Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘palestine’

Palestinian Entrepreneur Key to Hamas-Fatah Unity Deal, Talks Tough in Maariv Interview

Sunday, June 12th, 2011
munib al masri

Munib al-Masri, Palestinian entrepreneur instrumental in orchestrating Hamas-Fatah reconciliation, stands before his Venetian-style villa on Mt. Gerizim (Reuven Castro)

Robert Fisk has penned a major story about billionaire businessman Munib al-Masri, the wealthiest Palestinian perhaps in the Middle East, who played a key role in bringing together Hamas and Fatah for the unity deal which they signed last month in Egypt.  What’s especially interesting about this is that al-Masri provides his gloss on the meaning of the agreement for Israeli-Palestinian relations, and he reveals just how many separate power centers, nations and political-intelligence operatives were consulted to make the deal happen.

When you finish reading this (most of you anyway) will want to tip your hat to a man who pulled off one of the greatest deals of the past decade, at least, in Palestinian politics.  He did all this from a base he himself created called the Palestine Forum, a group of distinguished Palestinian independents interested in bridging the gaps between the two warring parties.  The Forum worked intensively and diligently for four years to bring this about.  Partially through its own creativity and perseverance, partially through the parties coming to realize that an agreement lay in their own interest, and perhaps most important of all due to the propitious events of the Arab Spring which worked in their favor–they created a Palestinian political miracle.

The following is part of the conversation with Khaled Meshal that preceded the final acceptance of the agreement:

We told him the government has to be of national unity — on the agreement that we would be able to carry out elections and lift the embargo on Gaza and reconstruct Gaza, that we have to abide by international law, by the UN Charter and UN resolutions…He agreed that resistance must only be ‘in the national interest of the country’ – it would have to be ‘aqlaqi’ – ethical. There would be no more rocket attacks on civilians. In other words, no more rocket attacks from Gaza.”…Hamas agreed on the 1967 border, effectively acknowledging Israel’s existence, and to the reference to the ‘resistance.’

Then al-Masri summarizes his own understanding of the agreement, and the reason why it finessed the question of Hamas participation in a government by appointing a transitional one that would not include Fatah or Hamas affiliated members:

If Hamas was in the government, it would have to recognise the State of Israel. But if they were not, they would not recognise anything. “It’s not fair to say ‘Hamas must do the following’, Masri says…”As long as they are not in the Palestinian government, Hamas are just a political party and can say anything they want. So America should be prepared to see Hamas agreeing on the formation of the government. That government will abide by UN resolutions – and international law. It’s got to be mutual. Both sides realised they might miss the boat of the Arab spring. It wasn’t me who did this – it was a compilation of many efforts. If it was not for Egypt and the willingness of the two Palestinian groups, this would not have happened.” In the aftermath of the agreement, Hamas and Abbas’ loyalists agreed to stop arresting members of each side.

1967 borders means that Hamas is accepting Israel and the ‘resistance’ initiative means an end to Gaza rockets on Israel. International law and UN resolutions mean peace can be completed and a Palestinian state brought into being.

Ben Caspit has written his own Hebrew version of this article, which includes a searing interview with the Palestine businessman and supporter of the Palestinian national movement.  I find this  interesting, because Caspit is a generally a supporter of Israel’s far right.  It’s hard for me to understand Caspit’s interest in profiling the Fatah-Hamas unity deal in a positive light given the Israeli government’s absolutely allergic reaction to it.  But hey, perhaps Caspit’s changing his tune politically or his intelligence sources are finding more to like in the deal than we realize.  Whatever the reason, it is a positive development that Caspit is conveying to his readers the thoughts of a major Palestinian figure who explains that Hamas, while not necessarily Israel’s friend, is not the demon it’s made out to be by Bibi & Co.  This is an important message for Israelis to here.

But al-Masri was not kind or diplomatic in his words.  When Caspi asked why Israelis should believe there can be peace with Palestinians when they had just entered into an agreement with a movement sworn to destroy Israel, al-Masri replied:

This is foolishness.  You disappoint me every time anew.  You’re simply unwilling to listen to the other side, only to yourselves.  You go to Washington and persuade members of Congress, make a big show of it, instead of quieting down and listening.  If you really listened to Khaled Meshal’s speech at the reconciliation ceremony in Egypt you would’ve heard three fundamental principles. These are the three principles which we worked on with Hamas and for which we achieved recognition.

