Posts Tagged ‘Palestine’

Author Naomi Klein Calls for Boycott of Israel

June 26, 2009
Published on Friday, June 26, 2009 by Agence France Presse

BILIN , West Bank – Bestselling author Naomi Klein on Friday took her call for a boycott of Israel to the occupied West Bank village of Bilin, where she witnessed Israeli forces clashing with protesters.

[Bestselling Canadian author Naomi Klein on Friday took her call for a boycott of Israel to the occupied West Bank village of Bilin, where she witnessed Israeli forces clashing with protesters. 'Boycott is a tactic . . . we're trying to create a dynamic which was the dynamic that ultimately ended apartheid in South Africa,' she said. (Photograph by: John Kenney, National Post)]Bestselling Canadian [Jewish] author Naomi Klein on Friday took her call for a boycott of Israel to the occupied West Bank village of Bilin, where she witnessed Israeli forces clashing with protesters. ‘Boycott is a tactic . . . we’re trying to create a dynamic which was the dynamic that ultimately ended apartheid in South Africa,’ she said. (Photograph by: John Kenney, National Post)

“It’s a boycott of Israeli institutions, it’s a boycott of the Israeli economy,” the Canadian writer told journalists as she joined a weekly demonstration against Israel’s controversial separation wall.”Boycott is a tactic . . . we’re trying to create a dynamic which was the dynamic that ultimately ended apartheid in South Africa,” said Klein, the author of “The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.”

“It’s an extraordinarily important part of Israel’s identity to be able to have the illusion of Western normalcy,” the Canadian writer and activist said.

“When that is threatened, when the rock concerts don’t come, when the symphonies don’t come, when a film you really want to see doesn’t play at the Jerusalem film festival . . . then it starts to threaten the very idea of what the Israeli state is.”

She briefly joined about 200 villagers and foreign activists protesting the barrier which Israel says it needs to prevent attacks, but which Palestinians say aims at grabbing their land and undermining the viability of their promised state.

She then watched from a safe distance as the protesters reached the fence, where Israeli forces fired teargas and some youths responded by throwing stones at the army.

“This apartheid, this is absolutely a system of segregation,” Klein said adding that Israeli troops would never crack down as violently against Jewish protesters.

She pointed out that her visit coincided with court hearings in Quebec in a case where the villagers of Bilin are suing two Canadian companies, accusing them of illegally building and selling homes to Israelis on land that belongs to the village.

The plaintiffs claim that by building in the Jewish settlement of Modiin Illit, near Bilin, Green Park International and Green Mount International are in violation of international laws that prohibit an occupying power from transferring some of its population to the lands it occupies.

“I’m hoping and praying that Canadian courts will bring some justice to the people of Bilin,” Klein said.

Her visit was also part of a promotional tour in Israel and the West Bank for “The Shock Doctrine” which has recently been translated into Hebrew and Arabic. Klein said she would get no royalties from sales of the Hebrew version and that the proceeds would go instead to an activist group.

© Copyright (c) AFP

MIDEAST: Bloody New Battles Suit Israel

June 1, 2009

By Mel Frykberg | Inter Press Service News

RAMALLAH, May 31 (IPS) – The inevitable has happened. Simmering tensions between rival Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah have left six Palestinians dead, in the bloodiest confrontation between the two groups since Hamas ousted Fatah from Gaza in June 2007.

A bloody gun battle broke out Sunday morning in the northern West Bank town of Qalqilia between a group of Hamas gunmen and security forces from the Fatah-affiliated Palestinian Authority (PA).

The PA had tried to arrest and flush out a group of Hamas gunmen who were hiding in a building in the northern city, just over an hour’s drive north-west of Ramallah.

The exchange of gunfire left two Hamas members and three PA police officers dead. The owner of the building where the Hamas fighters had taken refuge also succumbed to his wounds.

The PA placed Qalqilia under curfew as they searched for additional gunmen in the areas surrounding the building where the clash had taken place.

Palestinian security forces were put on a state of high alert with throngs of soldiers and jeeps surrounding PA President Mahmoud Abbas’s government compound, the Muqata, in Ramallah.

Each side blamed the other for instigating the violence. According to the PA, the Hamas men had refused to surrender or identify themselves, and had opened fire on PA forces first.

However, Hamas spokesmen said the cornered men only returned fire after the PA men refused to back off.

Tensions between the two Palestinian rivals have been building ever since the Gaza coup.

Both factions have tortured, abused and killed opponents during interrogation in their respective jails in the Gaza strip, controlled by Hamas, and the West Bank ruled by the PA.

Resentment and anger between the two organisations reached boiling point last week following Israel’s assassination of a top Hamas leader near the southern West Bank town Hebron, 30 km south of Jerusalem.

Abed Al-Majid Dudin, 45, head of Hamas’s military wing in Hebron was assassinated last Thursday by Israeli commandos, backed by jeeps and a helicopter.

According to the Israelis he was shot dead in a firefight after he had barricaded himself inside a house and refused to surrender. Hamas accused the PA of helping Israel carry out surveillance on Dudin prior to the killing.

