Just another day of ethnic cleansing...
---
Last update - 20:00 08/05/2007
30 structures in unrecognized Bedouin village in Negev demolished
By Mijal Grinberg, Haaretz Correspondent
30 structures, among them shacks and tents, were demolished on Tuesday in the unrecognized Bedouin village of Al-Twayil in the Negev.
The Council of Unrecognized Villages said the demolitions left 100 people with no roof over their heads.
The village, north of Be'er Sheva, has been in a struggle with the authorities for many years.
After the establishment of the State of Israel, when Israel's Arabs were subject to martial law, the families of the village were moved to the nearby areas of Lahura and Lakiya, but they were unable to remain due to claims on the land by other families, leading many of them to return to their original land over the past 20 years.
Following the demolitions, the Israel Lands Authority said it evacuated 24 "invasions" in the area and that "these invasions have taken place for the seventh time this year, to the same place."
"The invaders have homes in Lakiya," the authority said, and added that they had "evacuated tents, livestock shelters, and sheds."
Showing posts with label ethnic cleansing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethnic cleansing. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Honoring Israel's apologists
Sonja Karkar, The Electronic Intifada, 7 May 2007
Every now and then, journalists who have shown excellence in their work are rewarded. A prize that recognises their investigative skills and critical thinking is a worthy achievement; a prize that rewards them for using their profession to "conspicuously" support a foreign state in conflict, is not. Rather, it raises questions about their impartiality, good judgment and integrity. Their professionalism can no longer be trusted.
It happened in Australia this past week. Greg Sheridan, billed as "the most influential foreign affairs analyst in Australian journalism" by his newspaper The Australian was awarded the annual Jerusalem Prize by the State Zionist Council of NSW. According to its president Frank Levy, "The prize is awarded to someone who fosters and supports the state of Israel and its ideologies, the concept of the Jewish homeland and the Jewish community, particularly in Australia."
Sheridan saw nothing wrong in accepting the prize, but many Australians did. In fact, Sheridan wrote a loose article "Rare support for democracy in a sea of misunderstanding" (The Australian, 3 May 2007) in response to the mail he received urging him not to accept the prize and was at great pains to explain that he had not compromised his independence as a commentator because he believed Israel -- quoting the former pro-Israel president of Indonesia, Abdurrahman Wahid -- "is a democracy in a sea of misunderstanding."
Anxious to justify his position, Sheridan referred to the illustrious recipients of the prize worldwide including our own Liberal Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and a former Labor lord mayor of Sydney and current NSW minister, Frank Sartor. Sheridan wanted to make sure that bipartisan support for Israel in Australia was really understood and he pointed to both Liberal Prime Minister Howard and Labor Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd as avid supporters of Israel's democracy.
After all the names Sheridan dropped to validate his own selection for the prize, Israel's democracy emerged as the prime reason for Sheridan's unquestioning support, not because it is perfect, but because being anti-Israel is "fundamentally irrational and evidence of psychological and ideological dysfunction rather than genuine analysis."
There is no room in Sheridan's argument for an irrational and dysfunctional Israel and the ideology in which it is rooted. If any of its actions are mistakes that should be understood because "any democratic nation makes plenty of mistakes and sometimes it makes moral mistakes." But, he does not allow for other forms of government and leaders to make mistakes. Sheridan raises Saddam's responsibility for the killing of 300,000 to 400,000 of his own citizens: he does not mention that Israel slipped through the legal and moral net without condemnation when it deliberately killed hundreds of Palestinians and terrorised some 750,000 others to flee their homes and homeland in 1948.
Sheridan's snapshot look at history gives an out-of-context account of Israel's birth, ignoring the well-documented massacres and complete razing of Palestinian villages and towns that Israel executed to gain a permanent foothold in all of Palestine. None of that is in the least justified by Sheridan's statement that "there have always been Jews in Palestine." Indeed, it would have been helpful for him to point out that most of those Jews who lived in Palestine over the centuries were in fact Palestinians. Just like there are Palestinians who are Christians, and of course, Muslims. The European Jews filtered in when they fled persecution in Christian Spain in the Middle Ages, but it was not until modern times that the European Jewish population in Palestine swelled in number after Zionists forced their mass exodus to Palestine in the aftermath of the European holocaust. This was the realisation of the great Zionist colonialist experiment that had no predilection for democracy.
There was nothing fair about the partition that created Israel, giving the minority European Jewish population a greater portion of the land belonging to the majority Palestinian population. And there has been no fairness for the Palestinians since, despite Sheridan raising the old canard of Barak's "generous" offer. The 95 per cent of the West Bank and Gaza that Sheridan says was offered to the Palestinians was once again not put in context.
For years, the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) had called for a two-state solution agreeing to Israel keeping 78 per cent of the former British-mandated Palestine while the Palestinians would form their state on the remaining 22 per cent that Israel has occupied since the 1967 war. At Camp David 2000, Barak's offer actually amounted to only a bare 8.3 per cent of the original Palestinian homeland from which they had been driven in 1948. In exchange for withdrawing completely from Gaza as well as the offer of a small piece of land in the Negev Desert that Israel had used as a toxic waste dump, Israel would annex the most fertile and strategically important areas of the West Bank while maintaining control over the Palestinian state's borders, air space and the land's scarce water resources -- and with Israel's military free to intervene at any time. Effectively, what was offered were four non-contiguous parcels of land which would force Palestinians to cross Israeli territory every time they travelled or shipped their goods between each other and with no free access to their own international borders with Jordan and Egypt. Had Arafat agreed to this, he would have effectively waived any further Palestinian claims against Israel. That would have been political suicide for the Palestinians already being subjected to these Orwellian restrictions.
Moving on, Sheridan says that Israel made this "generous" offer in exchange for a peace that would accept Israel's legitimacy. Because Arafat refused, Sheridan then makes the quantum leap to deduce that Arafat "had never accepted that Israel had a right to exist at all." Nowhere does Sheridan explain that all the while these negotiations were taking place, Israel's illegal settlement expansionism was still going on. In fact, the Israeli bureau of statistics reported that settlement building had increased 81 percent in the first quarter of 2000. (Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories, 11-12/00) Nowhere does Sheridan describe the nightly military raids into Palestinian cities, towns and villages, the killings, home demolitions, arrests, humiliations and indignities suffered by the Palestinian population. Nowhere does he mention the frenzied attacks by the Israeli settlers, who have no moral qualms about allowing their children to hurl stones and abuse at Palestinian women and children as they try to make their way to school or home. Instead, he asks the reader to empathise with the Israelis who he says are forced to defend themselves from the constant threats and attacks driven by "hate-filled and anti-Semitic propaganda designed to make schoolchildren despise the Jews." Israel's democracy, therefore, has an excuse for war; Palestinians under occupation have none.
For an experienced foreign affairs journalist, Sheridan shows an amazing reluctance to examine the realities of Israel's "democracy" at work. His article relies on the same old and now-debunked myths and arguments that no self-respecting journalist ought to employ. Even if Sheridan is convinced that "Israel is a democracy in good standing" he ought to be asking for whom? Israel has made no secret of its intention to be a Jewish state only, so it is no wonder that Israel's 1.2 million Palestinian citizens -- the survivors and descendants of the 1948 Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine -- see themselves increasingly isolated and alienated from Israeli society. It won't be long before Israel will have to declare its hand: is it "a state of the Jewish people throughout the world" as it defines itself, or a state of all its citizens, both Jewish and non-Jewish? Perhaps Sheridan sees this as yet another issue that must be left for Israel's "vibrant, genuine problem-solving democracy" to solve. In the meantime, Sheridan should indeed congratulate himself on the "great honour" of being awarded the Jerusalem Prize for no other reason than having supported Israel so "conspicuously".
Sonja Karkar is the founder and president of Women for Palestine in Melbourne, Australia.
 |
| Greg Sheridan |
It happened in Australia this past week. Greg Sheridan, billed as "the most influential foreign affairs analyst in Australian journalism" by his newspaper The Australian was awarded the annual Jerusalem Prize by the State Zionist Council of NSW. According to its president Frank Levy, "The prize is awarded to someone who fosters and supports the state of Israel and its ideologies, the concept of the Jewish homeland and the Jewish community, particularly in Australia."
Sheridan saw nothing wrong in accepting the prize, but many Australians did. In fact, Sheridan wrote a loose article "Rare support for democracy in a sea of misunderstanding" (The Australian, 3 May 2007) in response to the mail he received urging him not to accept the prize and was at great pains to explain that he had not compromised his independence as a commentator because he believed Israel -- quoting the former pro-Israel president of Indonesia, Abdurrahman Wahid -- "is a democracy in a sea of misunderstanding."
Anxious to justify his position, Sheridan referred to the illustrious recipients of the prize worldwide including our own Liberal Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and a former Labor lord mayor of Sydney and current NSW minister, Frank Sartor. Sheridan wanted to make sure that bipartisan support for Israel in Australia was really understood and he pointed to both Liberal Prime Minister Howard and Labor Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd as avid supporters of Israel's democracy.
After all the names Sheridan dropped to validate his own selection for the prize, Israel's democracy emerged as the prime reason for Sheridan's unquestioning support, not because it is perfect, but because being anti-Israel is "fundamentally irrational and evidence of psychological and ideological dysfunction rather than genuine analysis."
There is no room in Sheridan's argument for an irrational and dysfunctional Israel and the ideology in which it is rooted. If any of its actions are mistakes that should be understood because "any democratic nation makes plenty of mistakes and sometimes it makes moral mistakes." But, he does not allow for other forms of government and leaders to make mistakes. Sheridan raises Saddam's responsibility for the killing of 300,000 to 400,000 of his own citizens: he does not mention that Israel slipped through the legal and moral net without condemnation when it deliberately killed hundreds of Palestinians and terrorised some 750,000 others to flee their homes and homeland in 1948.
Sheridan's snapshot look at history gives an out-of-context account of Israel's birth, ignoring the well-documented massacres and complete razing of Palestinian villages and towns that Israel executed to gain a permanent foothold in all of Palestine. None of that is in the least justified by Sheridan's statement that "there have always been Jews in Palestine." Indeed, it would have been helpful for him to point out that most of those Jews who lived in Palestine over the centuries were in fact Palestinians. Just like there are Palestinians who are Christians, and of course, Muslims. The European Jews filtered in when they fled persecution in Christian Spain in the Middle Ages, but it was not until modern times that the European Jewish population in Palestine swelled in number after Zionists forced their mass exodus to Palestine in the aftermath of the European holocaust. This was the realisation of the great Zionist colonialist experiment that had no predilection for democracy.
There was nothing fair about the partition that created Israel, giving the minority European Jewish population a greater portion of the land belonging to the majority Palestinian population. And there has been no fairness for the Palestinians since, despite Sheridan raising the old canard of Barak's "generous" offer. The 95 per cent of the West Bank and Gaza that Sheridan says was offered to the Palestinians was once again not put in context.
For years, the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) had called for a two-state solution agreeing to Israel keeping 78 per cent of the former British-mandated Palestine while the Palestinians would form their state on the remaining 22 per cent that Israel has occupied since the 1967 war. At Camp David 2000, Barak's offer actually amounted to only a bare 8.3 per cent of the original Palestinian homeland from which they had been driven in 1948. In exchange for withdrawing completely from Gaza as well as the offer of a small piece of land in the Negev Desert that Israel had used as a toxic waste dump, Israel would annex the most fertile and strategically important areas of the West Bank while maintaining control over the Palestinian state's borders, air space and the land's scarce water resources -- and with Israel's military free to intervene at any time. Effectively, what was offered were four non-contiguous parcels of land which would force Palestinians to cross Israeli territory every time they travelled or shipped their goods between each other and with no free access to their own international borders with Jordan and Egypt. Had Arafat agreed to this, he would have effectively waived any further Palestinian claims against Israel. That would have been political suicide for the Palestinians already being subjected to these Orwellian restrictions.
Moving on, Sheridan says that Israel made this "generous" offer in exchange for a peace that would accept Israel's legitimacy. Because Arafat refused, Sheridan then makes the quantum leap to deduce that Arafat "had never accepted that Israel had a right to exist at all." Nowhere does Sheridan explain that all the while these negotiations were taking place, Israel's illegal settlement expansionism was still going on. In fact, the Israeli bureau of statistics reported that settlement building had increased 81 percent in the first quarter of 2000. (Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories, 11-12/00) Nowhere does Sheridan describe the nightly military raids into Palestinian cities, towns and villages, the killings, home demolitions, arrests, humiliations and indignities suffered by the Palestinian population. Nowhere does he mention the frenzied attacks by the Israeli settlers, who have no moral qualms about allowing their children to hurl stones and abuse at Palestinian women and children as they try to make their way to school or home. Instead, he asks the reader to empathise with the Israelis who he says are forced to defend themselves from the constant threats and attacks driven by "hate-filled and anti-Semitic propaganda designed to make schoolchildren despise the Jews." Israel's democracy, therefore, has an excuse for war; Palestinians under occupation have none.
For an experienced foreign affairs journalist, Sheridan shows an amazing reluctance to examine the realities of Israel's "democracy" at work. His article relies on the same old and now-debunked myths and arguments that no self-respecting journalist ought to employ. Even if Sheridan is convinced that "Israel is a democracy in good standing" he ought to be asking for whom? Israel has made no secret of its intention to be a Jewish state only, so it is no wonder that Israel's 1.2 million Palestinian citizens -- the survivors and descendants of the 1948 Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine -- see themselves increasingly isolated and alienated from Israeli society. It won't be long before Israel will have to declare its hand: is it "a state of the Jewish people throughout the world" as it defines itself, or a state of all its citizens, both Jewish and non-Jewish? Perhaps Sheridan sees this as yet another issue that must be left for Israel's "vibrant, genuine problem-solving democracy" to solve. In the meantime, Sheridan should indeed congratulate himself on the "great honour" of being awarded the Jerusalem Prize for no other reason than having supported Israel so "conspicuously".
Sonja Karkar is the founder and president of Women for Palestine in Melbourne, Australia.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Ariel Sharon's son: Ethnically cleanse the Palestinians
Gilad was an MP jailed for syphoning dirty money to his father's campaign. He openly advocates tranfer of Israel's Palestinian population to increase the Jewish majority.
---
Haaretz
Wed., April 25, 2007
Let Taibeh go to Palestine
By Gilad Sharon
On the occasion of Independence Day, the time has come to forget about A.'s skirt for a moment, to disengage temporarily from H.'s lips and take a bird's-eye view of the country's basic problems. Basic problems which, if dealt with, could change our lives here significantly and for the better, while neglecting them could be fateful and endanger us. There is no possibility of dealing with a hundred big issues at once, or even with 10. Even a leadership of stature cannot do this, and certainly not the one we have now. At most it is possible to deal with two or three big issues, and even this, only with a great deal of talent and superhuman effort.
We shall focus on one of the strategic problems: Israel and its Arab citizens. On the issue of a Jewish state versus a state of all its citizens, it must be said without embarrassment and without apology: Of course we want to live in a democratic country, but at the same time we want to live in a Jewish country. Israel was not established to bring a democratic regime to a benighted region. Israel was established as a national home for the Jewish people. Even the United Nations partition resolution of 1947, which the Jews accepted and the Arabs rejected, talks about two states according to a national division - a state for Jews and a state for Arabs. The wars, the truce agreements and life experience have led to the current situation in which about one-fifth of the population of Israel is Arab. There is no similarity between the situation of the Arabs of Israel and the situation of Jews in other countries of the world. The Jews of the United States, for example, despite their support and their feelings towards the State of Israel, proudly fly the American flag, sing the national anthem and celebrate American Independence Day on the 4th of July.
Memorial Day in Israel, which is so sacred to us, is not a day of pain for most of Israel's Arabs. Independence Day is a day of mourning for them. Go out and look for a national flag in Arab locales. This will prove to be a fruitless search. The fact that the Arabs of Israel are citizens of the Jewish state and not citizens of an Arab state is a mishap of history. If, heaven forbid, Israel were to find itself in a crisis and our enemies were to succeed in defeating us, then a single fate could be expected for the leftists, the rightists, the ultra-Orthodox and the secular Jews in Israel. This is not the case for the Arabs of Israel. There would be no danger for them. We are not really in the same boat; we do not share the same fate.
So what in fact connects us? Convenience is the connection. Israel as an economic and social wonder has, in only a short time, reached the level of the most developed countries in the world. Despite the difficulties, there is a good health system, national insurance, unemployment allotments, freedom of expression, and so on. This is the glue.
Representatives of the Arab sector and Knesset members from the Arab parties are discriminated against; this is a fact. It is possible to try to whitewash this. It is possible to appoint someone as deputy Knesset speaker, or bring a representative into the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, but then it is impossible to talk about security matters, and all the reports are moved to the subcommittees. Is it possible to accuse the security institutions of racism? Not at all. How is it possible to reveal the state's security secrets to someone who consistently identifies with the enemies of the state, to someone who meets in Beirut and Damascus with the heads of the terrorists and their supporters? There is a conspiracy of silence here around the lie that we "supposedly" discriminate against them and they are "supposedly" loyal to the state.
To tell the truth, what is most disturbing is not the unqualified support for our enemies by the Arab sector's representatives. It is possible to understand this, because after all there is national identity between them. The main part of the problem is their hypocrisy; they are not prepared to pay the price for this support and identification. The possible solutions to this problem are not easy and they require deep thinking, but it is necessary to know what the goal is, what the state of Israel wants.
Therefore, as I see it, the goal has to be a significant Jewish majority among the citizens of Israel, forever. Minorities have to be totally loyal to the state, to fulfill all the obligations and enjoy all the rights, like the Druze, some of the Bedouins and the Circassians. An example of action in this direction is changing the citizenship of the Arabs of Umm al Fahm, Taibeh, Jaljulya, Kafr Bara and so on - as far as and including Kafr Qasem. After all, there is no real reason why Qalqilyah and Tul Karm should be Palestinian and Taibeh Israeli. This is a mistake and nothing more.
A change of citizenship without a change of place of residence is also possible in other places. The inhabitants will live securely in their homes and will not lose a single dunam of land. Their citizenship will change, but let us admit the truth: Anyone who passes through one of these locales today will not see a single sign of the state of Israel. Nationally and culturally the population belongs to the other side, and their representatives will no longer be discriminated against because, after all, in a situation like this their citizenship and their nationality will be identical.
It is very easy to avoid the discussion and escape to the refuge of racist demagoguery, but this would be the easy way out. Of course there are other problems and other kinds of distress which are necessary to address, and even issues that are easier to deal with. But despite the difficulty and the cautious treading, this is an issue that should be put on the table frankly and courageously, and not ignored. If we try to run away from the problem it will pursue us. It is better to deal with it at our own initiative.
The author is a farmer and businessman and the son of former prime minister Ariel Sharon.
---
Haaretz
Wed., April 25, 2007
Let Taibeh go to Palestine
By Gilad Sharon
On the occasion of Independence Day, the time has come to forget about A.'s skirt for a moment, to disengage temporarily from H.'s lips and take a bird's-eye view of the country's basic problems. Basic problems which, if dealt with, could change our lives here significantly and for the better, while neglecting them could be fateful and endanger us. There is no possibility of dealing with a hundred big issues at once, or even with 10. Even a leadership of stature cannot do this, and certainly not the one we have now. At most it is possible to deal with two or three big issues, and even this, only with a great deal of talent and superhuman effort.