Hamas agreed to the 67 lines as a basis for a settlement.  It gave Abu Mazen the credit [if he succeeds] and opportunity to continue the peace process.  And Hamas agreed that resistance could only happen in a national context [as part of a process worked out among the parties].  No longer would every armed group carry out its own military attacks.

These are three enormous achievements.  Similarly, they agreed to stop rocket fire from Gaza.  So tell me, what’s so bad about this for starters?  Why do you have to respond in a panic as you have done?

Hasn’t the time come for you to understand what Palestinians want?  They want something simple.  The 22% of the territory of Palestine about which we’ve agreed to compromise [67 borders].  What was agreed in Oslo.  Our share of Jerusalem [East Jerusalem].  The creation of two states in harmony and friendship.  Palestinians want to end the Occupation.  Believe me that I’m realistic and know what I’m talking about.  This isn’t propaganda.  These are facts.

You talk about peace.  But you don’t really want peace.  Look, almost every one of your senior intelligence officials when the leave their positions all of a sudden become men of peace.  I ask myself: why doesn’t this happen when they’re still serving?  And what happens to them when they come into government [that they oppose peace]?

Caspit continues with a bit of sophistry in questioning al-Masri, claiming that Israelis have learned to believe Arabs when they say the “unpleasant things” they do against Israel,  and that these words are not a basis of negotiation but of continuing war.  To which the Palestinian replies:

Not true.  You see what’s convenient for you to see.  You tell me what’s wrong with the Palestinian people uniting in one leadership?  It’s good for us and good for you and good for the peace process.  How can it be since the split between Hamas and Fatah, that you can claim it’s impossible to negotiate with Palestinians since you don’t know who you should be talking with, and suddenly when we do unite you say [to Fatah]: “It’s either them or us.”

You have a lot of nerve.  We united in order to show that there was a real Palestinian partner, that there is a real chance for peace.  And after we achieve such monumental things, you respond by disseminating such twisted facts.

…You simply cannot create a Palestinian state without such a unity deal.  So we united.  And what do you do?  Shut the door instead of pouncing on the opportunity.

Among the other interesting things revealed in Caspit’s story is that al-Masri’s grandson, who was named after him, was severely wounded by an IDF bullet in the Nakba Day protests along the border with Southern Lebanon.    He dropped everything and flew to Beirut to sit by his bedside.  Though he’d lost many friends to the Intifada and other military operations, the injury to his grandson was especially hard because the latter represented to him the future.  The boy had been 15-20 meters inside Lebanese territory when he took a sniper’s bullet in the back.  He lost a kidney and his spleen, his spinal cord is severed.  He lost a great deal of blood.  He took a dum-dum bullet which caused grave damage.

Caspit is so tone-deaf that he asks al-Masri why a boy who has everything in life including great wealth would take part in an assault on the Israeli fence.  To which the long-time supporter of the Palestinian national resistance replies:

Because he is a member of a generation which does not forget.  Golda and Ben Gurion, your leaders, said that the old would die and the young forget and so the problem of the refugees would be solved.  But the young haven’t forgotten.  He’s already the third generation.  And he still wants to return to his homeland.  He still dreams about it.  You don’t understand this.  You think that if you refuse to acknowledge it, it will go away.  But it won’t.  It’s a problem that must be solved.

Caspit asks, again cluelessly, whether the boy regrets what he did.  To which the grandfather says:

No, he plans to return along with his friends.  They will not give up.

…You cannot force people to give up their aspirations to return to their homes.  It’s a natural wish.  You also cannot dodge the moral and human problem resulting from the creation of the State of Israel and its decision to come [to this region].  The only way to solve this is the sit down and talk.  The 2002 Arab peace initiative is a good basis to start.  But to my sadness, you Israelis are boors.  You don’t want to hear about such things.  You only want to think your distorted thoughts which aren’t based on real recognition of us, but rather on narrow-mindedness, boorishness and prejudice.

What are you afraid of?  The Arab Initiative says the refugee problem has to be resolved in a way that is just and mutually agreed.  That means that you will have to agree to the solution as well [or it won't work].  But Bibi first must recognize that there is a problem.  And he must say to himself: it was caused because of our actions.  And we have a moral and national obligation [to solve it].  First admit that you have a problem, and then we can talk about solving it with the help of all the nations, even the Arab world, all of us together…

I am sure that we can come up with a solution acceptable to the refugess and to you.  But it’s necessary to be creative and flexible.  It is possible.  Why not try?