Dudin was one of Israel’s most wanted men, and had apparently managed to elude Israel security forces for 14 years. The Jewish state accused him of being behind several suicide bombings within Israel proper.

Following the assassination, Israel declared a state of high alert in anticipation of retaliatory attacks.

Hamas, meanwhile, told its fighters in the West Bank that the gloves were off, and they were free to carry out retaliation of their choosing against any legitimate targets in the occupied territory.

According to Hamas officials, the PA was also a legitimate target, due to its alleged collaboration with Israel.

Hamas further accused the PA of carrying out a witch-hunt against its members in the West Bank, stating that prior to bloody Sunday, over 20 Hamas sympathisers had been arrested during the previous two nights.

The PA continues to deny that the arrests were politically motivated, instead saying that embezzlement, fraud and criminal activity led to the arrests.

Several human rights organisations have charged repeatedly that PA prisons are full of political prisoners and Hamas sympathisers, many of them not even members of its armed wing Izzedin Al-Qassem.

Due to the escalating events and yet another round of failed Palestinian unity talks in Cairo several weeks ago, it was just a matter of time when bloody violence would break out.

But Israel’s timing, and the reasoning behind carrying out the provocative assassination of Dudin, which provided the spark to the West Bank powder keg, is curious.

There have been no attacks against Israel proper emanating from the West Bank for years, despite rampaging Israeli settlers stepping up their attacks against Palestinian civilians in the territory.

Furthermore, Israeli intelligence would have been sure of the assassination provoking retaliatory attacks, and increasing friction between Hamas and Fatah.

But Israel’s government, under the right-wing leadership of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, appears to be rudderless, and uncertain of its future direction.

The attacks come at a time when the rest of the international community, propelled forward by U.S. President Barack Obama, appears to be developing the resolve to pressure Israel into fulfilling its part of various peace agreements.

The calls from a growing number of world leaders for Israel to freeze settlement building are growing louder. Obama has reportedly given himself two years to reach a diplomatic settlement on a two-state solution as a means of resolving the protracted Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Israel argues that natural growth in the settlements has to be taken into account. However, most of the settlement building has been to accommodate increasing settler numbers – and as their numbers increase, further settlement building would be required.

There are currently about 500,000 illegal settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, according to Israeli rights group B’Tselem.

Additionally, Israeli attempts to outlaw Palestinians commemorating their Nakba (meaning catastrophe, to mark the day of the Israeli onslaught that drove them out of their land in 1948) with threats of three years imprisonment is not winning Netanyahu any support regionally or internationally either.

During the Nakba, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians either fled or were expelled from their homes, while over 500 villages were razed to make way for the establishment of Israel.

Neither are Israel’s accelerated attempts to Judaise East Jerusalem by expelling Palestinians and demolishing their homes there, helping its PR efforts.

Bloody Palestinian infighting might just be what a cornered Israeli government needs at the moment to focus attention elsewhere.

Netanyahu: Israel will still build on Jewish settlements

May 25, 2009

Israeli prime minister ignores Obama’s calls and says ‘natural growth’ on West Bank and in Jerusalem will continue

The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, said today that his country would continue to build in Jewish settlements in Jerusalem and the West Bank, despite calls from the US administration for a halt.

Netanyahu’s comments came less than a week after he met President Barack Obama in Washington, where he was told that the US wanted to see a stop to settlement expansion.

“We do not intend to build any new settlements, but it wouldn’t be fair to ban construction to meet the needs of natural growth or for there to be an outright construction ban,” Netanyahu said.

“Natural growth” is the term Israel uses for expansion to accommodate population growth inside the boundaries of existing settlements. However, the 2003 US road map for peace explicitly calls for a freeze to all settlement activity, including natural growth.

Nearly 500,000 Jewish settlers live in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Settlements on occupied land are widely regarded as illegal under international law.

The issue of settlement outposts – the most remote settlements that are not even authorised by Israel – was debated in the Israeli cabinet today. Ehud Barak, the defence minister, said 22 settlement outposts, out of a total of about 100, would be taken down either by dialogue or by force. However, after police tried to demolish one outpost near Ramallah last week, settlers simply returned within hours and began rebuilding.

“The 22 … have to be dealt with now in a responsible, appropriate manner, first of all exhausting all efforts at dialogue, and if that proves impossible, then unilaterally, using force if necessary,” Barak said before the cabinet meeting. He and other Israeli officials have made similar promises in recent years but the outposts remain.

Many in Netanyahu’s government are deeply opposed to any steps against the settlers. “Outposts do not have to be dismantled now,” said the interior minister, Eli Yishai. “There is rampant illegal construction on the part of Palestinians and Israeli Arabs. If we go for enforcement, then enforcement has to be unified, just and equitable.”