We shall focus on one of the strategic problems: Israel and its Arab citizens. On the issue of a Jewish state versus a state of all its citizens, it must be said without embarrassment and without apology: Of course we want to live in a democratic country, but at the same time we want to live in a Jewish country. Israel was not established to bring a democratic regime to a benighted region. Israel was established as a national home for the Jewish people. Even the United Nations partition resolution of 1947, which the Jews accepted and the Arabs rejected, talks about two states according to a national division - a state for Jews and a state for Arabs. The wars, the truce agreements and life experience have led to the current situation in which about one-fifth of the population of Israel is Arab. There is no similarity between the situation of the Arabs of Israel and the situation of Jews in other countries of the world. The Jews of the United States, for example, despite their support and their feelings towards the State of Israel, proudly fly the American flag, sing the national anthem and celebrate American Independence Day on the 4th of July.
Memorial Day in Israel, which is so sacred to us, is not a day of pain for most of Israel's Arabs. Independence Day is a day of mourning for them. Go out and look for a national flag in Arab locales. This will prove to be a fruitless search. The fact that the Arabs of Israel are citizens of the Jewish state and not citizens of an Arab state is a mishap of history. If, heaven forbid, Israel were to find itself in a crisis and our enemies were to succeed in defeating us, then a single fate could be expected for the leftists, the rightists, the ultra-Orthodox and the secular Jews in Israel. This is not the case for the Arabs of Israel. There would be no danger for them. We are not really in the same boat; we do not share the same fate.
So what in fact connects us? Convenience is the connection. Israel as an economic and social wonder has, in only a short time, reached the level of the most developed countries in the world. Despite the difficulties, there is a good health system, national insurance, unemployment allotments, freedom of expression, and so on. This is the glue.
Representatives of the Arab sector and Knesset members from the Arab parties are discriminated against; this is a fact. It is possible to try to whitewash this. It is possible to appoint someone as deputy Knesset speaker, or bring a representative into the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, but then it is impossible to talk about security matters, and all the reports are moved to the subcommittees. Is it possible to accuse the security institutions of racism? Not at all. How is it possible to reveal the state's security secrets to someone who consistently identifies with the enemies of the state, to someone who meets in Beirut and Damascus with the heads of the terrorists and their supporters? There is a conspiracy of silence here around the lie that we "supposedly" discriminate against them and they are "supposedly" loyal to the state.
To tell the truth, what is most disturbing is not the unqualified support for our enemies by the Arab sector's representatives. It is possible to understand this, because after all there is national identity between them. The main part of the problem is their hypocrisy; they are not prepared to pay the price for this support and identification. The possible solutions to this problem are not easy and they require deep thinking, but it is necessary to know what the goal is, what the state of Israel wants.
Therefore, as I see it, the goal has to be a significant Jewish majority among the citizens of Israel, forever. Minorities have to be totally loyal to the state, to fulfill all the obligations and enjoy all the rights, like the Druze, some of the Bedouins and the Circassians. An example of action in this direction is changing the citizenship of the Arabs of Umm al Fahm, Taibeh, Jaljulya, Kafr Bara and so on - as far as and including Kafr Qasem. After all, there is no real reason why Qalqilyah and Tul Karm should be Palestinian and Taibeh Israeli. This is a mistake and nothing more.
A change of citizenship without a change of place of residence is also possible in other places. The inhabitants will live securely in their homes and will not lose a single dunam of land. Their citizenship will change, but let us admit the truth: Anyone who passes through one of these locales today will not see a single sign of the state of Israel. Nationally and culturally the population belongs to the other side, and their representatives will no longer be discriminated against because, after all, in a situation like this their citizenship and their nationality will be identical.
It is very easy to avoid the discussion and escape to the refuge of racist demagoguery, but this would be the easy way out. Of course there are other problems and other kinds of distress which are necessary to address, and even issues that are easier to deal with. But despite the difficulty and the cautious treading, this is an issue that should be put on the table frankly and courageously, and not ignored. If we try to run away from the problem it will pursue us. It is better to deal with it at our own initiative.
The author is a farmer and businessman and the son of former prime minister Ariel Sharon.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Israeli state ordered to stop spraying Palestinian land with poison
With Chemical Weapons...
---
Last update - 08:13 16/04/2007
State ordered to stop spraying Bedouin land with chemicals
By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent
The High Court of Justice on Sunday ruled that the Israel Lands Administration is not allowed to spray chemicals on land farmed by Bedouin, a practice carried out in a bid to prevent the Bedouin from controlling those areas.
Justices Salim Joubran, Edna Arbel and Miriam Naor ruled that the spraying is not a proportionate means of achieving the stated goal because the chemicals endanger the lives and health of people and animals.
The court also required the state to pay NIS 20,000 in legal expenses to the Adala legal center for Arab rights in Israel, which filed the petition three years ago on behalf of the residents of the Negev villages of Al-Arakib and Wadi al-Bakar.
"Incursion into state land is indeed an illegal act," wrote Joubran. "And at the same time, coping with the phenomenon by aerial spraying is illegal."
Joubran said Israel's flora protection law was aimed at protecting health, sanitation and the environment, saying: "It is inconceivable that an authority would spray crops with a chemical substance to enforce the rights it claims to the land."
Although Arbel and Naor agreed with Joubran's conclusion that the ILA must stop spraying the land, they disagreed with his contention that the land administration did not have the right to do so in the first place.
As the landowner, wrote Arbel, the state is allowed to take steps to cope with a takeover of that land.
However, she said, the court is unable to accept that the spraying does not pose a health risk.
She said the chemicals' ability to cause breathing difficulties, nausea and vertigo are sufficient "to determine that the spray substance is liable, at the very least, to lead to damage to human health."
Arbel and Naor ruled that even though the spraying was carried out for the appropriate purpose of safeguarding state land, the method used was disproportionate and therefore unacceptable.
---
Last update - 08:13 16/04/2007
State ordered to stop spraying Bedouin land with chemicals
By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent
The High Court of Justice on Sunday ruled that the Israel Lands Administration is not allowed to spray chemicals on land farmed by Bedouin, a practice carried out in a bid to prevent the Bedouin from controlling those areas.
Justices Salim Joubran, Edna Arbel and Miriam Naor ruled that the spraying is not a proportionate means of achieving the stated goal because the chemicals endanger the lives and health of people and animals.
The court also required the state to pay NIS 20,000 in legal expenses to the Adala legal center for Arab rights in Israel, which filed the petition three years ago on behalf of the residents of the Negev villages of Al-Arakib and Wadi al-Bakar.
"Incursion into state land is indeed an illegal act," wrote Joubran. "And at the same time, coping with the phenomenon by aerial spraying is illegal."
Joubran said Israel's flora protection law was aimed at protecting health, sanitation and the environment, saying: "It is inconceivable that an authority would spray crops with a chemical substance to enforce the rights it claims to the land."
Although Arbel and Naor agreed with Joubran's conclusion that the ILA must stop spraying the land, they disagreed with his contention that the land administration did not have the right to do so in the first place.
As the landowner, wrote Arbel, the state is allowed to take steps to cope with a takeover of that land.
However, she said, the court is unable to accept that the spraying does not pose a health risk.
She said the chemicals' ability to cause breathing difficulties, nausea and vertigo are sufficient "to determine that the spray substance is liable, at the very least, to lead to damage to human health."
Arbel and Naor ruled that even though the spraying was carried out for the appropriate purpose of safeguarding state land, the method used was disproportionate and therefore unacceptable.
My Israel Question
Posted: April 15, 2007
Antony Loewenstein - His Israel Question
This week's guest is Antony Lowenstein. I speak with him about his book, "My Israel Question", the Arab-Israeli conflict and the relations between Jewish Diaspora and Israel. Readers can send questions
Loewenstein is a Sydney based journalist and the author of the new book My Israel Question, dealing mainly with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The controversial book of this "young Australian Jew, Antony Loewenstein, asks how much Zionism--the ideology of Jewish nationalism--is to blame for this intractable conflict. He fearlessly investigates the ways in which the Jewish diaspora in Australia and elsewhere have campaigned on Israel's behalf, in the media and in political and business spheres. He also considers the historical rationale for Zionism--including the centuries of virulent European antisemitism from which it grew--and asks how relevant and sustainable twentieth-century Zionism is today." (full bio here).
Readers can send questions to rosnersdomain@haaretz.co.il.
Antony,
Here's a big challenge: For the benefit of my readers who haven't read your book - can you please present the abridged version of your main complaints regarding Israel, and a solution that would make Israel more acceptable to you?
Best
Rosner
My book aims to articulate an alternative Jewish perspective on the Israel/Palestine conflict. In my view, the separation of Zionism and Judaism is one of the key challenges for 21st century Judaism. For too long, they have been inextricably linked. It is the duty of Jews, and all global citizens, to speak out against injustice, not just misbehavior against Jews.
I believe that Israel can no longer be a Jewish state, a nation that actively discriminates against anybody who isn't born Jewish. Whether Arab or Palestinian, a modern country that wants international recognition and respect, cannot continue to institute policies that are racially based. For the record, I am equally against an Islamic or Christian nation or any other religiously-sanctioned country. Israel must recognize that a progressive state doesn't continue to find legal ways to bar Jews marrying non-Jews or Palestinians living with Jewish partners. Apartheid South Africa instituted similar policies and the world finally reacted appropriately to such outrages. Jimmy Carter's recent book, "Palestine: Peace not Apartheid", succeeded in mainstreaming the realities of the occupied territories and detailed the day-to-day realities of life for Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Israel must grant equal rights to all its citizens.
Secondly, the Palestinian right of return is a sacred issue that will not simply disappear by Zionists wishing it would. Around five million Palestinians have the historical and legal right to return to land stolen in 1948, ethnically cleansed for the sake of a Jewish state. Arguably the vast majority of these Palestinians would not return to their ancestral lands, but they, like Jews, must have the right to do so. Many Jews and the Israeli government fear that such moves would dilute a Jewish state and make its future impossible. They're right, but only if a racially exclusive nation is their ideal. Israelis have the right to live in peace in their ancestral lands, and so do Palestinians.
The occupation of Palestinian land must end immediately. The Gaza "withdrawal" was a sham that essentially allowed the Israelis to imprison over one million Palestinians. Haaretz journalist Amira Hass has written of the Israeli mentality towards these Palestinians: "They are behaving as expected at the end of the extended experiment called 'what happens when you imprison 1.3 million human beings in an enclosed space like battery hens.'" Even as Israeli leaders across the world talk of peace and compromise, the expansion of West Bank settlements continues apace, making a truly contiguous Palestinian state virtually impossible. Such demographic realities make a one-state solution almost the default position, despite the posturing of the Bush administration and its global spokespeople. Spending time in the occupied territories, especially in places like Hebron, one is struck by the immorality of allowing a tiny minority of extremist Jews to control the lives of millions of Palestinians. Is this what the Holocaust taught Jews? Every single settlement on occupied land must be removed, no questions asked. The difficulties of doing so - and the real possibility of civil war within Israel - should not be reason enough to avoid this necessity. The future of Israel depends on this happening.
Finally, Israel must start to extricate itself from the incestuous embrace of successive American administrations. For a nation that claims to be independent in both word and deed, its actions indicate the exact opposite. The long-term viability of Israel is with the Arab world, not a superpower thousands of miles away. If the Jewish state wants to continue being a client of the US, that is its right, but a growing political awareness amongst Muslim Americans, coupled with the rise of India and China as global superpowers, makes Israel's current path unsustainable.
There are many aspects of Israeli culture that are vibrant and enviable. Its policies toward the Palestinians are not among them. As a Jew who believes that both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to live in peace together, corrupt Israeli leadership, blindly supported by Zionist spokesman in the Western world, is endangering Jewish lives by refusing to recognize the rights of another people. The equation is simple. Israel has the right to exist, but so does Palestine. Whether that's in one-state, two-states or some other formulation, that's for both peoples to decide.
Most importantly, however, as already stated by British-born historian Tony Judt, Israel, in its current form, "is truly an anachronism." It is not enough anymore for Zionists to merely deflect all criticism as anti-Semitic or anti-Zionist. In many countries around the world, including Australia, such rhetoric no longer has the power to shut down debate. A humane, responsible and moral Israel must not be allowed to shame its historical mandate. The soul of the Holocaust is not for Zionists to use and abuse. We all suffered in that cataclysmic event. Israel knows what it must do to be internationally accepted.
best,
Antony
Dear Antony,
Your book is a harsh criticism of Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, but also of the American and Australian Jewish community. So let's start with this general question: What is it that bothers you about the support Jewish Diaspora gives to Israel - or maybe you think that no support is needed?
Thank you,
Rosner
Thanks Shmuel,
Although it's not unique to the Jewish community, an unhealthy tendency has developed within many Jewish Diaspora communities since the birth of Israel. An ethno-centric and racially superior mentality has flourished that places the lives and concerns of Israel and Jews above all others. In this worldview, Israeli lives are always more precious than Palestinian ones. Israel's "security" is far more important than the existence or safety of a future Palestinian state. Such thinking, in my home country of Australia and elsewhere, has long troubled me. Is this what Zionism was destined to become?
When it relates to Israel, far too many Jews are able to defend, justify and explain the Jewish state's behavior, no matter how illegal or immoral. A recent letter published in the Australian Jewish News succinctly articulated the problem: "I have always believed that whatever Israel does is always right for the Jews." This uncritical and anti-intellectual stance completely contradicts the noble Judaic tradition of rigorous thought and dissent.
Since I started writing extensively on the Israel/Palestine conflict in the last years, I've been astounded by the reactionary response of some Jews to the idea of justice for all. Hate-mail and death-threats, by fellow Jews, has sadly become a fact of life. It is as if the overwhelming evidence of Israel's crimes in the occupied territories is always issued by "biased" media, NGOs or governments. Are only Israeli foreign ministry press releases worth respecting?
I have long thought that it is not the duty of all Jews to support Israel. If they want to engage with the Jewish state and improve its international standing, so be it. If Jews want nothing to do with a state that has no direct impact on their daily lives, this position should be respected. If they want to become unofficial spokespeople for the Israeli cause, good for them.
Personally speaking, I may be a harsh critic of Israel's policies (and Palestinian intransigence) but I still call myself a true friend of Israel, the kind the country needs to survive in the long-term, not "yes-men" only concerned with even-greater military reprisals against the Palestinians. After decades of these failed policies, why do many Jews still think that the Jewish state can thrive through force alone?
In my experience, Diaspora Jewish communities regularly prefer to ignore the true reality of the now 40-year occupation and the myriad of ways in which their beloved homeland has persecuted another people for generations. Is this something Jews should really be proud of?
These Diaspora communities need to ask themselves some tough questions, namely how their complicity in the current morass can be reversed. It's never too late to expect an Israeli government of any political stripe to behave morally and legally and rediscover the true Jewish soul.
Antony Loewenstein - His Israel Question
This week's guest is Antony Lowenstein. I speak with him about his book, "My Israel Question", the Arab-Israeli conflict and the relations between Jewish Diaspora and Israel. Readers can send questions
Loewenstein is a Sydney based journalist and the author of the new book My Israel Question, dealing mainly with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The controversial book of this "young Australian Jew, Antony Loewenstein, asks how much Zionism--the ideology of Jewish nationalism--is to blame for this intractable conflict. He fearlessly investigates the ways in which the Jewish diaspora in Australia and elsewhere have campaigned on Israel's behalf, in the media and in political and business spheres. He also considers the historical rationale for Zionism--including the centuries of virulent European antisemitism from which it grew--and asks how relevant and sustainable twentieth-century Zionism is today." (full bio here).
Readers can send questions to rosnersdomain@haaretz.co.il.
Antony,
Here's a big challenge: For the benefit of my readers who haven't read your book - can you please present the abridged version of your main complaints regarding Israel, and a solution that would make Israel more acceptable to you?
Best
Rosner
My book aims to articulate an alternative Jewish perspective on the Israel/Palestine conflict. In my view, the separation of Zionism and Judaism is one of the key challenges for 21st century Judaism. For too long, they have been inextricably linked. It is the duty of Jews, and all global citizens, to speak out against injustice, not just misbehavior against Jews.
I believe that Israel can no longer be a Jewish state, a nation that actively discriminates against anybody who isn't born Jewish. Whether Arab or Palestinian, a modern country that wants international recognition and respect, cannot continue to institute policies that are racially based. For the record, I am equally against an Islamic or Christian nation or any other religiously-sanctioned country. Israel must recognize that a progressive state doesn't continue to find legal ways to bar Jews marrying non-Jews or Palestinians living with Jewish partners. Apartheid South Africa instituted similar policies and the world finally reacted appropriately to such outrages. Jimmy Carter's recent book, "Palestine: Peace not Apartheid", succeeded in mainstreaming the realities of the occupied territories and detailed the day-to-day realities of life for Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Israel must grant equal rights to all its citizens.
Secondly, the Palestinian right of return is a sacred issue that will not simply disappear by Zionists wishing it would. Around five million Palestinians have the historical and legal right to return to land stolen in 1948, ethnically cleansed for the sake of a Jewish state. Arguably the vast majority of these Palestinians would not return to their ancestral lands, but they, like Jews, must have the right to do so. Many Jews and the Israeli government fear that such moves would dilute a Jewish state and make its future impossible. They're right, but only if a racially exclusive nation is their ideal. Israelis have the right to live in peace in their ancestral lands, and so do Palestinians.
The occupation of Palestinian land must end immediately. The Gaza "withdrawal" was a sham that essentially allowed the Israelis to imprison over one million Palestinians. Haaretz journalist Amira Hass has written of the Israeli mentality towards these Palestinians: "They are behaving as expected at the end of the extended experiment called 'what happens when you imprison 1.3 million human beings in an enclosed space like battery hens.'" Even as Israeli leaders across the world talk of peace and compromise, the expansion of West Bank settlements continues apace, making a truly contiguous Palestinian state virtually impossible. Such demographic realities make a one-state solution almost the default position, despite the posturing of the Bush administration and its global spokespeople. Spending time in the occupied territories, especially in places like Hebron, one is struck by the immorality of allowing a tiny minority of extremist Jews to control the lives of millions of Palestinians. Is this what the Holocaust taught Jews? Every single settlement on occupied land must be removed, no questions asked. The difficulties of doing so - and the real possibility of civil war within Israel - should not be reason enough to avoid this necessity. The future of Israel depends on this happening.
Finally, Israel must start to extricate itself from the incestuous embrace of successive American administrations. For a nation that claims to be independent in both word and deed, its actions indicate the exact opposite. The long-term viability of Israel is with the Arab world, not a superpower thousands of miles away. If the Jewish state wants to continue being a client of the US, that is its right, but a growing political awareness amongst Muslim Americans, coupled with the rise of India and China as global superpowers, makes Israel's current path unsustainable.
There are many aspects of Israeli culture that are vibrant and enviable. Its policies toward the Palestinians are not among them. As a Jew who believes that both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to live in peace together, corrupt Israeli leadership, blindly supported by Zionist spokesman in the Western world, is endangering Jewish lives by refusing to recognize the rights of another people. The equation is simple. Israel has the right to exist, but so does Palestine. Whether that's in one-state, two-states or some other formulation, that's for both peoples to decide.