Caspit, again naïvely, asks why then the Palestinians won’t return to the negotiating table when Bibi has called upon them to do so many times.  Al-Masri responds:

Bibi first tells us “No.” Count the number of rejections in his Washington speech: No to 67 borders, no to Jerusalem, no to refugees.  No, no, no.  You want to talk and in the meantime you continue to build.  Since Rabin’s murder do you know how many houses you built in the Territories and in Jerusalem?  And you want us to sit back and clap our hands?  It’s not fair.  You are pigs.  You want to swallow everything, eat the entire cake, and then you want peace as well.  You have quite a healthy appetite.  You on the one hand want peace and on the other want to continue what you’ve been doing.

…If you don’t stop, you’ll turn into South Africa.  It will go in the direction of a single state.  You’ll regret you didn’t accept Nelson Mandela.  You’ll long for a two state solution.  Why don’t you see this?

When the Maariv reporter asks whether al-Masri doesn’t think Israel has a right to fear the consequences of paying the price for peace given its history, the Palestinian says:

No, you have a Shoah mentality.  Leave the ghetto.  God Almighty, enough already.  You talk about the price of peace?  What about us?  We’ve lost the right to 78% of our lands.  Most of our people live as refugees in other lands.  And you want to talk about the price YOU pay?

The entire interview is worth reading.  I’ve translated most of it, but the man is so smart, so sensible and Caspit is so damn, well you heard the man, boorish.  It’s a perfect exemplar of the mess we face.  But at least you’ll read the ideas of a Palestinian who see clearly and is far-sighted.  Would that there was an Israeli leader who saw as clearly.

Caspit also notes that al-Masri may be a candidate for a major position in the transitional government since he is not affiliated with either side directly and so would be eligible for participation.  At the age of 75, he may be willing to answer the call of his people to broker and ensure the success of this unity deal.

Move Over Nakba, Naksa is Here

Saturday, June 4th, 2011
1967 war

Palestinians surrender during Naksa, 1967 War

Until a few  years ago, it seemed that the narrative of the Israeli-Arab conflict was determined mostly by Israel: there was the miraculous vote in the UN General Assembly recognizing the partition.  Then the even more miraculous 1948 War of Independence, which established the State of Israel.  Yes, there was the momentary setback of the 1956 Suez War, whose victorious territorial prize of the Sinai was wrenched from Israel’s hands by Pres. Dwight Eisenhower.  But the Lord’s miracles continued in 1967 as Israel reunited the nation’s eternal capital, Jerusalem.  The sparks of Messianic redemption were also sown by the return to our Biblical ancestral lands in places that came to be called by many in Israel, Judea and Samaria.  Israel affirmed its rendez-vous with Jewish destiny by returning its sons and daughters to these Biblical holy places in Shechem and Hebron, where they became latter-day versions of the pioneers of the 1920s who “cleared the land and drained the swamps.”

There wasn’t much room in all this history, destiny, and messianic redemption for the narrative of the “loser.”  Israelis, the most humane among them, could afford to acknowledge the sins that enabled the triumphs of Israel.  These visionaries bucked the national consensus, but they were swimming upstream and against the prevailing winds.  Over time, their voice became thinner and thinner until it was mostly snuffed out in the shouts of triumph from the Israeli nationalist camp.

But over the past decade or more, the tables have turned.  With the onset of the Intifadas, Palestinians began to make a claim to a narrative of their own.  It wasn’t just a story they proclaimed for themselves.  They asked the rest of the world to acknowledge it as well.  Slowly, ever so slowly, the world has turned from intense admiration of Israel’s achievements to recognition of the moral cost of those victories.

In the past 11 years, we have gone through two Intifadas, wars in Gaza in (2009) and Lebanon (2006).  With each of these new developments in the Palestinian national struggle, Israel’s narrative receded and the Palestinian’s advanced.

Though the term Nakba has existed for decades, few outside the Arab world have been willing to acknowledge either it or the historical event it denotes.  Until now.  The historical truth of this tragedy can no longer be mitigated or denied as it has been for so long.  Israel has tried to stick its finger in the dyke in order to suppress awareness.  It was sung the praises of its own national myth attempting to drown out those who paid the price for Israel’s joy.  But there is about the Nakba, what James Joyce called an “ineluctable modality of the visible,” something which can no longer be denied, a fundamental truth that has been repressed far too long.