Most importantly, however, as already stated by British-born historian Tony Judt, Israel, in its current form, "is truly an anachronism." It is not enough anymore for Zionists to merely deflect all criticism as anti-Semitic or anti-Zionist. In many countries around the world, including Australia, such rhetoric no longer has the power to shut down debate. A humane, responsible and moral Israel must not be allowed to shame its historical mandate. The soul of the Holocaust is not for Zionists to use and abuse. We all suffered in that cataclysmic event. Israel knows what it must do to be internationally accepted.
best,
Antony
Dear Antony,
Your book is a harsh criticism of Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, but also of the American and Australian Jewish community. So let's start with this general question: What is it that bothers you about the support Jewish Diaspora gives to Israel - or maybe you think that no support is needed?
Thank you,
Rosner
Thanks Shmuel,
Although it's not unique to the Jewish community, an unhealthy tendency has developed within many Jewish Diaspora communities since the birth of Israel. An ethno-centric and racially superior mentality has flourished that places the lives and concerns of Israel and Jews above all others. In this worldview, Israeli lives are always more precious than Palestinian ones. Israel's "security" is far more important than the existence or safety of a future Palestinian state. Such thinking, in my home country of Australia and elsewhere, has long troubled me. Is this what Zionism was destined to become?
When it relates to Israel, far too many Jews are able to defend, justify and explain the Jewish state's behavior, no matter how illegal or immoral. A recent letter published in the Australian Jewish News succinctly articulated the problem: "I have always believed that whatever Israel does is always right for the Jews." This uncritical and anti-intellectual stance completely contradicts the noble Judaic tradition of rigorous thought and dissent.
Since I started writing extensively on the Israel/Palestine conflict in the last years, I've been astounded by the reactionary response of some Jews to the idea of justice for all. Hate-mail and death-threats, by fellow Jews, has sadly become a fact of life. It is as if the overwhelming evidence of Israel's crimes in the occupied territories is always issued by "biased" media, NGOs or governments. Are only Israeli foreign ministry press releases worth respecting?
I have long thought that it is not the duty of all Jews to support Israel. If they want to engage with the Jewish state and improve its international standing, so be it. If Jews want nothing to do with a state that has no direct impact on their daily lives, this position should be respected. If they want to become unofficial spokespeople for the Israeli cause, good for them.
Personally speaking, I may be a harsh critic of Israel's policies (and Palestinian intransigence) but I still call myself a true friend of Israel, the kind the country needs to survive in the long-term, not "yes-men" only concerned with even-greater military reprisals against the Palestinians. After decades of these failed policies, why do many Jews still think that the Jewish state can thrive through force alone?
In my experience, Diaspora Jewish communities regularly prefer to ignore the true reality of the now 40-year occupation and the myriad of ways in which their beloved homeland has persecuted another people for generations. Is this something Jews should really be proud of?
These Diaspora communities need to ask themselves some tough questions, namely how their complicity in the current morass can be reversed. It's never too late to expect an Israeli government of any political stripe to behave morally and legally and rediscover the true Jewish soul.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Report: “68 women gave birth on checkpoints, 33 infants and 4 women died”
Wednesday April 11, 2007 07:29
by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC & Agencies saed at imemc dot org
The Palestinian Independent Commission for Citizens Rights (PICCR) reported that Israeli troops stationed at hundreds of roadblocks in the occupied territories barred dozens of pregnant women from crossing the checkpoints while in labor; 34 infants and four women died on their roadblocks.
The Commission reported that soldiers forced 68 pregnant women to give birth on road blocks after barring them from crossing as they were being transferred to hospitals and medical centers.
Also, the PICCR said that the Israeli procedures complicated the lives of the Palestinian civilians including pregnant women by enforcing harsh conditions and carrying illegal practices at these checkpoints.
Since the beginning of the Al Aqsa Intifada on September 28 2000 until July 2006, 68 pregnant women had to give birth at checkpoints, and that 34 infants and 4 pregnant women died on these checkpoints.
by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC & Agencies saed at imemc dot org
The Palestinian Independent Commission for Citizens Rights (PICCR) reported that Israeli troops stationed at hundreds of roadblocks in the occupied territories barred dozens of pregnant women from crossing the checkpoints while in labor; 34 infants and four women died on their roadblocks.
The Commission reported that soldiers forced 68 pregnant women to give birth on road blocks after barring them from crossing as they were being transferred to hospitals and medical centers.
Also, the PICCR said that the Israeli procedures complicated the lives of the Palestinian civilians including pregnant women by enforcing harsh conditions and carrying illegal practices at these checkpoints.
Since the beginning of the Al Aqsa Intifada on September 28 2000 until July 2006, 68 pregnant women had to give birth at checkpoints, and that 34 infants and 4 pregnant women died on these checkpoints.
Thursday, April 5, 2007
Israelis Uprooting 1,000 Palestinians from Jerusalem
Related
Freedom of movement disrupted further by closure of East Jerusalem street
---Thursday, April 5, 2007
Zionists Uprooting 1,000 Palestinians from Jerusalem(Al-Quds)
The Zionist enemy is trying to complete the Judaization of Al-Quds by forcing out its owners through stealing more Palestinian Arab property…
Israel repeats its old claims:
Uprooting 1,000 Palestinians from Jerusalem (Al-Quds)
By Amjad Samhan (Ramallah)
April 3rd 2007
Translated By: Adib S. Kawar
One hundred Palestinian Arab families from Assalam (Peace), on the outskirts of occupied Al-Quds, received evacuation orders, and were “given” 14 days to evacuate their homes. The occupation authority claimed that the houses are built on land owned by the heirs of a dead Jewish woman called Rachel Filibine.
Eyewitnesses said that tens of policemen, members of what is known as border guards, officers and intelligence men, stormed into the residents’ apartments and handed them evacuation orders signed by the lawyer of the heirs of Rachel, which said that they have evidence that 80% of the land on which buildings are built on is owned by the heirs… If the orders of evacuation are executed, about a thousand Palestinian Arabs shall be made homeless.
It is not known what will be the fate of the Arab buildings that the order demands to be evacuated, but the officer in charge of the Al-Quds file, Muhammad Abed Rabo, pointed out that the case could be solved by changing the owners to tenants, which is not likely to be allowed, because the aim of the attack is to uproot the Arabs of Al-Quds fully from their capital. The second possibility is to immediately uproot the Jerusalemite Arabs, and demolish their buildings, which will then be replaced by a Zionist colony, “especially since the occupation authorities and extremist religious Zionist groups support the second choice. The presence of the Arab homes stands in the way of completing the connection of the colonies surrounding Al-Quds, namely Bazjat, Zaif, Maali Adomin, the French Hill and Nave Yacoub to the city.”
Israel repeats its old claims:
Uprooting 1,000 Palestinians from Jerusalem (Al-Quds)
By Amjad Samhan (Ramallah)
April 3rd 2007
Translated By: Adib S. Kawar
One hundred Palestinian Arab families from Assalam (Peace), on the outskirts of occupied Al-Quds, received evacuation orders, and were “given” 14 days to evacuate their homes. The occupation authority claimed that the houses are built on land owned by the heirs of a dead Jewish woman called Rachel Filibine.
Eyewitnesses said that tens of policemen, members of what is known as border guards, officers and intelligence men, stormed into the residents’ apartments and handed them evacuation orders signed by the lawyer of the heirs of Rachel, which said that they have evidence that 80% of the land on which buildings are built on is owned by the heirs… If the orders of evacuation are executed, about a thousand Palestinian Arabs shall be made homeless.
It is not known what will be the fate of the Arab buildings that the order demands to be evacuated, but the officer in charge of the Al-Quds file, Muhammad Abed Rabo, pointed out that the case could be solved by changing the owners to tenants, which is not likely to be allowed, because the aim of the attack is to uproot the Arabs of Al-Quds fully from their capital. The second possibility is to immediately uproot the Jerusalemite Arabs, and demolish their buildings, which will then be replaced by a Zionist colony, “especially since the occupation authorities and extremist religious Zionist groups support the second choice. The presence of the Arab homes stands in the way of completing the connection of the colonies surrounding Al-Quds, namely Bazjat, Zaif, Maali Adomin, the French Hill and Nave Yacoub to the city.”
Abed Rabo said, “This plan aims at completing the big project known as ‘Greater Jewish Jerusalem’, which means, to complete the Judaization of Al-Quds, and isolate its Arabs, and strengthen the control of it, if not the suffocation Arab Jerusalemites”. He added that “80% of the project has already been fulfilled.”
One of the Palestinian Arab inhabitants that received an evacuation order, Nidal Aiash said, “The moment I received the evacuation order, I almost wept… Where shall I go with my family, I am ready to pay any amount they ask for; just so that I don’t leave this place… my home and city.”
Abu Aiash, a father of two said, “I paid US $60,000 to buy this apartment, and I never thought that everything I saved in my life is going to be lost for nothing, just like this… We have a lawyer who will follow our just case.” He pointed out that the evacuation orders were not accompanied by a court order, but to have all of these forces that accompanied the Zionist lawyer proves that the matter is almost certainly ‘precooked’.”
Another tenant, Mahmoud Sarandah, told Assafir newspaper that he also received a copy of the order and said, “What proves my ownership of the land is that I bought it from well known people. We shall raise a court case to prove that we own the land, and if they have anything to prove the contrary let them present it before the court.”
The owner of the project, Abdullah Azziz Al-Qam, told Assafir that he has what proves his ownership of the land, which he also purchased from well known people. We shall raise a case to the court to prove what we say, and if they have anything to prove the contrary, they are welcome to do so. I believe that they shall not be able to evacuate us from our homes, all they aim at is to put pressure on us, to terrorize and disturb us. He added, “I am carrying out big building projects in Al-Quds for nationalistic purposes, I sell the apartments for symbolic prices for the purpose of keeping my people from leaving their Al-Quds.”
It ought to be pointed out that just before this new Zionist project was declared, the occupation authorities confiscated Palestinian Arab owned homes in occupied Al-Quds, claiming that the land on which they are built is owned by “Israelis”. In Sheikh Jarrah, in occupied Al-Quds, the owners were changed to renters, when a colonizing group “proved” that the land is government owned, as if any such occupation authority sits and waits for somebody to prove its ownership of a certain property!!!
Translated from Arabic by Adib S Kawar and revised by Mary Rizzo for Tlaxcala
Labels: human rights violations, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestine, Zionism
Monday, April 2, 2007
Arabs in Kirkuk Dismayed at Ethnic Cleansing
Arabs in Kirkuk dismayed at relocation plan
By Mustafa Mohammed and Sherko Raouf Sun Apr 1, 10:30 AM ET
Arabs forced to move to Kirkuk decades ago by Saddam Hussein expressed dismay on Sunday at the Iraqi government's plan to encourage them to leave the oil-rich northern city and return to their original homes.
Iraq is expected to settle the final status of the ethnically-mixed city in a local referendum by the end of the year. Some officials and analysts have warned it might spark bloodshed.
Kurds want to incorporate Kirkuk into their largely autonomous Kurdistan region, which lies just to the north.
Abu Jabar, a 70-year-old Arab, said he moved to Kirkuk in 1975 from the southern city of Nassiriya with his wife and two children. His extended family now numbers 18.
"Some of my sons have married, had children and bought houses here and do not know anything about their city of origin. They have never been there," Abu Jabar said.
The cabinet last week agreed to give Arab families 20 million dinars ($15,000) each and a piece of land if they voluntarily returned to their original towns. Government sources told Reuters about the decision on Saturday.
Under Saddam, Kirkuk was subject to an "Arabization" policy that drove many Kurds from their homes and brought in Arabs, mostly Shi'ite Muslims from the south.
Iraq's constitution says that in the build-up to the city-wide referendum, the government should reverse Saddam's policy. A big influx of Kurds would sharply increase the odds the vote would result in Kirkuk becoming part of Kurdistan.
The compensation plan for Kirkuk has angered some Shi'ite and Sunni Arab parliamentarians in Baghdad.
Nassar al-Rubaie, head of the parliamentary bloc of radical Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, said a campaign to collect signatures would be launched to delay the referendum.
"Kirkuk is an Iraqi city. This issue needs to be postponed so we can solve the problem," he told a news conference.
Sharif Najim, a 35-year-old Kurdish farmer, said the relocation of Arabs would stabilize the city.
"They are the reason for the troubles because they took the money and the lands of the Kurds and the Turkmen," he said, referring to the city's Turkish-speaking ethnic group.
FLASHPOINT
Kirkuk, which sits atop one of the world's richest oil fields, could become a flashpoint for wider conflict.
Neighboring Turkey has hinted it might take military action to protect its own national interests.
Ankara fears Iraq's Kurds plan to seize control of Kirkuk as a prelude to declaring full independence from Baghdad, a move that could reignite separatist unrest among Kurds in southeast Turkey. Kurdish officials have repeatedly said they have no plans to separate from Iraq.
Arab Lawyer Harith Hussein, 45, said he moved to Kirkuk from the Shi'ite city of Hilla, south of Baghdad, in 1983.
"The government should provide security first and stop the violence that harvests hundreds daily before agreeing to such decisions that will ignite more violence," he said.
Civil servant Mohammed Khalaf, 29, said his family moved to Kirkuk in 1981 from the town of Hawija. He said he was prepared to return if the process was voluntary.
"If they gave me 20 million dinars, land and if I can move my job to my original city, I will go back," he said.
The United Nations has warned of a "looming crisis" in Kirkuk, where it said ethnic Turkmen and Arabs were being intimidated by Kurdish forces. Since the U.S. invasion of 2003, many Kurds have returned.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
When ethnic cleansing spreads, it deepens and prolongs war
Agent of empire
By Yitzhak Laor
"The Road to Jerusalem: Glubb Pasha, Palestine and the Jews" by Benny Morris, I.B. Tauris, 320 pages, $29.95
Benny Morris is the most significant Israeli historian of the last decades, even though he "only" digs around in archives. It is not that Morris has a profound view of history or comprehensive insight into its contexts, as great historians do. It is not even that he has produced a single thesis with which he dismantled an older, dominant one. To grasp his importance, he need only be compared with historians like Anita Shapira or Itamar Rabinovich, both of whom he mentions, with cautious decorum, in the introduction to this book. If the acts of cover-up perpetrated by these two in their books against the "New Historians" were actually historical writing, if the "majority of people agree with them" that the history they write does not clash with "what the majority of people know," why, then, with all the resources at their disposal (Tel Aviv University and its Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies; the Rabin Center for Israel Studies, and what have you), haven't they left a more obvious intellectual mark? Why doesn't their writing find an intellectual echo, precisely because of their considerable power, which is inseparable from the desire to defend hegemony, that is, power?
Here is a certain testimony to Benny Morris' influence as a historian. Moreover, his most important book, "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem" (1988), regardless of all the anti-Arab tones he wove into it, was written from outside the academic locus of power, and it nevertheless accrued meanings that the two examples cited above are not powerful enough to overcome.
Morris' work was driven by another kind of desire for power: to dismantle. He had his own version of history, and with its help he could search through the archives, ferret around, cobble together, and ultimately produce a version that was fairly sensational from the point of view of Israeli public opinion (no Arab historian was particularly moved by Morris' "sensational" claim that the Jews were not greatly outnumbered in the 1948 war, and that many of the refugees did not flee, but were driven out). The country that was demolished and kept hidden from us for many years, using the denial-ridden Zionist intelligentsia was briefly resurrected through the author's cold eyes.
By the way, it was not the second Intifada that aroused his hatred toward the victims of ethnic cleansing and such pathetic recommendations as "too bad they did not expel them all." Anyone who knew Morris before the "change" in his views was aware of his weakness. He does not speak Arabic. It is not clear whether he hates Arabs because he does not speak Arabic or vice versa. It really does not matter.
Background to the obvious
Anyway, that is why "The Road to Jerusalem" is a weak book. This time he had no mythology before his eyes as he wrote. The cooperation between the Hashemites and the State of Israel comes up in every interview with Israel's top intelligence officials, who like to brag about their "meetings with the king." In other words, the background to the obvious has been prepared over years. More important, the particular case of the cooperation between the Jordanian Legion and the State of Israel in the 1948 war, and especially the plot to steal from the Palestinians what little they had been promised in the UN partition plan, has already been described at length by Ilan Pappe and Avi Shlaim. Both of them know the same sources Morris has come to read, but they read much more, because they both read and speak Arabic. Incidentally, they were preceded by Israel Beer, whose book, "Israel's Security: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow," written in prison, was published in 1966 thanks to the strenuous efforts of Amikam Gurevitch. The plot between the leaders of the pre-state Jewish settlement and the Hasehmites is the main theme of Bar's book, and it also foregrounds an insight that Morris has never been able to grasp - that when ethnic cleansing spreads, it deepens and prolongs war. Moreover, Morris' book repeats what Morris himself has written in his own previous books. Indeed the book, the leftovers of previous research, is a cut-and-paste job of snips from the diaries and letters of John Bagot Glubb, who came with the British army to serve in Mesopotamia before the British Empire reconstituted it as Iraq and while the empire was pummeling the country's inhabitants, including with weapons of mass destruction, that is, gas. The book does not contain a proper biography of Glubb, neither of his English past nor of his years at the head of an Arab army in the service of the empire. It focuses, rather, on documents pertaining to his years in the military.
Not a Christian fanatic
Glubb fell in love with the Bedouin, learned their language and established serious military units to serve the British-appointed feudal lords, the Hashemite monarchs. Although it is very tempting to portray him this way, Glubb as a commander was working on behalf of the empire, and he trained military units in order to make them into imperial agents. He was also not a Christian fanatic like Orde Wingate, who used the Haganah (Jewish pre-state militia) to perpetrate atrocities in the Palestinian settlements in the name of biblical, that is, Protestant, morality, but in the service of the same empire.
The British finished their task in the 1950s when another army, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), began to perform a role here on behalf of the empire, whose capital, if you will, shifted from London to Washington, D.C. This historical move, if only as a hypothesis, also involved the rise and fall of the Arab secular nationalist regimes and the rise of Jordan to the status of an Arab country, although it had not undergone the same process as the Arab republics. All of these shifts remain hidden from Morris's oh-so-unhistorical vision.
It is impossible to report on Glubb in Jordan without knowing Arabic. The claim, for example, that the situation on the eastern side of the Jordan River was presumably no different from the situation in the Arab peninsula could only be written by someone who does not speak Arabic, but who nevertheless dares to write a history of the Jordanian army and of its relations with the Bedouin living east of the river.
What is left for Morris to find out? Whether the Jordanian army entered the campaign based on an agreement with the Zionist leadership, or did so, rather, in spite of that agreement. Typically, he charges at various possibilities. Arrogantly enough, the hero of his treatise is not the IDF and its own acts and avoidances, but rather the Legion. But you can't explain that Glubb did not know what to do, deliberated, changed his mind, and at the same time also claim that Abdullah, King of Jordan, and his people ultimately decided to cross the river, and all without consulting documents or evidence from that side. For that, you really need to be a colonialist of the less reputable variety.
When he has nothing to write about Glubb, he repeats what he wrote in his previous books, sometimes out of some fierce drive to "reform" - for example, that the refugee problem was in largely a function of developments on the battlefield, that some 400,000 Palestinians had fled or been driven from their homes by the start of the Second Truce, and that 300,000 more refugees were added due to Operations Yoav and Hiram. Leaving aside for a minute the hasty leap into the old narrative, what's Glubb got to do with all this? Morris, relying precisely on the stamina of an archive rat, begins with Glubb, moves to what he already has in his computer, goes back to Glubb, and then goes back to what he already has in his computer.
By Yitzhak Laor
"The Road to Jerusalem: Glubb Pasha, Palestine and the Jews" by Benny Morris, I.B. Tauris, 320 pages, $29.95
Benny Morris is the most significant Israeli historian of the last decades, even though he "only" digs around in archives. It is not that Morris has a profound view of history or comprehensive insight into its contexts, as great historians do. It is not even that he has produced a single thesis with which he dismantled an older, dominant one. To grasp his importance, he need only be compared with historians like Anita Shapira or Itamar Rabinovich, both of whom he mentions, with cautious decorum, in the introduction to this book. If the acts of cover-up perpetrated by these two in their books against the "New Historians" were actually historical writing, if the "majority of people agree with them" that the history they write does not clash with "what the majority of people know," why, then, with all the resources at their disposal (Tel Aviv University and its Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies; the Rabin Center for Israel Studies, and what have you), haven't they left a more obvious intellectual mark? Why doesn't their writing find an intellectual echo, precisely because of their considerable power, which is inseparable from the desire to defend hegemony, that is, power?
Here is a certain testimony to Benny Morris' influence as a historian. Moreover, his most important book, "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem" (1988), regardless of all the anti-Arab tones he wove into it, was written from outside the academic locus of power, and it nevertheless accrued meanings that the two examples cited above are not powerful enough to overcome.
Morris' work was driven by another kind of desire for power: to dismantle. He had his own version of history, and with its help he could search through the archives, ferret around, cobble together, and ultimately produce a version that was fairly sensational from the point of view of Israeli public opinion (no Arab historian was particularly moved by Morris' "sensational" claim that the Jews were not greatly outnumbered in the 1948 war, and that many of the refugees did not flee, but were driven out). The country that was demolished and kept hidden from us for many years, using the denial-ridden Zionist intelligentsia was briefly resurrected through the author's cold eyes.
By the way, it was not the second Intifada that aroused his hatred toward the victims of ethnic cleansing and such pathetic recommendations as "too bad they did not expel them all." Anyone who knew Morris before the "change" in his views was aware of his weakness. He does not speak Arabic. It is not clear whether he hates Arabs because he does not speak Arabic or vice versa. It really does not matter.
Background to the obvious
Anyway, that is why "The Road to Jerusalem" is a weak book. This time he had no mythology before his eyes as he wrote. The cooperation between the Hashemites and the State of Israel comes up in every interview with Israel's top intelligence officials, who like to brag about their "meetings with the king." In other words, the background to the obvious has been prepared over years. More important, the particular case of the cooperation between the Jordanian Legion and the State of Israel in the 1948 war, and especially the plot to steal from the Palestinians what little they had been promised in the UN partition plan, has already been described at length by Ilan Pappe and Avi Shlaim. Both of them know the same sources Morris has come to read, but they read much more, because they both read and speak Arabic. Incidentally, they were preceded by Israel Beer, whose book, "Israel's Security: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow," written in prison, was published in 1966 thanks to the strenuous efforts of Amikam Gurevitch. The plot between the leaders of the pre-state Jewish settlement and the Hasehmites is the main theme of Bar's book, and it also foregrounds an insight that Morris has never been able to grasp - that when ethnic cleansing spreads, it deepens and prolongs war. Moreover, Morris' book repeats what Morris himself has written in his own previous books. Indeed the book, the leftovers of previous research, is a cut-and-paste job of snips from the diaries and letters of John Bagot Glubb, who came with the British army to serve in Mesopotamia before the British Empire reconstituted it as Iraq and while the empire was pummeling the country's inhabitants, including with weapons of mass destruction, that is, gas. The book does not contain a proper biography of Glubb, neither of his English past nor of his years at the head of an Arab army in the service of the empire. It focuses, rather, on documents pertaining to his years in the military.
Not a Christian fanatic
Glubb fell in love with the Bedouin, learned their language and established serious military units to serve the British-appointed feudal lords, the Hashemite monarchs. Although it is very tempting to portray him this way, Glubb as a commander was working on behalf of the empire, and he trained military units in order to make them into imperial agents. He was also not a Christian fanatic like Orde Wingate, who used the Haganah (Jewish pre-state militia) to perpetrate atrocities in the Palestinian settlements in the name of biblical, that is, Protestant, morality, but in the service of the same empire.
The British finished their task in the 1950s when another army, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), began to perform a role here on behalf of the empire, whose capital, if you will, shifted from London to Washington, D.C. This historical move, if only as a hypothesis, also involved the rise and fall of the Arab secular nationalist regimes and the rise of Jordan to the status of an Arab country, although it had not undergone the same process as the Arab republics. All of these shifts remain hidden from Morris's oh-so-unhistorical vision.
It is impossible to report on Glubb in Jordan without knowing Arabic. The claim, for example, that the situation on the eastern side of the Jordan River was presumably no different from the situation in the Arab peninsula could only be written by someone who does not speak Arabic, but who nevertheless dares to write a history of the Jordanian army and of its relations with the Bedouin living east of the river.
What is left for Morris to find out? Whether the Jordanian army entered the campaign based on an agreement with the Zionist leadership, or did so, rather, in spite of that agreement. Typically, he charges at various possibilities. Arrogantly enough, the hero of his treatise is not the IDF and its own acts and avoidances, but rather the Legion. But you can't explain that Glubb did not know what to do, deliberated, changed his mind, and at the same time also claim that Abdullah, King of Jordan, and his people ultimately decided to cross the river, and all without consulting documents or evidence from that side. For that, you really need to be a colonialist of the less reputable variety.
When he has nothing to write about Glubb, he repeats what he wrote in his previous books, sometimes out of some fierce drive to "reform" - for example, that the refugee problem was in largely a function of developments on the battlefield, that some 400,000 Palestinians had fled or been driven from their homes by the start of the Second Truce, and that 300,000 more refugees were added due to Operations Yoav and Hiram. Leaving aside for a minute the hasty leap into the old narrative, what's Glubb got to do with all this? Morris, relying precisely on the stamina of an archive rat, begins with Glubb, moves to what he already has in his computer, goes back to Glubb, and then goes back to what he already has in his computer.
Monday, March 26, 2007
PLANNING FOR ETHNIC CLEANSING IN PALESTINE
Nizar Sakhnini, 25 March 2007
Zionist ethnic cleansing operations of 1948 were planned way before 1948. Ethnic cleansing was part and parcel of the Zionist plans for the creation of the Jewish State they had in mind.
The Haganah, an illegal military organization, was formed in 1920 headed by an elected political leadership and was transferred to the joint authority of the Jewish Agency Executive and the Va'ad Leumi in 1929. The Arab rebellion in 1936-39 was quelled by the British forces in cooperation with the Haganah. Palmach, the Haganah’s strike force, was formed in 1941.
In 1931, a group of the Haganah members seceded from the organization and became knows as the Irgun Tzeva'i le'umi or its acronym, Etzel.
In 1940, a small group led by Abraham (Yair) Stern, seceded from Etzel and began to operate separately under the name "Etzel in Israel" (the Stern group).
In 1939 differences of opinion emerged between Stern and Raziel, then commander of the Irgun, which led to a split in the organization and the establishment of the new organization Irgun Zvai Leumi Beisrael, which later became to be known as the Lohamei Herut Yisrael (Lehi). Yitzhak Shamir was one of the leaders of Lehi.
By the end of WWII, Haganah, Etzel, and Lehi joined together to carry out terrorist actions against the mandate government in Palestine. Moshe Sneh, head of the Haganah national headquarters, laid down the foundations for an alliance with Etzel and Lehi, which grew into the “Hebrew Resistance Movement”. (Michael Bar-Zohar, Ben-Gurion: A Biography. New York: Delacorte Press, 1977, p. 130)
In 1948, the Israel Defense Force (IDF) was founded incorporating all the three terrorist organizations.
Military operational plans for occupation and ethnic cleansing were also prepared ahead of time.
Plan A was prepared in February 1945 at a time when the Zionist leadership was hoping for an unconditional support from a post-war British Labor government which would enable them to take over the country during a period of "transitional minority rule".
Plan B was introduced in May 1947, after the British had referred the Palestine question to the UN. Since partition was expected to be rejected by the Arabs, the strategic objective of Plan B was to frustrate any interference by the neighboring Arab forces.
Plan C (Plan Gimmel) was worked out in November 1947 when partition became a distinct possibility. It had more specific operational objectives than the two earlier plans.
In March-April 1948, Plan C was replaced by Plan D (Plan Dalet). Zero hour for Plan D was to arrive when British evacuation had reached a point where the Haganah would be reasonably safe from British intervention and when mobilization had progressed to a point where the implementation of a large-scale plan would be feasible. (Netanel Lorch, The Edge of the Sword, pp. 87 – 89, reproduced in Walid Khalidi, From Heaven to Conquest: Readings in Zionism and the Palestine Problem until 1948. Beirut: Institute for Palestine Studies, 1971. Second Printing, Washington, 1987 pp. 755 - 760)
The possibility of retreat from partition and imposing an international trusteeship in Palestine to replace the mandate made it necessary to launch plan D in early April, before the end of the mandate.
Efforts to acquire the weapons and equipment needed for the battle began as of the end of WW II. Ben-Gurion arrived in New York on 1 July 1945 for this purpose. He held a secret meeting with 18 Jewish American millionaires to discuss a ‘vital’ matter. The meeting was held at the home of his friend the millionaire Rudolph Sonnenborn who was among those who attended the meeting. Ben-Gurion explained his plans to acquire millions of dollars in arms to defend the Jewish State that had yet to be created. Each of the eighteen millionaires undertook to do everything within his power for the project. This was the beginning of the Sonnenborn Institute. As a cover, Sonnenborn was engaged in shipping equipment and medicines for hospitals, but secretly he collected millions of dollars to buy arms and many ships to serve illegal immigration. (Michael Bar-Zohar, op. cit., pp. 126 - 127)
In the months following the ZC in 1946, Ben-Gurion dedicated himself to studying military problems. Back in December, in the course of the Zionist Congress, Ben-Gurion had summoned Ya’acov Dori and Israel Galili for a series of conversations. Dori was one of the founders of the Haganah. Galili was the chief officer in the Haganah’s national command. Now, in the spring of 1947, he appointed Galili head of the national command and made Dori commander-in-chief. He summoned the former chief of operations, Yigael Yadin, and re-appointed him to head the Operations Branch in the national command. (Ibid, pp. 141 and 145 - 146)
On 30 Sept. 1947, Ben-Gurion sent his assistant, Munia Mardo, to Europe to seek out sources of arms supplies. Three days later, he decided to purchase airplanes and recruit military experts from abroad. On Oct. 6, Ben-Gurion summoned the head of Ta’as, the local arms and munitions works, and told him to order all the raw materials he required immediately. On 7 November, the Haganah published its order concerning ‘the national structure’, thereby laying the foundations for the establishment of the IDF in due course. (Ibid, pp. 146 - 147)
When the UN issued its resolution # 181 on 29 November 1947 calling for partition, Ben-Gurion was ready for action. The action included: ethnic cleansing, occupation of the largest possible part of Palestine by force and declaration of a Jewish State in that part as a first step for expansion in the future.
Zionist ethnic cleansing operations of 1948 were planned way before 1948. Ethnic cleansing was part and parcel of the Zionist plans for the creation of the Jewish State they had in mind.
The Haganah, an illegal military organization, was formed in 1920 headed by an elected political leadership and was transferred to the joint authority of the Jewish Agency Executive and the Va'ad Leumi in 1929. The Arab rebellion in 1936-39 was quelled by the British forces in cooperation with the Haganah. Palmach, the Haganah’s strike force, was formed in 1941.
In 1931, a group of the Haganah members seceded from the organization and became knows as the Irgun Tzeva'i le'umi or its acronym, Etzel.
In 1940, a small group led by Abraham (Yair) Stern, seceded from Etzel and began to operate separately under the name "Etzel in Israel" (the Stern group).
In 1939 differences of opinion emerged between Stern and Raziel, then commander of the Irgun, which led to a split in the organization and the establishment of the new organization Irgun Zvai Leumi Beisrael, which later became to be known as the Lohamei Herut Yisrael (Lehi). Yitzhak Shamir was one of the leaders of Lehi.
By the end of WWII, Haganah, Etzel, and Lehi joined together to carry out terrorist actions against the mandate government in Palestine. Moshe Sneh, head of the Haganah national headquarters, laid down the foundations for an alliance with Etzel and Lehi, which grew into the “Hebrew Resistance Movement”. (Michael Bar-Zohar, Ben-Gurion: A Biography. New York: Delacorte Press, 1977, p. 130)
In 1948, the Israel Defense Force (IDF) was founded incorporating all the three terrorist organizations.
Military operational plans for occupation and ethnic cleansing were also prepared ahead of time.
Plan A was prepared in February 1945 at a time when the Zionist leadership was hoping for an unconditional support from a post-war British Labor government which would enable them to take over the country during a period of "transitional minority rule".
Plan B was introduced in May 1947, after the British had referred the Palestine question to the UN. Since partition was expected to be rejected by the Arabs, the strategic objective of Plan B was to frustrate any interference by the neighboring Arab forces.
Plan C (Plan Gimmel) was worked out in November 1947 when partition became a distinct possibility. It had more specific operational objectives than the two earlier plans.
In March-April 1948, Plan C was replaced by Plan D (Plan Dalet). Zero hour for Plan D was to arrive when British evacuation had reached a point where the Haganah would be reasonably safe from British intervention and when mobilization had progressed to a point where the implementation of a large-scale plan would be feasible. (Netanel Lorch, The Edge of the Sword, pp. 87 – 89, reproduced in Walid Khalidi, From Heaven to Conquest: Readings in Zionism and the Palestine Problem until 1948. Beirut: Institute for Palestine Studies, 1971. Second Printing, Washington, 1987 pp. 755 - 760)
The possibility of retreat from partition and imposing an international trusteeship in Palestine to replace the mandate made it necessary to launch plan D in early April, before the end of the mandate.
Efforts to acquire the weapons and equipment needed for the battle began as of the end of WW II. Ben-Gurion arrived in New York on 1 July 1945 for this purpose. He held a secret meeting with 18 Jewish American millionaires to discuss a ‘vital’ matter. The meeting was held at the home of his friend the millionaire Rudolph Sonnenborn who was among those who attended the meeting. Ben-Gurion explained his plans to acquire millions of dollars in arms to defend the Jewish State that had yet to be created. Each of the eighteen millionaires undertook to do everything within his power for the project. This was the beginning of the Sonnenborn Institute. As a cover, Sonnenborn was engaged in shipping equipment and medicines for hospitals, but secretly he collected millions of dollars to buy arms and many ships to serve illegal immigration. (Michael Bar-Zohar, op. cit., pp. 126 - 127)
In the months following the ZC in 1946, Ben-Gurion dedicated himself to studying military problems. Back in December, in the course of the Zionist Congress, Ben-Gurion had summoned Ya’acov Dori and Israel Galili for a series of conversations. Dori was one of the founders of the Haganah. Galili was the chief officer in the Haganah’s national command. Now, in the spring of 1947, he appointed Galili head of the national command and made Dori commander-in-chief. He summoned the former chief of operations, Yigael Yadin, and re-appointed him to head the Operations Branch in the national command. (Ibid, pp. 141 and 145 - 146)
On 30 Sept. 1947, Ben-Gurion sent his assistant, Munia Mardo, to Europe to seek out sources of arms supplies. Three days later, he decided to purchase airplanes and recruit military experts from abroad. On Oct. 6, Ben-Gurion summoned the head of Ta’as, the local arms and munitions works, and told him to order all the raw materials he required immediately. On 7 November, the Haganah published its order concerning ‘the national structure’, thereby laying the foundations for the establishment of the IDF in due course. (Ibid, pp. 146 - 147)
When the UN issued its resolution # 181 on 29 November 1947 calling for partition, Ben-Gurion was ready for action. The action included: ethnic cleansing, occupation of the largest possible part of Palestine by force and declaration of a Jewish State in that part as a first step for expansion in the future.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Don't you be my neighbor!
The Jewish families in east Jerusalem hope their Arab neighbors will eventually leave and be replaced by Jews. The Arabs hope the Jews will realize they are unwelcome and move back out
A few hundred meters from the Museum on the Seam, a sociopolitical art museum dedicated to coexistence located on the former border between Israeli and Jordanian Jerusalem, lies the mixed neighborhood of Shimon Hatzadik. According to tradition, the high priest, who was among the last members of the Great Assembly, was buried in a cave built into these sloping Sheikh Jarrah hills, where dozens of hassidim can be found praying and learning throughout the day.
Just a few meters away, in a smaller cave, is the traditional burial site of 23 former heads of the Sanhedrin. Here, a lone hassid sways back and forth as he prays in the dark, damp underground tomb.
The land surrounding the burial caves had lain barren of inhabitants for almost two millennia. The graves, however, were continuously visited by Jewish pilgrims.
In modern times, Jews started this neighborhood in 1895 and lived there until they were evicted by the British army during the Arab riots in 1947, says a source in Lomdei Shalem, an organization responsible for the renewed Jewish presence in the area. In the interim, he explains, the Jordanian government took over the land and permitted Arab families to move into the Jewish homes, where many still remain.
In 1998, a small group of men who went to pray at the ancient burial site reported that the synagogue there was being used as a goat shed and garbage dump by a local Arab family, which also was reportedly planning to build on top of the site, threatening to destroy the entire foundation.
After acquiring power of attorney from the Sephardi Community Council, the original owner of the property, MK Benny Elon shepherded a group of young yeshiva students to the old synagogue. They cleaned it up and began to study there regularly.
In the meantime, says the Lomdei Shalem source, apartments in the area "became available." Slowly, Jews began to move back in.
Today, seven Jewish families live in the Shimon Hatzadik neighborhood, interspersed among dozens of Arab families. Though they're living together, the neighborhood is far from a model for coexistence.
The old synagogue has been restored and is now a kollel, where men study Torah on a daily basis. On the grassy yard outside, Lomdei Shalem and the organizations responsible for supporting the Jewish neighborhood have built a small playground, which is often the site of nasty arguments with the Arabs, whose children also want to play on the new equipment.
"We don't hate them," says Bryna Segal, a resident of Shimon Hatzadik. "But the neighborhood decided not to let them play here so they'll know who's in charge and won't give us trouble."
Segal, her husband and two young children moved to Shimon Hatzadik a little over six months ago from the northern Samaria settlement of Ma'aleh Levona because they wanted to live in Jerusalem and in an ideologically meaningful place. She says the adjustment was difficult and that when they first moved in, she was afraid to let her children go out alone.
"In the beginning, the Arabs would curse at us when we would walk by them," says Segal, who has had rocks thrown at her car, her antennas stolen and her tires slashed.
The Dagan family, which moved in a year ago, recalls an outdoor community meal the Jewish families made one Shabbat that led to a violent encounter with their Arab neighbors.