Now, the tender shoots of the Arab Spring have burst forth.  On Nakba Day last month, Palestinian supporters overwhelmed four Israeli borders demanding that the injustice of the Nakba be redressed.  Tomorrow, many of these same protesters will do it again, this time to commemorate the Palestinian loss represented by the 1967 War.  They’re calling it Naksa, the Setback.  Perhaps slightly less tragic than Nakba, or Catastrophe.  But the aggregation of these terms strengthens the sense of a wrong that cannot be denied.

News stories today indicate that Hezbollah has asked for protests on the Lebanese border be cancelled.  So we don’t quite know what the dimensions of the event will be.  But there is one thing of which you can be sure.  The dimensions of this struggle will grow day by day, protest by protest.  And as they do, Israel’s case will grow weaker and weaker.

Later this month, a Turkish flotilla consisting of peace activists from the Arab world along with Israelis and American Jews will set sail for Gaza.  This voyage is a follow-up to the Mavi Marmara catastrophe in which Israeli commandos killed nine Turks last year.  Turkish media reports that the U.S. has dangled a carrot in front of the Turkish government, promising to host an Israeli-Palestinian peace conference in Turkey if it will call off the flotilla and normalize relations with Israel.

The very notion of such a bribe is insulting both to Turkey and to the Israeli-Arab peace process.   Can a nation be bought?  Can peace be bought?  For a mess of porridge?  What does Obama take Turkey for?  This is a proud nation that can’t be taken in by charades.  Its leader, Pres. Erdogan is no fool.  He ought to tell the U.S. and Israel that it knows what the price of peace is and when those two are ready to pay, then they have his phone number, as Secretary of State Baker said during the Bush administration, and should call.  Until then, they should stop wasting everyone’s time with makeshift measures and blandishments like peace conferences.  What good is such a meeting when Israel isn’t ready to deal?

As I wrote in my latest contribution to Truthout, a September date with destiny is looming for Palestine in the UN General Assembly.  This is yet another incremental advance of the cause of Palestine and another nail in the coffin of the Occupation.  From my reading of UN processes, the Security Council can delay but not deny Palestinian statehood.  It’s only a matter of time.  As Meir Dagan has been saying lately, time is not on Israel’s side.  The longer it delays the worse the deal it will get.

I should make clear that I’m not talking about erasing the Israeli narrative or expecting Israelis to grovel at the feet of those they’ve injured.  The Israeli narrative is still valid.  All those achievements are laudable, something Israel and the Jewish people can be proud of.  But not at the expense of Palestine.  Not if Palestine must be denied.  What the world demands is that there be two legitimate narratives neither of which eclipses or demeans the other.  Two equal narratives.  When Bibi Netanyahu or whoever is the Israeli PM at the time can do that, he knows Mahmoud Abbas’s phone number.  He can call.

Palestine: Road to Statehood

Tuesday, May 31st, 2011

Haaretz fleshes out Palestinian plans to bring its case for statehood before the General Assembly in September.  A recent article quoting the current General Assembly president as saying that Palestine could not achieve full UN membership without Security Council approval appears to have been incomplete.  It is true that under normal procedures a state may not become a member until both the GA and SC have approved its candidacy.  To become a member, a nation needs the backing of nine Security Council members with no veto offered by any member.  It would also need to agree to abide by the UN Charter and to have satisfied certain benchmarks determined by UN bodies that guarantee it would be a viable state.  Palestine has already succeeded in meeting these targets

In order to begin this process, the PA must bring the issue of statehood before the Security Council, where it will be vetoed by the U.S.  At that point, the General Assembly may take up the matter first by recognizing Palestine as a state, then by voting by 2/3 majority to accept it as a full member.  In this way, there is a way to do an end-around the Security Council and the U.S. veto.

However, Bibi Netanyahu seems confused when he claims here that Palestine cannot become a full-fledged UN member without Security Council approval:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told a [Knesset] meeting…nothing could be done to prevent the UN General Assembly from recognizing a Palestinian state.

“They can decide that the world is flat, there’s nothing we can do about it,” said Netanyahu. “We have no way of blocking a decision by the assembly. We will get support there from only a few countries.”

However, Netanyahu still said the move could be thwarted.

“We have no way to obstruct the UN decision,” he said, warning that that the Palestinians will not succeed in their efforts in the UN Security Council. “It is impossible to recognize a Palestinian state without passing through the Security Council and such a move is bound to fail.