"They threw feces on the tables we had set up," says Iska Dagan, "and after we started arguing with them, they stabbed my husband Emanuel three times in the back with a screwdriver."
The perpetrators were arrested, held for two days and released, she says. Although the government pays for two 24-hour security guards, the Jewish families complain that they don't get involved.
"One time an Arab threw a cinder block at us as the guard watched, and instead of doing something he told me I should learn to get along with the Arabs," says Dagan.
Now, the families "coexist" in an almost quiet denial of the other's presence.
Segal's next-door neighbors, the Kurds, ignore her completely, she says, because she lives in the home they had built for their son. One of the Jewish associations took the Kurds to court, claiming they built the home illegally.
As protected tenants (residents who cannot be evicted from an apartment that was built under the British Mandate) in a home originally owned by Jews that was later taken over by the Jordanians, the Kurds could not be evicted.
But according to the court, they were prohibited from building an addition to the home that they didn't own in the first place, and Jews were permitted to take it over.
"It's my house," says Fawziya Kurd angrily. "I built it, but Jews are living there. How am I supposed to feel?"
Segal says Fawziya yelled at her when her family put up a mezuza and when they built a succa, but that in recent months her neighbors won't even make eye contact with her.
"We don't talk to them and we don't like them," says Fawziya, "but we don't give each other problems. We both want to live in peace."
The Jewish families in Shimon Hatzadik hope their Arab neighbors will eventually leave and be replaced by Jews, to accelerate the fulfillment of the Jewish dream of Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel. The Arabs hope the Jews will realize they are unwelcome and move back out, enabling Jerusalem to be the capital of a future Palestinian state.
BUT SHIMON Hatzadik is not a singular phenomenon. Throughout east Jerusalem, similar Jewish enclaves are being zealously established with the goal of reigniting Jewish life in what is termed "the heart of Jerusalem" rather than "east Jerusalem," says Daniel Luria, spokesman for Ateret Cohanim, the organization championing the movement.
"Zionism didn't end in 1948 or 1967," he says. "The Jewish dream of having a safe, thriving Jewish community in the heart of Jerusalem hasn't been achieved yet."
Ateret Cohanim, not to be confused with the Old City yeshiva of the same name, was established in 1979, when it helped its first Jewish family move into the Muslim Quarter.
Now, says Luria, there are 800 Jews living in the Muslim and Christian quarters of the Old City, along with 50 families in Ma'aleh Hazetim - also known as Ras el-Amud - on the Mount of Olives. There are also plans for a new project on empty plots of Jewish-owned land on the Jerusalem side of Abu Dis, to be called Kidmat Zion.
Nine Jewish families are also living in the old Yemenite neighborhood of Shiloah, which the Arabs call Silwan, across from the City of David. Just a few weeks ago, however, they were ordered to evacuate by a Jerusalem court because the building they are residing in was built illegally.
The property on which the building sits was owned by Yemenite Jews who were expelled in Arab riots 70 years ago, explains Luria. Arabs built illegally on the property in the last few years, he says, and this specific building was purchased - and then populated - by Jews.
Though he admits there was a lack of adequate building permits for the project, Luria says they are fighting the eviction because of the fact that illegal building is rampant throughout east Jerusalem and the municipality does little to enforce the law on the Arabs living in hundreds of illegally built homes.
In fact, both Luria and Elon say that illegal building in Arab neighborhoods is one of the biggest problems facing the Jerusalem Municipality today.
"It's a very sensitive issue and the government is scared to put its foot down," says Luria. "It's scared CNN or BBC is going to show up and show an old woman crying and a little boy playing in the street outside an Arab home that was destroyed for being illegally built, so it only enforces the law with the Jews."
But Ateret Cohanim and Lomdei Shalem aren't acting alone in their fervent efforts to reestablish Jewish life in the disputed section of the city. Other organizations, the most popular of which are Elad, responsible for renewing Jewish life in the City of David, and Beit Orot, which operates a yeshiva of 10 families on the northern side of the Mount of Olives, are actively involved in bolstering the Jewish presence in these Arab-populated areas.
Supported by funds raised mostly from private donors here and abroad, these organizations work to acquire property from the Arab residents either by purchasing the title from the Arab owner or the protected tenancy right from the Arab resident.
"Contrary to what some may think, nobody is kicked off any land," Luria says. "There are Arabs ready to sell and we take the opportunity to buy. If they are protected tenants and they don't want to leave, we can't make them."
In many instances, he says, the land is in fact Jewish owned but has been occupied by Arabs for many years, rendering many of these residents protected tenants. As such, as Luria points out, they cannot be evicted - unless they sold the property without the permission of the original owner or built illegally on the premises, as occurred in the case of the Kurd family in Shimon Hatzadik. In such cases, or if the resident is not actually a protected tenant but an illegal squatter, the Arab family can be taken to court and evicted.
"Everything that's done is done legally," says Elon, who has pioneered this movement in order to "wipe out the Green Line in Jerusalem" by having a meaningful Jewish presence in the eastern part of the city.
"Everyone says don't worry about Jerusalem, it will be our capital forever and ever, but when [Ehud] Barak was prime minister, Jerusalem was on the table," he says. "We need to unite Jerusalem, not just on maps but on the ground, and the only way to do that is if Jews feel safe and secure there and know this is the only capital of the Jewish state."
While the stakes are high, Luria maintains that the process is simple - if an Arab wants to sell, a Jew should be able to buy. Indeed, 100 percent of Ateret Cohanim's activity is buying from the Arabs and does not involve the courts - unless the Arab himself requests a cover story.
"There have been many instances in which Arabs were killed for selling land to Jews," Luria says, clearly hinting at the highly-rumored notion that if an Arab wants to sell to Jews but is afraid for his life, he can be taken to court and go through the motions of being "evicted" so his Arab neighbors won't know he willingly sold to Jews. "We go to great lengths to protect the Arabs, even if it means looking bad in the eyes of the community."
For all the bad press it receives for its controversial activities, he says his organization shouldn't have to exist at all - it's really the responsibility of the government or the Jewish National Fund to act on behalf of Jewish landowners, research the old properties and synagogues and make sure the current Arab residents aren't destroying or defiling them.
"The whole world is talking about Jews as the occupiers of Arab land," he says. "But in Jerusalem, it's totally the opposite."
THE ARABS, of course, disagree.
Karim Arafat lives in Wadi Hilweh in Silwan, where he owns a tailor shop. When asked if there are Jews living in his neighborhood, he responds in the negative, saying that it's not Jews but "settlers" who have begun moving in.
"No one's happy they're here," he says. "We don't want them living in our neighborhood."
Arafat says his new neighbors aren't friendly and interfere with his lifestyle, explaining that on Jewish holidays, the streets are closed off and while he is trapped in his home, the "settlers are dancing in the streets."
He says he thinks it might be possible for Jews and Arabs to live together one day, but that "Jews and settlers are not the same thing. I can't live with settlers," he says. "And I don't think you could either."
Though he acknowledges their claim that the property in question was Jewish-owned, Arafat says that doesn't change the fact that they are kicking Arabs out of homes they've lived in for years.
"They say they owned it a hundred years ago," he says, "but if someone steals your house, or even your friend's house, how can you live with them?"
Correspondingly, dovish city councilman Pepe Allalo says every effort to bring Jewish families into east Jerusalem homes is a violent provocation against the Arabs and straddles the boundaries of what's legal and what's not.
"First of all, according to international law, nothing here is legal because the world considers east Jerusalem occupied land," he says. In Israel, he adds, it's also illegal because many of the homes being purchased by Jews are illegally built, and as an example he refers to the case of the Jewish families in Silwan recently given eviction notices.
But it's impossible to say whether all these transactions are legal or not, says attorney Daniel Seidman of Ir Amim, which describes itself as an organization that promotes Israeli-Palestinian coexistence in Jerusalem. Each house in east Jerusalem, he says, has its own, complicated story.
Seidman became involved in the issue in 1992, when he petitioned the High Court of Justice on behalf of former Meretz MK Haim Oron, arguing that Jews moving into east Jerusalem reflected a covert government policy to turn over Palestinian properties to extremist settlers. Seidman contends that "the settlers" have an "ambiguous relationship" with the rule of law and tons of political clout that they use to the utmost. The government, he says, has practiced a systematic policy of collusion with the settler organizations, with Ariel Sharon as their "patron saint."
There have been plenty of cases in east Jerusalem, he says, in which there are illegal allocations of government funds or in which "settlers" are given the inside track by government agencies. He says he has even witnessed situations in which land is declared "absentee property"(property in a captured territory that is managed by a government appointee), turned over to Jews and the Arabs living in the house find "their stuff being thrown out the window and themselves evicted."
Widespread illegality reigns, he alleges, but nevertheless admits that there are circumstances in which properties in east Jerusalem are turned over in a completely legal manner and by the consent of the Arab owner. He points out that Shimon Hatzadik is one distinct example.
"The property was owned by Jews prior to 1948 and the Jordanian custodian for enemy property built homes on this land to house refugees - so the title here clearly belongs to the Jews," he says. Confirming the Jewish claims, Seidman elaborates that Jews have been able to legally repopulate the area because Arabs sold to them or violated contract agreements and were evicted by a court.
But the bottom line is that both the Arabs and Jews, determined to force the other out of east Jerusalem, claim the other side is wrong, lying, cheating, stealing or forging documents. At the end of the day, says Seidman, "you'll never hear a settler say I've ripped off a Palestinian, and you'll never hear a Palestinian say anything but that he's been ripped off."
AT THE HEART of the issue is the controversial piece of land itself, over which Israelis and Palestinians have been competing for some 120 years, says Yisrael Kimche, a geographer at the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies and 70-year Jerusalem resident.
"Each side thinks that if it settles in this place, it will own it," he explains.
Documents clearly show that most of the land in question was owned by Jews many years ago, he says, similar to land in west Jerusalem that was once owned by Arabs but was turned over to the government after they left during the War of Independence.
It's difficult to examine whether all the transactions going on today are legal, he continues, because most of it is done in secret to protect the Arabs who are thought to be betraying their brethren by selling to Jews.
"The Jewish organizations try to do everything legally, but no one knows exactly what's happening there because everything is kept very quiet," he says.
But the phenomenon, he adds, is nothing new.
"Most of the Jewish neighborhoods in west Jerusalem were purchased from Arabs since the middle of the 19th century," he says. "It's just in the last couple of years that it's become a major political issue."
The issue itself has been greatly exaggerated, Kimche says, because the actual number of Jews moving into Arab areas of east Jerusalem is small and the number of Jews already living in what is considered east Jerusalem - in neighborhoods such as Pisgat Zeev built north, south and east of the Green Line - is more than 180,000, only slightly fewer than the number of Palestinians residing there.
The Arab population in east Jerusalem stands at about 240,000, 33% of the total population of Jerusalem, according to figures provided by Kimche.Of that, more than half are studying in the Israeli education system, and as such are considered by Kimche to be a population that Jews can enter and live with peacefully.
"I personally don't think it's a great idea for Jews to purchase land in the middle of Arab neighborhoods. I think it's better to live side by side but not to mingle." he says. "But there are hundreds of Arab families moving to Jewish neighborhoods because of housing shortages, so I don't think it's so problematic for a Jewish family to live in a Muslim area."
Kimche remains optimistic, pointing out that "there were times when Jews and Arabs lived together in peace."
"I think it's possible for us to live together," he continues. "So perhaps this [situation in east Jerusalem] could encourage peace because you already have Jews and Arabs living together."
From the hostility and tension tangible in the air around Shimon Hatzadik, it doesn't seem very likely.
"There is no chance for coexistence today," says Allalo. "They're living in a bad situation," he says of the Jews in Shimon Hatzadik. "There's violence, arguing, and two guards right next to them. If there was coexistence, we wouldn't need guards, but we do because each side doesn't want the other."
Today, Allalo determines that the only course of action is for Jews and Arabs to separate from each other completely and have two states. Only after friendly relations are established between the states can either side even consider living in the other's communities.
"We are at war now," he says. "Maybe one day when there's peace a Jew can buy a house in Silwan and an Arab can buy a house in Neveh Ya'acov. But it's not possible today."
Though they live mere meters apart and pass by each other morning and night, the two communities in Shimon Hatzadik continue to exist as if the other doesn't.
"We don't expect everyone to get along," says Luria, "just to be cordial and coexist."
Segal says she isn't scared anymore and now lets her children play freely in the plaza outside her home and feels comfortable walking around the area alone.
But perhaps it's just too soon to tell. In the home across the way from Segal's, an Arab woman smiles at Segal and her children as they walk by. They wave and smile back. Segal says the two women don't speak, but that she's always friendly.
"It would be interesting to speak to the Arabs, to find out about them, to learn who they are," says Segal, "but unfortunately, that's not the atmosphere here."
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Jerusalem home demolitions: by 2020, 240,000 Palestinians will be 40,000
Editor's note: I am moving to post at the other blog(also see new articles below).
---
(Jerusalem) Maisa Abu Ghazaleh
Wednesday, 14 March 2007
The wintry weather did not prevent the Israeli-controlled Jerusalem Municipality bulldozers from traveling to the Hummos Valley in the village of Sur Baher. They demolished two of the homes in southeastern Jerusalem under the pretext of not being licensed.
Since this morning the bulldozers have been active, demolishing the house belonging to Ali Abu Sarhan where he and his 10 member family have lived since 2002. The home is approximately 100 square meters with a construction cost of approximately 130,000 shekels, in addition to the 50,000 shekels given to the Israelis for the Municipal Court to issue a license.
Abu Sarhan said he was surprised to find a large presence of police and border guards, along with the municipal crews who began removing furniture from the house while the bulldozers got started on the other side.
A residential building not yet inhabited belonging to the Tun family was also destroyed. The house was constructed, but Tun was awaiting a building permit to move in since 2003 from the Jerusalem municipality which refused to grant it.
He said, “When I saw the police and bulldozers I went to the Jerusalem municipality to again postpone, but they would not. I spent half a million shekels building this home.” He noted that he and his children all must rent.
In the meantime, Israeli forces imposed a closed military zone on the Hummos Valley while distributing demolition orders to approximately 50 families under the pretext of licensing. The demolitions are slated for June, although the Israelis generally accept large sums of money to postpone.
Director of the Jerusalem Center for Economic and Social Rights, Ziad Al Hamori, said that demolition in Jerusalem for this year has been extensive and brutal, pointing out that during the first three months of 2007, Jerusalem Municipality bulldozers demolished 20 houses.
Al Hamori told PNN, “The continuation of the campaign to demolish homes aims to drive the people from the city, in addition to solving the Israeli concern over demographics.” He pointed out the ease with which Jewish builders are granted permits in settlements or in other parts of Jerusalem. “Israel is distorting and changing the features and history of the Old City and its surroundings.” According to the Israeli plan for 2020, 240,000 Palestinians in Jerusalem must be reduced to 40 or 50 thousand, concluded Al Hamori.
---
(Jerusalem) Maisa Abu Ghazaleh
Wednesday, 14 March 2007
The wintry weather did not prevent the Israeli-controlled Jerusalem Municipality bulldozers from traveling to the Hummos Valley in the village of Sur Baher. They demolished two of the homes in southeastern Jerusalem under the pretext of not being licensed.
Since this morning the bulldozers have been active, demolishing the house belonging to Ali Abu Sarhan where he and his 10 member family have lived since 2002. The home is approximately 100 square meters with a construction cost of approximately 130,000 shekels, in addition to the 50,000 shekels given to the Israelis for the Municipal Court to issue a license.
Abu Sarhan said he was surprised to find a large presence of police and border guards, along with the municipal crews who began removing furniture from the house while the bulldozers got started on the other side.
A residential building not yet inhabited belonging to the Tun family was also destroyed. The house was constructed, but Tun was awaiting a building permit to move in since 2003 from the Jerusalem municipality which refused to grant it.
He said, “When I saw the police and bulldozers I went to the Jerusalem municipality to again postpone, but they would not. I spent half a million shekels building this home.” He noted that he and his children all must rent.
In the meantime, Israeli forces imposed a closed military zone on the Hummos Valley while distributing demolition orders to approximately 50 families under the pretext of licensing. The demolitions are slated for June, although the Israelis generally accept large sums of money to postpone.
Director of the Jerusalem Center for Economic and Social Rights, Ziad Al Hamori, said that demolition in Jerusalem for this year has been extensive and brutal, pointing out that during the first three months of 2007, Jerusalem Municipality bulldozers demolished 20 houses.
Al Hamori told PNN, “The continuation of the campaign to demolish homes aims to drive the people from the city, in addition to solving the Israeli concern over demographics.” He pointed out the ease with which Jewish builders are granted permits in settlements or in other parts of Jerusalem. “Israel is distorting and changing the features and history of the Old City and its surroundings.” According to the Israeli plan for 2020, 240,000 Palestinians in Jerusalem must be reduced to 40 or 50 thousand, concluded Al Hamori.
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Ongoing population transfer in OPT and Israel
Report, BADIL, 10 March 2007
Israel's ongoing policies against the Palestinian people of land expropriation, house demolition, population transfer, colonial settlement expansion, denial of freedom of movement, and expropriation of water and other resources, present the Human Rights Council with one of the longest-standing, yet urgent cases of denial of internationally-recognized human rights. Indeed, Israel's practices that victimize the indigenous Palestinian people, constitute a violation of every one of the most fundamental human rights embodied in the Universal Bill of Human Rights: the rights to life, to freedom of movement, to civil, political, religious and cultural rights, to the due process rights of the ICCPR, and to virtually all of the economic, social and cultural rights of the ICESCR.
The most recent authoritative documentation on these Israeli practices available to the Council includes Special Rapporteur John Dugard's report on the Occupied Territories, (Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, 29 January 2007) which labels Israel's actions 'apartheid.'
SR Dugard's thorough report draws sufficient parallels between the South African apartheid regime and Israel's as to make the term appropriate for use against Israel today. Israel's historical policy of institutional discrimination is at the root of its regime of occupation, colonization and apartheid. Israel's discriminatory and racist policies, favoring "Jewish nationals", including settlers, over Palestinian citizens of Israel, protected civilians in the occupied territories, and refugees has created a two-tier system whereby the special and distinct status of "Jewish nationals" prevents the fundamental right to equality of Palestinians.
Under Israeli law and policy, only "Jewish nationals" exclusively enjoy a range of economic, social and cultural rights, including the "Law of Return" that allows free immigration for Jews, but denies the same to the Palestinian indigenous population tracing its ties to the land for thousands of years. "Jewish nationals" are also privileged to acquire, control and exclusively use the properties and national assets that belong to Palestinians, including the 6.8 million refugees and others displaced since 1948. This discriminatory regime thus prevents the return of Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons to their homes of origin, and leads to ongoing population transfer in both Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. Amongst others whose very existence is threatened are the Bedouin communities in the Nakab (Negev) and the occupied West Bank.
Enforcing international law: the need for further action
States have a duty to protect the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people, denounce discrimination, racism, and colonization, and find a durable solution to Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons based on their right to return and restitution. Moreover, the United Nations and member states must act urgently to prevent further population transfer within Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.
Unless a rights-based approach to the conflict that addresses Israel's discriminatory practices becomes the basis of international community actions, the conflict will continue to deepen, affecting the peace and security of all nations. The urgent need for action by the Human Rights Council, and through it, the United Nations bodies, cannot be overemphasized. It is with this hope that Badil request the Council to consider the legality and implications of Israel's historical policies of institutional discrimination being applied in both Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.
This action is particularly urgent considering that the number of Palestinians killed in 2006 represents a 215 percent increase compared to the 2005 figure. According to UN OCHA and Defense for Children International (DCI), 678 Palestinians were killed, including 124 children, in the occupied Palestinian territories as a result of the ongoing conflict. Since the beginning of the intifada in September 2000, over 4,300 Palestinians have been killed and 31,000 injured. These casualties continue to mount while successive UN Resolutions designed to bring the illegal occupation to an end remain ignored by Israel.
Badil calls upon members of the Human Rights Council to initiate a request for the International Court of Justice to issue an advisory opinion on The Legality of the Israeli Occupation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories; call all upon states to bring claims against Israel in the International Court of Justice under the principle of state responsibility, to ensure that Israel complies with its obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law; preserve the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian territories Occupied since 1967; appoint a Special Rapporteur or expert to examine discriminatory practices affecting Palestinians and other minorities in Israel; consider urging states members of the UN to take measures such as economic sanctions and diplomatic boycott against Israel for its breach of international law and non-implementation of UN Resolutions, as outlined by the International Court of Justice in its 9 July 2004 Advisory Opinion on The Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and endorse a call to the United Nations political bodies to act to provide international protection for the Palestinian civilian population through United Nations forces on the ground.
This is a statement submitted by Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, an NGO with special ECOSOC status to the fourth session of the Human Rights Council which starts this week in Geneva.
Related Links
Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights
UN Rapporteur compares Israel to Apartheid South Africa (27 February 2007)
 |
| A wide view of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland. (Photo: UN/Jean-Marc Ferre) |
Israel's ongoing policies against the Palestinian people of land expropriation, house demolition, population transfer, colonial settlement expansion, denial of freedom of movement, and expropriation of water and other resources, present the Human Rights Council with one of the longest-standing, yet urgent cases of denial of internationally-recognized human rights. Indeed, Israel's practices that victimize the indigenous Palestinian people, constitute a violation of every one of the most fundamental human rights embodied in the Universal Bill of Human Rights: the rights to life, to freedom of movement, to civil, political, religious and cultural rights, to the due process rights of the ICCPR, and to virtually all of the economic, social and cultural rights of the ICESCR.
The most recent authoritative documentation on these Israeli practices available to the Council includes Special Rapporteur John Dugard's report on the Occupied Territories, (Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, 29 January 2007) which labels Israel's actions 'apartheid.'
SR Dugard's thorough report draws sufficient parallels between the South African apartheid regime and Israel's as to make the term appropriate for use against Israel today. Israel's historical policy of institutional discrimination is at the root of its regime of occupation, colonization and apartheid. Israel's discriminatory and racist policies, favoring "Jewish nationals", including settlers, over Palestinian citizens of Israel, protected civilians in the occupied territories, and refugees has created a two-tier system whereby the special and distinct status of "Jewish nationals" prevents the fundamental right to equality of Palestinians.
Under Israeli law and policy, only "Jewish nationals" exclusively enjoy a range of economic, social and cultural rights, including the "Law of Return" that allows free immigration for Jews, but denies the same to the Palestinian indigenous population tracing its ties to the land for thousands of years. "Jewish nationals" are also privileged to acquire, control and exclusively use the properties and national assets that belong to Palestinians, including the 6.8 million refugees and others displaced since 1948. This discriminatory regime thus prevents the return of Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons to their homes of origin, and leads to ongoing population transfer in both Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. Amongst others whose very existence is threatened are the Bedouin communities in the Nakab (Negev) and the occupied West Bank.
Enforcing international law: the need for further action
States have a duty to protect the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people, denounce discrimination, racism, and colonization, and find a durable solution to Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons based on their right to return and restitution. Moreover, the United Nations and member states must act urgently to prevent further population transfer within Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.
Unless a rights-based approach to the conflict that addresses Israel's discriminatory practices becomes the basis of international community actions, the conflict will continue to deepen, affecting the peace and security of all nations. The urgent need for action by the Human Rights Council, and through it, the United Nations bodies, cannot be overemphasized. It is with this hope that Badil request the Council to consider the legality and implications of Israel's historical policies of institutional discrimination being applied in both Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.
This action is particularly urgent considering that the number of Palestinians killed in 2006 represents a 215 percent increase compared to the 2005 figure. According to UN OCHA and Defense for Children International (DCI), 678 Palestinians were killed, including 124 children, in the occupied Palestinian territories as a result of the ongoing conflict. Since the beginning of the intifada in September 2000, over 4,300 Palestinians have been killed and 31,000 injured. These casualties continue to mount while successive UN Resolutions designed to bring the illegal occupation to an end remain ignored by Israel.
Badil calls upon members of the Human Rights Council to initiate a request for the International Court of Justice to issue an advisory opinion on The Legality of the Israeli Occupation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories; call all upon states to bring claims against Israel in the International Court of Justice under the principle of state responsibility, to ensure that Israel complies with its obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law; preserve the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian territories Occupied since 1967; appoint a Special Rapporteur or expert to examine discriminatory practices affecting Palestinians and other minorities in Israel; consider urging states members of the UN to take measures such as economic sanctions and diplomatic boycott against Israel for its breach of international law and non-implementation of UN Resolutions, as outlined by the International Court of Justice in its 9 July 2004 Advisory Opinion on The Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and endorse a call to the United Nations political bodies to act to provide international protection for the Palestinian civilian population through United Nations forces on the ground.
This is a statement submitted by Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, an NGO with special ECOSOC status to the fourth session of the Human Rights Council which starts this week in Geneva.
Related Links
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Israelis keep a fishy watch
Israelis keep a fishy watch: Since late June, when an Israeli soldier was taken captive by Palestinian militants during what one Israeli military source called "a daring commando raid" on an Israeli army post on the Gaza border, there has been a total ban on fishing by Palestinians. The Israeli army asserts the ban is imposed to prevent Palestinian militants from squirreling the captured Israeli soldier Shalit to Egypt by sea. A cursory study of the disabled and bullet-riddled boats beached at the Gaza Port reveals that many fishermen defy the Israeli ban and have paid a significant price. What is our choice," asked el-Amoudi, as he weighed the impact of his family going hungry versus the danger of fishing the tiny Gaza coastline. Collectively, Palestinian fishermen have seen their monthly catch drop from 823 tonnes in June 2000 to as low as 50 in late 2006. The World Food Programme, which feeds about a quarter of a million of Gaza's most destitute, has issued an urgent appeal over malnutrition resulting from the removal of fish and other animal proteins from the diet in Gaza.
Israelis keep a fishy watch
Israelis keep a fishy watch: Since late June, when an Israeli soldier was taken captive by Palestinian militants during what one Israeli military source called "a daring commando raid" on an Israeli army post on the Gaza border, there has been a total ban on fishing by Palestinians. The Israeli army asserts the ban is imposed to prevent Palestinian militants from squirreling the captured Israeli soldier Shalit to Egypt by sea. A cursory study of the disabled and bullet-riddled boats beached at the Gaza Port reveals that many fishermen defy the Israeli ban and have paid a significant price. What is our choice," asked el-Amoudi, as he weighed the impact of his family going hungry versus the danger of fishing the tiny Gaza coastline. Collectively, Palestinian fishermen have seen their monthly catch drop from 823 tonnes in June 2000 to as low as 50 in late 2006. The World Food Programme, which feeds about a quarter of a million of Gaza's most destitute, has issued an urgent appeal over malnutrition resulting from the removal of fish and other animal proteins from the diet in Gaza.
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Stephen Lendman: A Review of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by Ilan Pappe
Thursday, February 08, 2007
A Review of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by Ilan Pappe
by Stephen Lendman
Ilan Pappe is an Israeli historian and senior lecturer at Haifa University. He's also Academic Director of the Research Institute for Peace at Givat Haviva and Chair of the Emil Touma Institute for Palestinian Studies. Pappe is an expert on Israel and Zionism and the Palestinians' Right of Return to their homeland, is considered "an honourable academic with integrity and conscience," and is a member of the Advisory Board of the Council for Palestinian Restitution and Repatriation (CPRR), an organization declaring that "every Palestinian has a legitimate, individual right to return to his or her original home and to absolute restitution of his or her property."
Pappe is also one of Israel's "new historians" whose scholarship and writings are based on access to material now available from British Mandate period and Israeli archives that provide the most accurate and authentic documented history of Israel before and after it became a state and which now serve to debunk the myths about the years leading up to the Jewish State's founding and those following it to this day.
Pappe has also authored, contributed to or edited nine books. His latest is the one this review covers in detail so readers will know about its powerful and shocking content, unknown to most in the West and in Israel, that hopefully will arouse them enough to get the book and learn in full detail what Pappe documented. He proves from official records how the Israeli state came into being with blood on its hands from lands forcibly seized from its Palestinian inhabitants who'd lived on it for hundreds of years previously. Since the 1940s, they were ethnically cleansed and slaughtered without mercy so their homeland would become one for Jews alone.
The shameful result is that Palestinians then and today have almost no rights including being able to live in peace and security on their own land in their own state that no longer exists. Survivors then and their offspring either live in Israel as unwanted Arab citizens with few rights or in the Occupied Palestinians Territories (OPT) where their lives are suspended in limbo in an occupied country in which they're subjected to daily institutionalized and codified racism and persecution. They have no power over their daily lives and live in a constant state of fear with good reason. They face economic strangulation; collective punishment for any reason; loss of free movement; enclosures by separation walls, electric fences and border closings; regular curfews, roadblocks, checkpoints, loss of their homes by bulldozings and crops and orchards by wanton destruction and seizure; arrest without cause, and routine subjection to torture while in custody.
They're targeted for extra-judicial assassination and indiscriminate killing; taxed punitively and denied basic services essential to life and well-being including health care, education, employment and even enough food and water at the whim of Israeli authorities in a deliberate effort to destroy their will to resist and eliminate those who won't by expulsion or extermination. Palestinians have no power to end these appalling abuses and crimes against humanity or receive any redress for them in Israeli, the West or through the International Criminal Court Israel ignores when it rules against its interests.
How can they as Muslims in a racist Jewish state where Israelis oppressive them with impunity, the US goes along with huge financing and supplying of the most modern and destructive weapons of war, and the West and most Arab states are indifferent preferring to ally with Israel and the US for benefits received while writing off Palestinians as a small price worth paying. It created state of appalling human misery and desperation severely aggravated by crushing economic sanctions for the past year imposed for the first time ever on an occupied people. They're responsible for poverty and unemployment levels of 80% or more and increasing instances of starvation and unreported deaths from all causes because Israel controls everything and everyone allowed in and out of the territories. Those inside them suffer painfully as a result. Others with power to help, don't care and do nothing.
Pappe documents how it all began in 12 chapters with a short epilogue plus 18 graphic pictures needing no explanation. He calls the book his "J'Accuse against the politicians who devised the plan and the generals who carried out the ethnic cleansing" naming the guilty, the villages and urban areas destroyed, and the cruelest crimes committed against defenseless people only wanting to live in peace on their own land and were willing to do it with Jews as neighbors but not as overlords or oppressors.
This review is lengthy so readers will know in detail what Israeli authorities successfully suppressed for decades. Pappe courageously revealed it in a book begging to be read and discussed by all people of conscience and good faith. They need to take the lead building a groundswell consensus to stand up to this long-festering injustice against defenseless people fighting for their rights and existence against overwhelming odds.
Pappe provides them help with his extensive documentation and other suggested reading on the origins of Zionist ideology leading to the ethnic cleansing in the 1940s and thereafter. He particularly mentions two of Nur Masalha's important books - Expulsion of the Palestinians: The Concept of Transfer in Zionist Political Thought, 1882 - 1948 and The Politics of Denial: Israel and the Palestinian Refugee Problem. Readers are encouraged to explore this issue further with these and other books exposing ugly truths long suppressed in the West and needing to be freely aired.
The Beginning - Initial Planning for Ethnic Cleansing
In his preface, Pappe writes about the "Red House" in Tel-Aviv that became headquarters for the Hagana, the dominant Zionist underground paramilitary militia during the British Mandate period in Palestine between 1920 and 1948 when the Jewish state came into being. He details how David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, met with leading Zionists and young Jewish military officers on March 10, 1948 to finalize plans to ethnically cleanse Palestine that unfolded in the months that followed including "large-scale (deadly serious)intimidation; laying siege to and bombarding villages and population centres; setting fire to homes, properties and goods; expulsion; demolition; and finally, planting mines among the rubble to prevent any of the expelled inhabitants from returning."
The final master plan was called Plan D (Dalet in Hebrew) following plans A, B, and C preceding it. It was to be a war without mercy complying with what Ben-Gurion said in June, 1938 to the Jewish Agency Executive and never wavering from later: "I am for compulsory transfer; I do not see anything immoral in it." Plan D became the way to do it. It included forcible expulsion of hundreds of thousands of unwanted Palestinian Arabs in urban and rural areas accompanied by an unknown number of others mass slaughtered to get it done. The goal was simple and straightforward - to create an exclusive Jewish state without an Arab presence by any means including mass-murder.
Once begun, the whole ugly business took six months to complete. It expelled about 800,000 people, killed many others, and destroyed 531 villages and 11 urban neighborhoods in cities like Tel-Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem. The action was a clear case of ethnic cleansing that international law today calls a crime against humanity for which convicted Nazis at Nuremberg were hanged. So far Israelis have always remained immune from international law even though names of guilty leaders and those charged with implementing their orders are known as well as the crimes they committed.
They included cold-blooded mass-murder; destruction of homes, villages and crops; rapes; other atrocities; and massacres of defenseless people given no quarter including women and children. The crimes were suppressed and expunged from official accounts as Israeli historiography cooked up the myth that Palestinians left voluntarily fearing harm from invading Arab armies. It was a lie covering up Israeli crimes Palestinians call the Nakba - the catastrophe or disaster that's still a cold, harsh festering unresolved injustice.
Even with British armed presence still in charge of law and order before its Mandate ended, Jewish forces completed the expulsion of about 250,000 Palestinians the Brits did nothing to stop. It continued unabated because when neighboring Arab states finally intervened, they did so without conviction. They came belatedly and with only small, ill-equipped forces, no match for a superior, well-armed Israeli military easily able to prevail as discussed below.
Ethnic Cleansing Defined
Pappe notes that ethnic cleansing is well-defined in international law that calls it a crime against humanity. He cites several definitions including from the Hutchinson encyclopedia saying it's expulsion by force to homogenize the population. The US State Department concurs adding its essence is to eradicate a region's history. The United Nations used a similar definition in 1993 when the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) characterized it as the desire of a state or regime to impose ethnic rule on a mixed area using expulsion and other violence including separating men and women, detentions, murder of males of all ages who might become combatants, destruction of houses, and repopulating areas with another ethnic group.
In 1948, Zionists waged their "War of Independence" using Plan D to "cleanse" Palestine according to the UN definition. It involved cold-blooded massacres and indiscriminate killing, targeted assassinations and widespread destruction as clear instances of crimes of war and against humanity, later expunged from the country's official history and erased from its collective memory. It was left it to a few courageous historians like Ilan Pappe to resurrect events to preserve the truth too important to let die. His invaluable book provides an historic account of what, in fact, happened. It needs broad exposure but won't get it in the corporate-controlled Israeli, US or Western media overall. It will on this important web site with the courage to publish it.
Zionism's Ideological Roots
Pappe traces the roots of Zionism to the late 1880s in Central and Eastern Europe "as a national revival movement, prompted by the growing pressure on Jews in those regions to assimilate totally or risk continuing persecution." Founded by Theodor Herzl, the movement became international in scope supporting a Jewish homeland in the Land of Israel, or Eretz Israel, even though early on many in the movement were ambivalent about its location. That changed following Herzl's death in 1904 when it was decided the goal was to colonize Palestine because of its biblical connection that happened to be land occupied inappropriately by "strangers" meaning anyone not Jewish having "no right" to be there.
So as justification, the myth was created of "a land without people for a people without a land" even though this "empty land" had a flourishing Palestinian Arab population including a small number of Jews. Zionist leaders wanted a complete dispossession of indigenous Arabs to reestablish the ancient land of Eretz Israel as a Jewish state for Jews alone and got help doing it from the British after Palestine became part of its empire post-WW I. With duplicity, the Brits crafted the 1917 Balfour Declaration supporting the notion of a Jewish homeland in Palestine while simultaneously promising indigenous Arabs their rights would be protected and land would be freed from foreign rule.
Palestinian Arabs saw through the scheme wanting no part of it. It was their land, and they weren't about to give it up without a struggle. They strongly opposed further Jewish immigration but to no avail, as their wishes conflicted with British plans for the territory. It set off decades of conflict leading to the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948 with British help under their Mandate and neighboring Arab state indifference doing little to prevent it. Palestinians lost their homeland, their struggle for justice goes on unresolved, and these beleaguered people are virtually isolated from the West and their Arab neighbors preferring alliance with Israel for their own interests that exclude helping Palestinian people get theirs served including a viable independent state free from Israeli occupation.
Pappe traces the early post-Balfour history when Palestinians comprised 80 - 90% of the population. Even then they fared poorly under British Mandate rule giving Zionist settlers preferential treatment. It led to uprisings in 1929 and 1936, the later one lasting three years before being brutally suppressed. In its wake, Britain expelled Palestinian leaders making their people vulnerable to Jewish forces post-WW II that led to their defeat and subjugation. The sympathetic British Mandate made it possible by helping Jewish settlers transform their 1920 paramilitary organization into the Hagana, a name meaning defense. It then became the military arm of the Jewish Agency or Zionist governing body now called the Israel Defense Forces or IDF.
Planning the Expulsion of the Palestinians
David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, led the Zionist movement from the mid-1920s until well into the 1960s. He played a central role and had supreme authority planning the establishment of a Jewish state serving as its "architect" with full control over all security and defense issues in the Jewish community. His goal was Jewish sovereignty over as much of ancient Palestine as possible achieved the only way he thought possible - by forceable removable of Palestinians from their land so Jews could be resettled in it.
To do it, he and other Zionist leaders needed a systematic plan to "cleanse" the land for Jewish habitation only. It began with a detailed registry or inventory of Arab villages the Jewish National Fund (JNF) was assigned to compile. The JNF was founded in 1901 as the main Zionist tool for the colonization of Palestine. Its purpose was to buy land used to settle Jewish immigrants that by the end of the British Mandate in 1948 amounted to 5.8% of Palestine or a small fraction of what Zionists wanted for a Jewish state. Early on, Ben-Gurion and others knew a more aggressive approach was needed for their colonization plan to succeed.
It began with the JNF Arab village inventory that was a blueprint completed by the late 1930s that included the topographic location of each village with detailed information including husbandry, cultivated land, number of trees, quality of fruit, average amount of land per family, number of cars, shop owners, Palestinian clans and their political affiliation, descriptions of village mosques and names of their imams, civil servants and more. The final inventory update was finished in 1947 with lists of "wanted" persons in each village targeted in 1948 for search-and-arrest operations with those seized summarily shot on the spot in cold blood.