It certainly is possible to recognize a Palestinian state if the Security Council vetoes the bid.  What Bibi doesn’t choose to recognize is the UNGA ‘Uniting for Peace’ Resolution 377 which provides for the Assembly to accept a state if the SC has been paralyzed and unable to approve such an action.  Use of the Resolution would certainly be controversial and Israel (and the U.S.) would fight it.  But unless they can get the GA to agree not to adopt the Resolution it appears likely the body can and will recognize and accept Palestine as a full member.

In the meantime, I just caught myself humming that hoary pop standard, See You in September:

I’ll be alone each and every night
While you’re away, don’t forget to write

Bye-bye, so long, farewell
Bye-bye, so long

See you in September
See you when the summer’s through

…Have a good time but remember
There is danger in the summer moon above
Will I see you in September
Or lose you to a summer love…

Ehud Barak has already warned that Israel faces a “diplomatic tsunami” in September.  Perhaps Bibi should take heed of the words of the song: “there is danger in the summer moon above.”

Once Palestine becomes a full member, it can then bring charges against Israel for occupying its territory in contravention of international law.  Israel would be bound as a fellow member to obey any ruling finding the Occupation to be an infringement on Palestine’s sovereignty.  If it refused, the UN could them impose sanctions on Israel.  Palestine may also bring a case before the International Criminal Court against Israeli generals for war crimes violations, as Palestine would now fall under ICC jurisdiction.  This would further hem in Israel’s freedom of action in maintaining the Occupation.

The handwriting is on the wall.  The Occupation will fall.  Perhaps not this year, maybe not next, but soon.

To Israel: The Palestinians are Coming! The Palestinians are Coming!

Sunday, May 22nd, 2011

russians are comingApologies to all you youngsters out there who don’t remember the hilarious comedy spoof of the 1970s starring Alan Arkin and an amazing cast, The Russians are Coming! The Russian are Coming!  The plot revolved around a Russian submarine which runs aground on the New England coast, thus throwing the populace into a hysterical uproar, believing that the arrival of the sub presaged a Russian invasion of America.

nakba day golan protest

Druze protesters breach the Israeli border


Of course the recent Nakba Day protests in which thousands of Palestinians and their supporters penetrated the Israeli border from territory of five frontline nations are no comedy, unless it’s one of the darkest kinds.  The joy felt by the Druze on the Israeli side of the border when their brethren crossed a mine field and leapt over a fence to meet them, quickly turned to horror when the IDF mowed down four of their number though they were completely unarmed.  Israel has faced no consequences for its heinous overreaction.

What I wanted to get at in the reference to the movie though is the vast divide between the average Israeli Jewish response to the border violation and the response of foreigners.  For Israelis, these were looming hordes come to rape and pillage Israel.  They had to be stopped by any means necessary including lethal violence.  They had to be taught a lesson not to tinker with Israel lest they repeat these theatrics.

For the average foreign observer, the Israeli response was typically bellicose, aggressive and brutal.  It showed the obtuseness of Israel both to the injustices it has perpetrated and to the perception of its behavior on the world stage.  So in my film analogy, the Israelis were the hysterical New England residents believing their country was about the be overrun.

Returning to Nakba Day…what did Israel expect from its own counter-provocation?  The demonstrations will now take on a continuing life of their own.  The IDF responded in precisely the way the organizers of this protest would’ve expected.  And now that Israel has drawn blood, the protesters have been in effect dared to take up the challenge.  If the IDF had merely treated the border violations as a civil matter and turned the protesters away in a non-lethal manner, the protests would’ve likely petered out or taken a different form.

But now, Israel has thrown down the gauntlet.  And one thing Israel may find is that the Arab world, in the aftermath of the democratic revolutions which convulsed Arab capitals from Tunis to Damascus, is in no mood to back down in the face of bullies.  Israel may have the most powerful army in the Middle East, but what can it do against the possibility of tens of thousands or protesters piercing its borders?  Can it afford to murder hundreds as has happened in Syria?  Does it have enough political capital left in the international community to withstand the universal condemnation this would arouse?  Not to mention calls for international criminal prosecution?  Does Bibi think Barack will cheer him on as Bush did when Israel slaughtered over 1,000 Lebanese civilians in 2006?