The idea was simple - kill the leaders and anyone thought to be a threat the British hadn't already eliminated quelling the 1936-39 uprising. It created a power vacuum neutralizing any effective opposition to Zionists' plans. The only remaining obstacle thereafter was the British presence Ben-Gurion knew was on the way out by 1946 before it finally ended in May, 1948.
Partition, Ethnic Cleansing, War, and Establishment of the State of Israel
Ethnic cleansing began in early December, 1947 when Palestinians comprised two-thirds of the population and Jews, mostly from war-torn Europe, the other third. The British tried dealing with two distinct ethnic entities choosing partition as the way to do it. By 1937, this solution became the centerpiece of Zionist policy, but it proved too hard for the Brits to resolve and be able to satisfy both sides. It instead handed the problem to the newly formed UN to deal with before their Mandate ended.
It put the Palestinians' fate in the hands of a Special Committee for Palestine (UNSCOP) whose members had no prior experience solving conflicts and knew little Palestinian history. It was a recipe for disaster as events unfolded. UNSCOP opted for partition favoring the Jews as compensation for the Nazi holocaust that became General Assembly Resolution 181 on November 29, 1947 giving them a state encompassing 56% the country with one-third of the population while making Jerusalem an international city. Palestinians were justifiably outraged. They were excluded from the decision-making process concluded against their will and at their expense.
From that moment on, the die was cast leading to partition, ethnic cleansing, the first Arab-Israeli war, the others to follow, and decades of disregard for their rights to this day creating their desperate state with no resolution in prospect. Resolution 181 was even worse than an unfair 56 - 44% division of territory as it allotted the most fertile land and almost all urban and rural territory in Palestine to the new Jewish state plus 400 of the over 1000 Palestinian villages their residents lost with no right of appeal.
Pappe explains Ben-Gurion simultaneously accepted and rejected the resolution. He and other Zionist leaders wanted official international recognition of the right of Jews to have their own state in Palestine. He was also determined to make Jerusalem the Jewish capital, intended final borders to remain flexible wanting to include within them as much future territory as possible, and today Israel is the only country in the world without established borders. Ben-Gurion decided borders would "be determined by force and not by partition resolution." He headed the Consultancy or Consultant Committee, an ad-hoc cabal of Zionist leaders created solely to plan the expulsion of Palestinians to cleanse the land for Jewish habitation only.
The process began in early December, 1947 with a series of attacks against Palestinian villages and neighborhoods. They were engaged ineffectively from the start on January 9 by units of the first all-Arab volunteer army. It resulted in forced expulsions beginning in mid-February, 1948. On March 10, final Plan Dalet was adopted with its first targets being Palestinian urban centers that were all occupied by end of April with about 250,000 Palestinians uprooted, displaced or killed including by massacres, the most notorious and remembered being at Deir Yassin even though Tantura may have been the largest.
Deir Yassin was Palestinian land on April 9 when Jewish soldiers burst into the village, machine-gunned houses randomly killing many in them. The remaining villagers were then assembled in one place and murdered in cold blood including children and women first raped and then killed. Recent research puts the number massacred at 93 (including 30 babies), but dozens more were killed in the fighting that ensued making the total number of deaths much higher.
The Arab League finally decided on April 30 to intervene militarily but only after the British Mandate ended on May 15, 1948, the day the Jewish Agency declared the establishment of the state of Israel in Palestine. The US and Soviet Union officially recognized the new state legitimizing it, and on the same day Arab forces entered the territory.
Pappe details the Zionist leadership's plan and steps it followed to gain as much of Palestine as possible with the fewest number of Palestinians remaining in it, irrespective of Resolution 181 it ignored. They wanted over 80% of Mandatory Palestine or over 40% more land than the UN allotted them taken forcibly from the Palestinians. To get it, they colluded tacitly with the Jordanians, effectively neutralizing the strongest Arab army, buying them off with the remaining 20% of the territory.
On the eve of battle in 1948, Jewish fighting forces were around 50,000 (increasing by summer to 80,000). They included a small air force, navy and units of tanks, armored cars and heavy artillery. The army was comprised of the main Hagana force plus elements of the two extremist terrorist groups - the Irgun led by future prime minister and fanatical Arab-hater Menachem Begin and the Stern Gang whose most notorious member was also a future prime minister, Yitzhak Shamir, another extreme racist. It also included special commando Palmach units, founded in 1941 and whose leaders included future Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin and noted general and war hero Moshe Dayan. They faced a hopelessly outmanned and outgunned Palestinian irregular force of about 7000.
Outside Arab intervention only began on May 15, 1948, five and a half months after UN Resolution 181 was adopted and during which time the Palestinians were defenseless against the Zionist ethnic cleansing onslaught against them. Arab states waited because they were indifferent, and when they finally acted they sent an inferior force proving no match for the superior Jewish one it faced to be discussed further below.
Finalizing Plans to De-Arabize Palestine
In December, 1947, the Palestinian population numbered 1.3 million of which one million lived in the territory of the future Jewish state. The Jewish minority stood at 600,000. Zionist leaders needed a way to dispose of this large number of people "cleansing" the land for Jewish habitation only. They weren't planning to do it gently. Instead it became a systematic campaign of state-sponsored terror against a near-defenseless population unable to withstand the horrific onslaught unleashed against it step by step. It included threats and intimidation, villages attacked including while its inhabitants slept, shooting anything that moved, and blowing up homes with their residents inside plus other violent acts sparing no one, especially fighting-age men and boys who might pose a combat or determined resistance threat.
Ben-Gurion exulted in the progress as events unfolded with comments like: "We are told the army had the ability of destroying a whole village and taking out all its inhabitants, let's do it." Another time he explained: "Every attack has to end with occupation, destruction and expulsion." He meant the entire population of a village had to be removed, everything in it leveled to the ground and its history destroyed. In its place, a new Jewish community would be established as part of the new Jewish state he and others in the Consultancy believed wasn't possible without a mass ethnic cleansing transfer and/or extermination of Palestinians living there.
Their plan also included cleansing urban neighborhoods that were attacked beginning with Haifa picked as the first target. It was where 75,000 Palestinians lived in peace and solidarity with their Jewish neighbors until it ended with the outbreak of violence. It moved on to other cities including Jerusalem where initial sporadic attacks later became intense. It was part of an overall initiative of occupation, expulsion and slaughter of anyone resisting or just having the misfortune to live on land Zionists wanted for themselves and intended taking by force.
As ethnic cleansing progressed, it got more vicious as the Consultancy decided to ransack whole villages and massacre large numbers in them including women, children and babies. Shamefully, it began and intensified under Mandate authority with a large British military presence on the ground to maintain order that never did. It chose instead to look the other way and let all horrific events on the ground go on unimpeded. By March, 1948, Plan Dalet became operational as the battle plan to remove the entire Palestinian population from the 78% of the country Zionists established as the state of Israel on May 15 when the Mandate ended.
The campaign included disingenuous rhetoric and propaganda about Jews in Palestine being under threat from a hostile population having to go on the offensive in self-defense. The truth turned that notion on its head because of the military, political and economic imbalance between the two communities. It was so lopsided, the outcome was never in doubt as long as the British stayed out of it. They did, and after the Mandate ended in mid-May it was the UN's problem to deal with. It also failed the test as discussed below.
Plan Dalet began in the rural hills on the western slopes of the Jerusalem mountains half way on the road to Tel-Aviv. It was called Operation Nachshon, and it served as a model for future campaigns. It employed sudden massive expulsions using terror tactics that proved the most effective way to clear an area preparing it for Jewish resettlement to follow. Early on, the plan wasn't to spare a single village, and orders given to carry it out were clear: "the principle objective of the operation is the destruction of Arab villages (and) the eviction of the villagers so that they would become an economic liability for the general Arab forces."
To motivate attacking Israeli forces, Palestinians were dehumanized as sub-humans worthy of no respect or consideration making them legitimate targets for destruction. It's the same tactic US forces used against the Japanese in WW II, in Vietnam and today in Iraq and Afghanistan. In each instance, targets were people of color or others not white enough like Arabs.
Pappe details what he calls the "urbicide of Palestine" that included attacking and cleansing the major urban centers in the country. They included Tiberias, Haifa, Tel-Aviv, Safad and what Pappe calls the "Phantom City of Jerusalem" changed from the "Eternal City" once Jewish troops shelled, attacked and occupied its western Arab neighborhoods in April, 1948. The Brits stood aside shamelessly doing nothing to stop it except in one area, Ahaykh Jarrah, where a local British commander intervened.
It was a rare exception proving how much better Palestinians would have fared if their British "protectors" had actually done their job. They didn't, and the result was anarchy and a state of panic with Israelis having free reign to ravage Northern and Western Jerusalem with heavy shelling, pillaging and destruction while ethnically cleansing the population in eight Palestinian neighborhoods and 39 villages in the greater Jerusalem area transferring them to the Eastern part of the city.
The urbicide continued into May with the occupation of Acre on the coast and Baysan in the East on May 6. On May 13, Jaffa was the last city taken two days before the Mandate ended. The city had 1500 volunteers against 5000 Jewish troops. It survived a three week siege and attack through mid-May, but when it fell its entire population of 50,000 was expelled. With its fall, Jewish occupying forces had emptied and depopulated all the major cities and towns of Palestine, and most of their inhabitants never again got to see their former homes.
Pappe explains this all happened between March 30 and May 15, 1948 "before a single regular Arab soldier had entered Palestine (to help Palestinians which they did ineffectively when they finally came)." His account also undermines the Israeli-concocted myth that Palestinians left voluntarily before or after Arab forces intervened. Nearly half their villages were attacked and destroyed before Arab countries sent in any forces, and another 90 villages were wiped out from May 15 (when the Mandate ended) till June 11 when the first of two short-lived truces took effect.
The UN's partition plan caused the problem, and yet the world body did nothing to remediate a situation that was out of control. Early on it was clear a potential disaster loomed that, in fact, ended up worse than first imagined. Still, the British through May 15, the UN, and neighboring Arab states of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq procrastinated as long as possible before reluctantly stepping in, and when they did it was too little, too late. Pappe calls Jordan's (Transjordan then) King Abdullah "the odd man out." He had army units inside Palestine, some were willing to protect villagers' homes and lands, but they were restrained by their commanders.
It was because earlier the King and Zionists cut a deal allowing Jordan to annex most of the land the partition allocated to the Palestinians that became the West Bank. In return, Jordanian forces agreed not to engage Jewish troops militarily. To their shame and discredit, the Brits agreed to this scheme effectively sealing the Palestinians' fate. Still, once the British Mandate ended, Jordan had to fight Jewish forces for what it got because Ben-Gurion reneged on his deal. All along, he wanted as much territory as possible for a new Jewish state on more land than the 78% he ended up with. The Jordanian military prevailed, spoiling his plans. It saved 250,000 Palestinians in the West Bank from being ethnically cleansed the way other Palestinians were who weren't as fortunate.
As already explained, after waffling during March and April, the Arab League finally sent regular armies to intervene in Palestine. Ironically at this time, it was learned the US State Department on March 12, 1948 drafted a new proposal to the UN suggesting the partition plan failed and an alternate approach was needed. The proposal was for an international trusteeship over Palestine to last five years during which time the two sides would work out a mutually agreed solution. It concluded partitioning failed and was causing violence and bloodshed. Pappe notes in the long history of Palestine and its relationship to the West, this was the most sensible proposal ever made.
Shamefully it was stillborn because even then a Zionist lobby was influential in Washington, it dealt with Harry Truman in the White House, and it succeeded in derailing the State Department's efforts even though Department Arabists convinced Truman to rethink the partition plan and proposed a three month armistice to both sides to consider it. That also failed as a new Jewish People's Board was created and met on May 12. Ben-Gurion and almost all others present rejected Truman's offer. Three days later they established the state of Israel which the White House recognized almost immediately.
The Phony and Real Wars Over Palestine
As explained above, Jordan's King Abdullah cut a deal with Zionists to get what turned out to be the West Bank in return for not committing troops to the short-lived conflict beginning in May although Abdullah, if fact, had to fight for what he got because of Jewish duplicity. Zionists needed to neutralize Jordan because it had the strongest army in the Arab world and would have been a formidable threat had it become part of the overall Arab force that went to war with the new Jewish state. Their staying out of it was the reason the Arab League's English Commander-in-Chief, Glubb Pasha, called the 1948 war in Palestine the "Phony War." Pasha knew Abdullah cut a deal for his own territorial gain and other Arab armies entering the war planned to do it "pathetically" as some on the Arab interventionist side called their campaign.
Cairo only committed forces the last minute on May 12. It set aside 10,000 troops for the engagement, but half of them were Muslim Brotherhood volunteers opposed to Egyptian collaboration with imperialism, and they'd just been released from prison because of their opposition. They had no training, were likely picked as convenient cannon fodder, and despite their fervor were no match for the Jewish military.
Syrian forces were better trained, their political leaders more committed, but only a small contingent was sent, and they performed so ineffectively the Consultancy considered seizing the Golan Heights later gotten in the 1967 war. Even smaller and less committed were Lebanese units most of which stayed on their side of the border defending adjacent villages. Iraqi troops were also involved but only numbered a few thousand. Their government ordered them not to attack Israel but only to defend the West Bank land allocated to Jordan. Still, they defied orders, became more broadly engaged, and temporarily saved 15 Palestinian villages in Wadi Ara until 1949 when the Jordanian government ceded the area to Israel as part of a bilateral armistice agreement.
Overall, invading Arab forces performed "pathetically." They overstretched their supply lines, ran out of ammunition, used mostly antiquated and malfunctioning arms, and there was no command and control coordination vital for a successful campaign. It showed their lack of commitment to the final outcome although in fairness to them their main British and French suppliers declared an arms embargo on Palestine hamstringing their effort.
In contrast, Jewish forces had a ready source of armaments from the Soviet Union and its Eastern bloc countries like Checkoslovakia. As a result, their weapons easily outgunned the combined Arab force, and its force size outnumbered and outclassed them. Jewish forces were never threatened, and Pappe exposed the Israeli-concocted myth that the very existence of a Jewish state was at stake. It never was, and Ben-Gurion and other Zionist leaders knew it early on.
The war's outcome was never in doubt, and it allowed ethnic cleansing to go on unimpeded. It spared no one from removal, slaughter and loss of their homes and land. They were dynamited, torched, and leveled to the ground to make way for new Jewish settlements and neighborhoods to be built on vacated land. Still Arab forces continued fighting getting Israelis to agree to the first of two brief truces. The first one was declared on June 8 and begun on the 11th. It lasted until July 8, during which time the Israeli army continued its cleansing operation that included mass destruction of emptied villages.
A second truce began on July 18 that was violated immediately. The Israeli leadership was undeterred and continued engaging in widespread ethnic cleansing and seizure of as much land as possible. Truce or no truce, the campaign went on unhindered to conclusion that was mostly completed by October and wrapped up finally in January, 1949 except for some mopping-up operations that continued until summer.
In September, 1948, the war, such as it was, continued but subsided. It finally ended in 1949 when Israel signed separate armistice agreements with its four major warring adversaries. The agreements allotted Israel 78% of British Mandatory Palestine, over 40% more than the UN partition allowed. The cease-fire lines agreed to became known as the "Green Line." Gaza was occupied by Egypt and the West Bank by Jordan. For the victorious Israelis, this was their moment of triumph in their "War of Independence", but for the defeated and displaced Palestinians it became known as "al Nakba" - "The Catastrophe." An unknown number of Palestinians were killed and about 800,000 became refugees. Their lives were destroyed, and they were left to the mercy of neighboring Arab countries and conditions in the camps where they barely got any.
Toward the end of 1948, Israel focused on its anti-repatriation policy pursuing it on two levels. The first was national, introduced in August that year, with the decision taken to destroy all cleansed villages transforming them into new Jewish settlements or "natural" forests. The second level was diplomatic to avoid international pressure to allow Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and villages.
Nonetheless, Palestinians had an ally in the UN Palestine Conciliation Commission (PCC) that spearheaded efforts for refugees to return and called for their unconditional right to do it. Their position became UN Resolution 194 giving Palestinians the unconditional option to return to their homes or be compensated for their losses if they chose not to. This right was also affirmed in Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted as General Assembly Resolution 217 A (III) on December 10, 1948, the day before it passed Resolution 194. To this day, all Israeli governments have ignored both resolutions and gotten away with it because of support and complicity by the West and indifference by Israel's Arab neighbors preferring strategic alliances for their own benefit and writing off the Palestinians as a small price to pay for it to their shame and disgrace.
The Ugly Face of Occupation
Even at war's end and Israel's ethnic cleansing completed, Palestinians' agony and hardships were only beginning. Throughout 1949, and beginning a precedent continuing to this day, about 8,000 refugees were put in prison camps while many others escaping cleansing were physically abused and harassed under Israeli military rule. The Palestinians lost everything including their homes, fields, places of worship and other holy places, freedom of movement and expression and any hope for just treatment and redress according to the rule of law not applied to them. They were afflicted with such indignities as needing newly-issued identity cards. Not having them on their person at all times meant imprisonment up to 1.5 years and immediate transfer to a pen for "unauthorized" and "suspicious" Arabs. This went on in cities and rural areas as undisguised racism and persecution.
Other kinds of Israeli harshness were also introduced at this time that all Palestinians are still subjected to today in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). There were roadblocks that now include checkpoints and curfews with violators shot on sight. These conditions were imposed to make life so unbearable, those subjected to them might opt to leave the territories for relief elsewhere.
Worse still in 1949 were labor camps where thousands of Palestinian prisoners were held under military rule for forced labor for all tasks that could strengthen the economy or aid the military. Conditions in them were deplorable and included working in quarries carrying heavy stones, living on one potato in the morning and half a dried fish at noon. Anyone complaining was beaten severely, and others were singled out for summary execution if they were considered a threat.
Life outside prison and labor camps wasn't much better. Red Cross representatives sent their Geneva headquarters reports of collective human rights abuses including finding piles of dead bodies. Overall, Palestinians surviving expulsion and now Israeli citizens gained nothing. They had no rights and were subjected to constant random violence and abuse with no protection from the law applying only to Jews. Their places of worship were profaned and schools vandalized. Those still with homes were robbed with impunity by looters in broad daylight. They took everything they wanted - furniture, clothing, anything useful for Jewish immigrants entering the new Jewish state. Palestinians reported that there wasn't a single home or shop not broken into and ransacked. The authorities did nothing to stop it or prosecute offenders. It was like living under a perpetual "Kristallnacht."
Further, Palestinian areas were "ghettoised" as a way to imprison people other than by putting them behind bars or in camps. In Haifa, for example, they were ordered from their homes and transferred to designated parts of the city, then crammed into confined quarters the way it was done in Wadi Nisnas, one of the city's poorest areas. The UN and Red Cross also reported many cases of rape, confirmed by uncovered Israeli archives and from the oral history of victims and their boasting victimizers.
Finally, with the war over and ethnic cleansing completed, the Israeli government relaxed its harshness and halted the looting and ghettoisation in cities. A new structure was created called The Committee for Arab Affairs that dealt with growing international pressure on Israel to allow for repatriation of the refugees. Israeli officials tried to sidestep efforts by proposing instead refugees be settled in neighboring Arab states like Lebanon, Jordan and Syria. Their efforts succeeded as discussions produced no results nor was there much effort to enforce Resolution 194.