Similarly, when Israel mowed down nine Turkish pro-Palestinian activists on the Mavi Marmara, it provoked a series of such flotillas chugging to Gaza.  Now, the Turkish foreign minister has warned Israel not to toy with Turkey by considering another military attack on a Turkish convoy planning to set sail for Gaza in June.  This could set up some sort of armed confrontation between the two former allies.  Isn’t it interesting how quickly relations and alliances shift in the Middle East?

I predict Bibi will fold in the face of the Turkish threat and these ships will reach Gaza.  Israel tends to back down when it realizes its opponent is as strong as it is.  Israel’s army and political leadership prefers to bully states and entities with weak military forces like Palestine, Syria and Lebanon.  That’s why there hasn’t been an armed confrontation with Jordan since 1967.  And conversely, it’s why it attacked the Mavi Marmara and forcibly prevents other unarmed ships from breaching the Gaza siege.  If any of these ships had a military escort, the situation would be different.

With the UN General Assembly vote looming in September, Palestinian activists will test Israel to determine how it will react to such protests.  If Israel continues to overreact and kills more activists and gets into a pissing match with Turkey, it will strengthen the movement for statehood.  This will also take the wind out of the sails of the Obama administration in its effort to carry water for Israel by vetoing the resolution in the Security Council if it makes its way there.

World Leaders Warn Israel Not to Impound Palestinian Tax Funds

Wednesday, May 4th, 2011

What a difference a few years can make in a political conflict.  After 2006, when Hamas won the PA election and Israel froze hundreds of millions in dollars in tax payments due the PA for many months, there was nary a whine from the world community.  The prevailing sentiment seemed to be that Hamas and the Palestinians had it coming.  There was hardly a peep of opposition.

Now, Tony Blair and Hillary Clinton are both warning Bibi that this money isn’t Israel’s to withhold and no less a figure than Ehud Barak reminds his government that if it does so it will be in violation of international agreements:

“The money is Palestinian money so it must be transferred. That is a quartet position. Hillary Clinton made the same point,” Blair told Haaretz. “I think what happens when the new government comes to power is another thing, but at the moment Salam Fayyad is the prime minister and the arrangements are what they were always.”

…Steinitz’s move is strongly opposed by Defense Minister Ehud Barak. Behind closed doors, Barak was reported describing the delay as “capricious,” adding that this was Palestinian money and that if Israel did not transfer it, it would be in violation of international agreements.

B’Tselem Demands IDF Cease Using Attack Dogs on Palestinian Day Laborers

Thursday, April 28th, 2011
idf k-9 dog attacks palestinian woman

IDF K-9 attacks Palestinian woman

Calling the IDF practice of siccing K-9 attack dogs on undocumented Palestinian workers (Hebrew) a “terror policy,” the Israeli NGO B’Tselem is appealing against its use to the army senior command.  It should be noted that the victims are not security suspects, but rather day laborers seeking to enter Israel to find work and who do not have the proper permits to do so (which are practically non-existent anyway).  According to B’Tselem:

The incidents took place in the area of a-Ramadin, southwest of Hebron. Most of those injured attempted to enter Israel to work, and one, to receive medical treatment. Two of them were arrested by soldiers and remain in custody. In some of the cases, the laborers told B’Tselem that the dogs did not respond to their handlers’ order to stop, and the handlers had to use an electric-shock device to calm the dogs.

…M [a Palestinian victim] also stated that, while fighting with the dog, a soldier filmed the incident on his cell phone. Soldiers then stunned the dog with an electric-shock device. The dog stopped the attack and his mouth was covered with a muzzle

In one case, the injured worker filed a complaint with the police and was arrested on suspicion of entering Israel illegally…Y, who is 22 and lives in a village next to a-Dhahiriya, was with a group of Palestinians trying to sneak into Israel. He told B’Tselem that…a dog jumped on him and bit him from behind and on his left hand. He managed to push the dog away and get into the waiting car, and they entered Israel. Later that day, he returned to the West Bank and went to the government hospital in Hebron, where the doctors found he had a torn tendon in one of his fingers. Three days later, when he went to the police station in Hebron to complain about the attack, he was detained on suspicion of entering Israel, disturbing a public official in the course of carrying out his duty, and fleeing…

…Furthermore, in the cases documented by B’Tselem, the soldiers apparently released the dogs at groups of Palestinian laborers attempting to cross the fence, and the dogs bit laborers who did not manage to flee…

Apparently, the IDF also shoots Palestinians for doing nothing more than trying to feed their families.  And then to cover up the crime they imprison them so the victim is out of reach of NGOs or journalists who might conceivably embarrass the army by exposing its egregious conduct:

On 25 April, K, a 45-year-old resident of al-Burej, Hebron District, tried to enter Israel illegally. During the attempt he apparently was wounded by gunfire and was bitten by a dog and was taken to Soroka Medical Center, in Beersheva. A few hours later, K was taken from the hospital and is now in the army’s prison at Ofer. Since he is incarcerated, B’Tselem presently [is] unable to obtain further details on the incident.