Other issues also remained unresolved including money expropriated from the former 1.3 million Palestinian citizens of Mandatory Palestine as well as their property now in Israeli hands. The first governor of the Israeli national bank estimated it was valued at 100 million British pounds. There was also the question of cultivated land confiscated and lost that amounted to 3.5 million dunum or almost 22,000 square miles. The Israeli government forestalled international indignation by appointing a custodian for the newly acquired properties pending their final disposition. It dealt with the problem by selling them to public and private Jewish groups which it claimed the right to do as the moment confiscated lands came under government custodianship they became property of the state of Israel. That, in turn, meant none of it could be sold to Arabs which is still the law in Israel today.
As this took place, the human geography of Palestine was transformed by design. Its Arab character in cities was erased and with it the history and culture of people who lived there for centuries before Zionists arrived to depopulate their state making it one for Jews alone. They only succeeded partially but managed to transform ancient Palestine into the state of Israel creating insurmountable problems Palestinians now face in it and the OPT. In 1949, about 150,000 Palestinians survived expulsion in the territory of Israel and were now citizens designated by the Committee of Arab Affairs as "Arab Israelis." That designation meant they were denied all rights given Jews.
They were put under military rule, comparable to the Nuremberg Laws under the Nazis and no less harsh. It denied them the basic rights of free expression, movement, organization and equality with the "chosen Jewish people" of the new Jewish state. They still had the right to vote and could be elected to the Israeli Knesset, but with severe restrictions. This regime lasted officially until 1966, but, in fact, never ended to this day and has been especially severe since the democratic election of Hamas in January, 2006 as well as throughout the Second Intifada that began with Ariel Sharon's provocative visit to the al-Aqsa Mosque on September 28, 2000.
The Committee of Arab Affairs continued meeting, and as late as 1956 considered plans for mass removal of all remaining Arabs in Israel. Even though ethnic cleansing formerly ended in 1949, expulsions continued throughout this period until 1953, but never really ended to this day. Palestinians surviving it paid a terrible price with the loss of their possessions, land, history and future still unaddressed with justice so far denied them and ignored.
The theft of their land by ethnic cleansing led to new Jewish settlements in their place and now are built on occupied Palestinian land in the OPT. In 1950, disposition of it was placed in the hands of the Settlement Department of the Jewish National Fund (JNF). The JNF law was passed in 1953 granting the agency independent status as landowner for the Jewish state. That law and others, like the Law of the Land of Israel, stipulated the JNF wasn't allowed to sell or lease land to non-Jews. The Knesset passed a final law in 1967, the Law of Agricultural Settlement, prohibiting the subletting of Jewish-owned land to non-Jews. The law also prohibited water resources from being transferred to non-JNF lands.
After ethnic cleansing completion, Palestinians remaining comprised 17% of the new Israeli state but were was allotted only 2% of the land to live and build on with another 1% for agricultural use only. Today, 1.4 million Palestinian Arabs are Israeli citizens or about 20% of the population. The still have the same 3% total, an intolerable situation for a population this size. The 1.4 million Palestinians in occupied, ghettoized and quarantined Gaza live under even harsher conditions in what's now considered the world's largest open air prison with a population density three times that of Manhattan. The 2.5 million others in the West Bank aren't treated much better living under severe repression from a foreign occupier.
"Memoricide" of the Nakba
Palestinian lands under JNF control also included authority to rename them to destroy centuries of history they signified. The task went to archaeolgists and biblical experts volunteering to serve on an official Naming Committee to "Hebraisize" Palestine's geography. The goal was to de-Arabize the lands, erase their history, and use it for new Jewish colonization and development as well as create European-looking national parks with recreational facilities including picnic sites and children's playgrounds for Jews only. Hidden beneath them were destroyed Palestinian villages erased from the public memory but not from that of people who once lived there who'd never forget or allow their descendents to.
The JNF website features four of the larger, most popular resort parks belying and defiling the long history beneath them - the Birya Forest, Ramat Menashe Forest, Jerusalem Forest and Sataf. They all symbolize Pappe's poignant prose that: "better than any other space today in Israel, (these lands represent) both the Nakba and the denial of the Nakba." Today, descendents of families displaced six decades ago still live in refuge camps and diasporic communities in neighboring Arab countries and elsewhere. Their collective memories won't ever be erased nor will justice be served until they receive redress for the crimes committed against their ancestors and those still living.
Pappe emphasizes what other regional experts like him believe - the key to peace in the Middle East is a just and lasting settlement of the Palestinian refugee problem as well as equity for those living in the OPT and all Palestinian Israeli citizens long denied any rights and forced to live in an Israeli apartheid state under harsh conditions of severe repression.
Pappe believes two main factors deter conflict resolution today - the Zionist ideology of ethnic supremacy and the so-called "peace process" that's always been structured to avoid peace at all costs. The first factor continues denying the Nakba's legitimacy, and the second one always succeeds in foiling an international will to bring justice to the region by maintaining a state of conflict to justify Israel's harsh response to it pretending it's for self-defense. It works because the US supports and funds the Jewish state allowing it to get away with mass-murder, property destruction, land theft and denial of everything Palestinians hold dear including their lives and freedom. Nothing has changed since 1948 because the West goes along as well as do most Arab states for their own political and economic gain. Palestinians have no bargaining power and can do nothing to alleviate their plight.
The UN world body should have aided them but never did. It's flawed partition plan caused the conflict to begin with. It cost Palestinians everything, and nothing happened since to win them redress. Even after its early missteps, the UN might have made a difference but erred again by not involving the International Refugee Organization (IRO) that always recommends repatriation as a refugee entitlement. Instead it backed Israel's wish to avoid IRO involvement by creating a special agency for Palestinian refugees that became UNRWA in 1950 or the UN Relief and Work Agency. UNRWA wasn't committed to the Right of Return and only looked after refugees' daily needs to provide employment and fund permanent camps to house them. Its efforts amounted to little more than putting band-aids on gaping wounds still raw and unaddressed.
It's typical of how the UN still operates today under the thumb of its dominant member country where it's headquartered. It's so-called "peacekeeping" function is a pathetic and disgraceful example as keeping the peace is the one thing Blue Helmets almost never do. Its first ever operation began in 1948 as the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) mandated to supervise the armistice agreements and earlier uneasy truces between warring Israeli and Arab forces. It's been there ever since, never prevented wars in 1956, 1967 and 1973 nor did it ever succeed in establishing or maintaining peace. The operation is still active, but it's little more than a pathetic presence without purpose observing violations on the ground and doing nothing to stop them or even report them properly to superiors. The IDF controls everything, operates freely, and UN "peacekeepers" keep quiet but no peace.
Out of this mess earlier, Palestinian nationalism emerged as the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) that became the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. It was founded by the Arab League in 1964 and committed to the Right of Return. It also had to confront what Pappe calls "two manifestations of denial" - international peace brokers' denial of Palestinian concerns as part of a future peace arrangement and refusal to deal with Israelis' denial of the Nakba and their unwillingness to be held accountable for it. To this day, refugee issues and Nakba crimes are excluded from the so-called "peace process" assuring there never will be a one unless that changes.
At first, in the spring of 1949, the UN made some conflict resolution effort by organizing a conference in Lausanne, Switzerland. Nothing came from it, however, because prime minister Ben-Gurion and King Abdullah scuttled it to get on with their partition scheme. Two more decades were then lost until after the 1967 war when the US got more involved, began colluding with the Israelis, and couched all new peace efforts within an overall context of a Middle East Pax Americana. It meant from that time till now, an equitable resolution of the conflict and attention to Palestinians' needs and rights were sidelined in favor of addressing Israeli needs and those of its US partner.
In 1967, Israel excluded the 1948 Nakba and Right of Return from any peace discussions. Thenceforth, it based all negotiations on the notion that the conflict began in 1967 when Israel seized and occupied the West Bank and Gaza in the June Six Days' War that year. This was how Israel sought to legitimize its 1948 "War of Independence" and all its crimes it wanted erased from the public memory. No longer were they on the table to be considered in any future conflict resolution negotiation. For Palestinians, the 1948 Nakba is their core issue, and without it being settled equitably there can never be closure or a real lasting peace in the region.
Nonetheless, by the mid-seventies, the PLO softened its stance enough to accept a US-led international consensus favoring a two-state solution. It led to the 1978 Camp David Accords and peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, but it left Palestinians out in the cold by implicitly renouncing their Right of Return and failing to address the issue of an independent state.
The predictable result was festering anger in the OPT that led to the first Intifada in 1987 that, in turn, led to the Madrid peace conference following the 1991 Gulf war. From it, the 1993 Oslo Accords and so-called Declaration of Principles emerged that once again betrayed Palestinian hopes for redress denied them to this day. Israel got an agreement to establish a new Palestinian Authority (PA) to act as its comprador enforcer to control a restive people. All the tough issues were left unaddressed meaning they never would be - an independent Palestinian state, the Right of Return, status of Jerusalem, settlements in the OPT and established borders.
Oslo I led to Oslo II in 1995 and further betrayal. The new agreement divided the West Bank into three zones - Areas A, B, and C plus a fourth area of Israeli occupied East Jerusalem. It established a complicated system of control allowing Israel in Area C to build settlements on the most valuable land with its water resources mostly denied the Palestinians. By 2000, 59% of the West Bank was in Area C. Israel is slowly annexing more of the territory by expanding settlements and building new ones. It's also getting it by its Separation or Apartheid Wall on seized Palestinian land, building new roads for Jews only on more of it, and defining one-third of the West Bank as Greater Jerusalem.
So-called "permanent status" talks began in July, 2000 at Camp David that once again resulted in betrayal. Israelis never made a good faith offer in writing or intended to. They provided no documentation or maps. All Palestinians got was a plan dividing the West Bank into four isolated "Bantustan" cantons surrounded by Israeli settlements and continued occupation with no resolution of their fundamental long-standing problems and core issues.
Predictably it led to the second al-Aqsa Mosque Intifada triggered by Ariel Sharon's provocative visit to the Muslim Noble Sanctuary on September 28, 2000 as explained above. It then spun out of control when Palestinians, fed up with Fatah betrayal, democratically elected a Hamas government in January, 2006 foiling Israeli efforts to assure their complicit allies would again prevail. When they didn't, Israel denounced the results, never accepted Hamas as a peace partner, refused to negotiate with them in good faith, and acted ever since in bad faith to destroy Hamas and punish the Palestinian people for their "wrong" choice. That's how things always work under rules of imperial management practiced by the US and its Israeli partner complicit in their collective attempt to destroy a democratically elected government misportraying them as "terrorists" to get the West to go along and the public to believe it.
Today, Israel is slowly annexing more of the West Bank in a relentless process wanting all useful parts of it for exclusive Jewish habitation only. It made the job easier by defining one-third of it as Greater Jerusalem while expropriating Palestinian land to expand existing settlements, build new ones, add new roads for Jews only, and erect the Separation Wall falsely claimed for security to disguise its real land-grab purpose plus another way to cantonize Palestinians in isolated areas cut off from all others and effectively enclose them in large open-air prisons.
This is part of the appalling daily oppression and persecution ongoing against Palestinians in the OPT and also against Israeli Arab citizens living in Israel. Former US president Jimmy Carter pierced the "last taboo" daring to open a forbidden window on part of it in his new best-selling book Peace Not Apartheid that got him vilified by the Israeli Lobby implying he's anti-semitic. He courageously wrote about a rigid system of segregation in the OPT even though he failed to acknowledge the same injustices go on inside Israel he called a model democratic state which it is not.
Palestinian Israeli citizens living get none of the democratic rights afforded Israeli Jews, and Carter, of course, knows that or should know it. He distanced himself from that consideration that might have been too much truth to reveal at one time. Nonetheless, his bold, if partial, step represents an important breakthrough that may encourage other high-level officials in the US and elsewhere to add their voices to his exposing all Israeli crimes demanding redress. They won't ever be addressed until enough prominent figures step forward to denounce them and finally reveal their extent to an uninformed public.
Redress one day will come just like it did for Jews no longer persecuted as they were for centuries. But it won't happen until the power of the Israeli Lobby is neutralized by forces for truth and justice surpassing it in power and influence. That day is nowhere in sight, but when it arrives, Jews and Arabs will again live in peace the way they once did in pre-Zionist times. It's the way Jews and Christians now easily mix in the US unlike decades ago when anti-semitism was significant enough to deny Jews the kinds of opportunities and rights they now take for granted including achieving positions of high influence in government, business, academia and other prominent public and private institutions in the country. There's no reason Jews and Arabs can't coexist as easily provided there's a will to do it or events intervene.
An Intractable Problem Caused by "Fortress Israel"
Pappe's final chapter deals with what Israel calls its "demographic problem" and need to limit future Palestinian population growth. The problem is an old one understood by early Zionists as the major obstacle in the way of their dream of a homeland for Jews alone. Theodor Herzl wrote his solution in his diary in 1895: "We shall endeavour to expel the poor population across the border unnoticed, procuring employment for it in the transit countries, but denying it any employment in our own country."
In 1947, Ben-Gurion adopted his own version of Herzl's solution with his ethnic cleaning plan that's gone on ever since in various forms under succeeding prime ministers to this day. It's meant continual displacement of Palestinians in the West Bank by new and expanded Israeli settlement developments and Separation Wall land seizures. Pappe explains the "Zionist project (today is trying) to construct and then defend a 'white' (Western) fortress in a 'black' (Arab) world. At the heart of the refusal to allow Palestinians the Right of Return is the fear of Jewish Israelis that they will eventually be outnumbered by Arabs." To assure this won't happen, Israel intends to maintain an overwhelming Jewish majority regardless of world public opinion. There's no dissent in the West or among most Arab leaders because US administrations won't tolerate any.
Pappe believes the consensus in Israel today is for a state comprising 90% of Palestine "surrounded by electric fences and visible and invisible walls" with Palestinians given only worthless cantonized scrub lands of little or no value to the Jewish state. In 2006, 1.4 million Palestinians live in Israel on 2% of the land allotted them plus another 1% for agricultural use with six millions Jews on most of the rest. Another 3.9 million live concentrated in Israel's unwanted portions of the West Bank and concentrated in Gaza that's three times the population density of Manhattan. It's made for intolerable conditions throughout the OPT that guarantee resistance to them and the same harsh Israeli responses in an unending cycle of violence, repression and unresolved and unaddressed injustices.
The growing demographic imbalance only exacerbates things, and it's already a nightmare for Israeli leaders. They haven't gotten enough new Jewish immigration or adequately increased Jewish birth rates to counteract it. They also haven't been able to reduce the number of Arabs in Israel. All solutions so far considered only lead to an Arab population increase barring mass expulsion or worse some extremists in Israel favor and one day may be able to make policy unless cooler heads stop them.
For Pappe and all people of conscience and good faith, there's only one solution - Israel's willingness one day to transform itself into a civic and democratic state ending the last postcolonial European enclave in the Arab world. The Palestinian people will accept nothing less nor should they, and growing numbers of Israelis are aware of the horror and injustice of the Nakba. So far, they only comprise a small minority, but they may hold the key to a future resolution if their numbers grow enough and they become vocal as is now slowly happening.
Today, however, the situation for Palestinians is grim with unrelenting daily Israeli assaults against them in Gaza and the West Bank along with Jerusalem slipping away by an ethnic cleansing process to make the city one for Jews only. At the end of his book, Pappe explains "The problem with Israel was never its Jewishness....it is its ethnic Zionist character." It represents a "tempest that threatens to ruin (Jews and Palestinians alike)," and it's now raging in the OPT as it did in Lebanon over the summer where an uneasy peace could again erupt in conflict on any pretext.
The future of Jews and Arabs depends on finding an equitable solution to their unresolved problems and issues and avoiding further escalation that threatens to engulf the whole region in raging conflict if extremists in Israel and Washington get their way and extend the Iraq war to Iran and Syria. Kuwait-based Arab Times Editor-in-chief Ahmed al-Jarallah cites what he calls a reliable source saying a military strike against Iranian oil and nuclear facilities is planned before April to be launched from warships in the Persian Gulf that grow in number and readiness.
He may be right based on former Russian Black Sea Fleet commander Admiral Eduard Baltin's judgment about US activity in the Gulf. Currently, US nuclear submarines are maintaining a vigil there and Admiral Baltin told Interfax News: "The presence of US nuclear submarines in the Persian Gulf region means that the Pentagon has not abandoned plans for surprise strikes against nuclear targets in Iran. With this aim a group of multi-purpose submarines ready to accomplish the task is located in the area." Admiral Baltin added the presence of these submarines indicates the Pentagon wants to control navigation in the Gulf and conduct strikes against Iranian targets.
One other report adds still more credibility to the current danger of a wider regional war. It comes from former US State Department Middle East intelligence analyst Wayne White who said: "I've seen some of the planning....You're not talking about a surgical strike. You're talking about a war against Iran. We're talking about clearing a path of targets" against the Iranian Air Force, Kilo submarines, anti-ship missiles and even ballistic missile capability that could target commerce and US warships in the Gulf as well as the country's nuclear infrastructure.
More pressure still is coming from Israeli officials calling Iran's nuclear program an "existential threat" and Israeli opposition leader and former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu whose rhetoric makes him sound like he's criminally insane. On January 21, he addressed a security conference in Herzliya stoking the flames of war by calling the Iranian government a "genocidal regime" and adding "Either it will stop the nuclear programme without the need for a military operation, or it could prepare for it....who will lead the charge if not us. No one will come defend the Jews if they do not defend themselves." Also at the conference, US Under-Secretary Nicholas Burns spoke hawkishly saying "There is no doubt Iran is seeking nuclear military weapons (and) the policy of the United States is that we cannot allow Iran to become a nuclear weapons state....Iran has refused to back down in its attempt to destabilize the region....We have an absolute right to defend our soldiers."
If the US and/or Israel attack Iran, all bets are off, and Palestinians already under an Israeli siege will suffer even more. It means cooler heads on both sides must denounce this kind of talk and find a way to avoid a wider war and bring the present conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine to an end. It won't be easy at a perilous time looking like conflict escalation is planned, not its resolution with the potential fallout from it too horrendous to allow for all parties in the region, but especially for those suffering under occupation.
Now there's the further threat of one Palestinian faction facing off against the other. On one side is the besieged Hamas-led government already in tatters from months of harsh sanctions and daily Israeli assaults. On the other are corrupted Fatah forces loyal to PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas acting as a quisling proxy comprador enforcer for Israeli and US imperial interests for everything he stands to gain selling out his people for crumbs handed him and his cronies. They're being armed to the teeth to do it, and George Bush announced he's helping further by transferring $86 million to Abbas while starving Hamas and most Palestinians. It's taken the lives of dozens of Palestinians in recent days. They're in the middle having no dog in this fight except their oppressive occupier they want expelled.
They cry out as a colonized people struggling to be free with things at this stage looking pretty grim. But sooner or later conflicts and repression end when bloodshed and suffering from them no longer are tolerated and outside forces see the injustice and futility and are willing to help. It's happening in Iraq and will in Afghanistan, and it's coming to the OPT with force strength too great to be restrained. When it arrives, ethnic cleansing and injustice will end, replaced by ethnic victory for Jews and Palestinians alike and others in the region who'll model their own struggle for justice on the one they saw succeed in Palestine.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)