In its defense, the army claims the dogs only attack those attempting to damage the Wall and that they receive permission before unleashing the dogs.  This is disproven by the fact that dogs have attacked Palestinians even before they cross the Separation Wall while still inside Palestinian territory.  Also, it defies common sense that a Palestinian laborer seeking work in Israel would endanger his chances of crossing the barrier by damaging the Wall.

I’m reminded of the attitude of the beloved Prof. Amos Funkenstein, who passed away tragically some years ago, toward dogs.  Since he was a child of survivors, he always disliked canines and used the derisive term hund to describe them.  Do we not remember why Jews of that generation hated dogs?  Because the Nazis used them in precisely the same way the IDF is using them on Palestinians.  The only difference is that the Jews ended up gassed and the Palestinians ‘only’ end up maimed.  At least they have their lives.

Jordanian Intelligence Services Implicated in Abusisi Kidnapping

Friday, March 25th, 2011

Yousef Abusisi, Dirar’s brother, tells me that after the latter left Gaza he traveled to Egypt, and then boarded a Jordanian flight to Kiev that had a 5 hour Amman stopover.  During the layover, Jordanian intelligence agents refused to allow him to board the connecting flight.  They held him overnight at the airport.  Then he stayed at his father’s home in Amman for another six days until they allowed him to exit the country.  Before they did, he was required to check in at a Jordanian intelligence  office every day.  On one day, he was forced to remain there for ten hours.

When he finally left Jordan, the intelligence services monitored him closely wanting to be sure the “package” was delivered to Ukraine intact.

I think we can reasonably speculate on what happened while he was detained in Jordan and why.  The Mossad contacted Jordanian security at some point after he left Gaza and informed them that Abusisi was either a Hamas terrorist on a mission or that he was at the least a high-security risk.  Mossad asked Jordan to detain him.  What we don’t know is what happened between the two security services while Dirar was in Jordan.  Either they were trying to agree what to do with him (possibly detain him and ship him directly to Israel from Jordan); or planning his kidnapping once he arrived in Ukraine.

I’m guessing that given the strength of the Jordanian opposition and Muslim Brotherhood, that Jordan couldn’t afford to directly render Abisisi to the Mossad from Jordan.  It would simply be too embarrassing and arouse too much anger for the intelligence services to be collaborating so closely with the Israelis.  But that seven-day interval would allow Israeli agents in Ukraine to set up their safe house, arrange for the plane that would spirit him to Israel, and negotiate with Ukrainian authorities about what would happen to Dirar while there.

All of which means that now we have not one, but two foreign countries deeply implicated in the Abusisi extraordinary rendition.  And one of the countries is Arab, which throws an entirely new wrinkle on the project.  Before, somehow having just Israel and Ukraine implicated it was a bit more distant.  But now, a Palestinian was betrayed by a fellow Arab nation.  It gets a lot more complicated both for the Jordanians themselves and for their relations with Palestinians both inside and outside the Kingdom.

It indicates a high level of “cooperation” (aka “collusion”) between Mossad and Jordanian intelligence that certainly would be disturbing to many of the 70% of the Jordanian population of Palestinian origin.  It also opens Jordan up to charges that it too, like Ukraine, violated international law by participating in the plot to kidnap him, even if they may not have known specifically what would happen to Dirar once he arrived there.

Yousef also told me that after Dirar left Jordan the latter was haunted and had a strong suspicion that something was being planned, though he didn’t know what.

Yousef also believes that the Palestinian embassy in Ukraine was at least partially implicated in the plot, after the fact.  After Dirar disappeared, Veronika and Yousef went to the embassy seeking help.  Instead of actively doing so, the embassy took the line of Ukrainian officials who’d told them to remain silent and not publicize the then-disappearance.  The Palestinian embassy officials promised they would do everything in their power to find Dirar, but did nothing.  This was the result of the Ukrainian effort as well.  This Voice of America article in Russian indicates that both the Ukrainians and Palestinian officials there continued to maintain their studied indifference as both refused to comment to VOA after a press conference Veronika held today.

So now you actually have an official Palestinian government entity that at least tacitly collaborated with the kidnapping as well.  It just gets seamier and seamier.

It seems to me the Jordanian intelligence services have a lot to answer for.  For those who read Arabic, there is a report in the Jordanian opposition newspaper Assabeel about Dirar’s experience in Jordan.  It isn’t fully accurate, but mostly so in the broad outline of events.

One thing is important, no matter how many countries were involved and no matter how sleazy their involvement, this factor must not be used by Israel to lessen the scrutiny and opprobrium that accords to Israel’s secret police for their role as authors of this nasty business.  Israel would love to point to all the other countries involved to say that they too agreed with their assessment that Abusisi was a terrorist or whatever the claim might be.  That would somehow lessen the blame on Israel.  But we mustn’t let the intelligence apparatus get away with laying blame elsewhere.  Blame lies fully on Israel for this despicable act.

The other parties mentioned above behaved reprehensibly and violated their commitments under international law.  But they are co-conspirators, not the authors of the crime.  Israel takes sole credit for that.

The VOA report also notes that Veronika is concerned for her own safety and has hired two security guards from a private company to guard her in case Ukrainian security services seek to intimidate or harm her in any way.

Erekat, Palestinian Cabinet Resign, Election Set

Tuesday, February 15th, 2011
mahmoud abbas

Mahmoud Abbas: what's this nonsense they're talking about democracy and some sort of Revolution? Did I miss that? (EPA)

In a sign of the ripple effect that the Egyptian Revolution is having on its neighbors in the region, virtually the entire rump PA government resigned and Mahmoud Abbas called for new elections.  It’s rather comic because he has had the opportunity to do this since 2006 and only chose now to do so.  Abbas also chooses to hold an election without the participation of his chief rival, Hamas.  The latter refuses to participate in an election while Fatah has refused efforts to reconcile and restore a unified Palestinian government.

This will essentially be a one party election and the West Bank will be a one party rump state.  So much for real democracy.  Abbas is runnin’ scared that the Egyptian model might be embraced in Palestine.  This reminds me of the tribe that believes it must appease the volcano god by tossing a maiden into its maw.  This is cosmetic surgery, designed to fool Palestinians and the rest of the world into believing that Fatah is the democratically elected representative of the people.  But how can it be when it will have virtually no competition?

james steinberg state department

James Steinberg, proudly points to U.S. success in stifling Security Council resolutions which conform with U.S. policy (AFP)

Saeb Erekat’s resignation is a further indication of the failure of Peace Process 1.0.  Any such process predicated on maximum Palestinian flexibility and minimum Israeli concessions along with a mediator heavily tilted toward Israeli interests–that is dead.

On a related matter, the Obama administration, with its announcement that it would proudly and eagerly veto the Security Council resolution condemning settlements, seems not to have learned any lessons from Tahrir Square.  The message conveyed by this veto is: we stand by our allies, even when they behave in ways antithetical to our own policies and values.

Didn’t we just dump a guy for that?

What irks me especially is the pride the U.S. State Department official takes in the fact that the U.S. continually frustrates any attempt to address the evils of the Occupation in the Security Council:

“We have made very clear that we do not think the Security Council is the right place to engage on these issues,” Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg told the House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs Committee.

We have had some success, at least for the moment, in not having that arise there. And we will continue to employ the tools that we have to make sure that continues to not happen,” said Steinberg.

Imagine the April 6th Youth Movement bringing a resolution to the Security Council condemning Mubarak’s 30 years of venality and oppression of the Egyptian people and a similar statement from a U.S. representative boasting of our ability to game the system so troublesome matters like these are never brought up.  Is this what the Obama administration wishes to be remembered for as its legacy?  That we were Israel’s toady?

Let’s also not lose sight of the fact that this resolution’s wording tracks almost note for note specific U.S. policy on the settlements.  So we’re placed in the incredibly awkward and lame position of vetoing a resolution that diverges not a whit from our pronounced policy against settlements.  I couldn’t have thought of a way to look more stupid on the world stage.  Not to mention that after we struggled so hard to appear relevant during the events in Tahrir Square, for us to recede so quickly into irrelevancy is almost heartbreaking.

The truth is that the Obama administration defends freedom and liberty up to the shores of Tel Aviv.  Beyond that, we’re captive to the Israel lobby here and a set of Likudist-settler interests there.