‘Israel won’t yield to U.S. demands, won’t halt settlement construction’

May 24, 2009

Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya’alon, left, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attending a Likud faction meeting.
Emile Salman / Jini

Last update – 05:49 24/05/2009
By Haaertz Service
Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya’alon spoke to Channel 2 on Saturday about the meeting between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Barack Obama, held earlier this week, saying that Israel’s government will not allow the U.S. to dictate its policy, and that “settlement construction will not be halted.””Settlements are not the reason that the peace process is failing, they were never an obstacle, not at any stage,” Ya’alon told Channel 2 News. “Even when Israel pulled out of [Palestinian] territory, the terror continued. Even when we uprooted [Jewish] communities, we got ‘Hamastan.’ That is why I propose that we think about it – not in slogans and not with decrees.”

According to Ayalon, “we will not halt the construction in the settlements within the framework of natural growth. There are people here who are living their lives, raising children. Housing is required ? it wasn’t housing that has prevented peace.”

Advertisement

In reference to the illegal West Bank outposts, which Israel has vowed to evacuate and has begun to do so, Ya’alon stressed that “the government will not permit illegal settlement, as we’ve proven with our actions this week.”

Some believe that the evacuation of the outpost of Maoz Esther on Thursday morning, which came a day after Defense Ministry sources told Haaretz that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak had agreed on a plan to evacuate illegal outposts in the West Bank, was carried out in accordance with U.S. pressure. However, Barak denied any correlation between the Netanyahu-Obama meeting on Monday, and the evacuation.

Ya’alon also addressed reports that the U.S. had upped its demands and was trying to dictate Israel’s next moves in the negotiations with the Palestinians. “What the U.S. is asking is not a demand, we’ll see whether their declaration become actual demands,” he said.

“[U.S. envoy to the Middle East George] Mitchell will come, and we’ll talk to him. I suggest that Israel and the U.S. don’t set a timetable. We won’t let them threaten us,” Ya’alon added.

“From the banks of the Potomac in Washington it is not always clear what the real situation here is,” Ya’alon concluded. “This is where Israel must step in and help her ally understand the situation.”

Ya’alon also criticized Israel, saying that “the Israeli discourse paints us as hostile, the problem is within us.”

Gaza’s separation from the West Bank is Israel’s great triumph

April 27, 2009

Amira Haas | Uruknet.info, April 26, 2009

The total separation of the Gaza Strip from the West Bank is one of the greatest achievements of Israeli politics, whose overarching objective is to prevent a solution based on international decisions and understandings and instead dictate an arrangement based on Israel’s military superiority.

In view of the violent rivalry between the two main movements competing for the upper hand in the Palestinian mock-government, Fatah and Hamas, it’s easy to forget the effort Israel invested in separating families, economies, cultures and societies between the two parts of the Palestinian state “in the making.” All that remained was for the Palestinians to crown the split with their dual regime.

The restrictions on Palestinian movement that Israel introduced in January 1991 reversed a process that had been initiated in June 1967. Back then, and for the first time since 1948, a large portion of the Palestinian people again lived in the open territory of a single country – to be sure, one that was occupied, but was nevertheless whole. True, there quickly emerged three categories of Palestinian residents: third-class Israeli citizens, residents of Israel (in Jerusalem) and residents of the “administered territories.” Yet the experience of renewing old family and social ties and creating new modes of social, cultural and economic companionships proved stronger than the administrative distinctions. The dynamism, creativity and optimism of the first intifada (1987-1992) owe much to the reality generated by this freedom of movement inside a single country.

Israel put a halt to this freedom of movement on the eve of the first Gulf war. Since January 1991, Israel has bureaucratically and logistically merely perfected the split and the separation: not only between Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and their brothers in Israel, but also between the Palestinian residents of Jerusalem and those in the rest of the territories and between Gazans and West Bankers-Jerusalemites. Jews live in this same piece of land within a superior and separate system of privileges, laws, services, physical infrastructure and freedom of movement.

One day, when the archives are opened, we’ll know just how calculated and planned this process was. Meanwhile, we cannot ignore the fact that it commenced at a time when the Cold War and South African apartheid were ending and the international community assessed that conditions were ripe for an Israeli-Palestinian two-state agreement based on the June 4, 1967 lines.

In parallel with the Oslo process, Israel took bureaucratic steps that rendered hollow the clause in the Oslo Accords according to which the Gaza Strip and West Bank are a single territorial unit. Gazans were forbidden to live, study and work in the West Bank without permission from Israel (which was rarely given, and only to favored applicants). Gazans were also forbidden to enter the West Bank via its border with Jordan. Friends and family live just 70 kilometers apart but Israel does not allow them to meet. Today, a Palestinian born in Gaza who lives in the West Bank without Israeli permission is considered an “illegal presence.”

The devious unilateral Israeli disengagement of 2005 perpetuated a process that commenced in 1991: Gaza and the West Bank fall under different types of administration, with Israel cleverly presenting Gaza as an independent entity no longer under occupation. In the last Palestinian elections, Hamas proved more persuasive than Fatah when it attributed the Palestinian “victory” and the Israeli withdrawal to itself and its armed struggle. There followed Hamas’ takeover of the Gaza security forces in June 2007 and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ directive to tens of thousands of Palestinian Authority employees to boycott their places of work in the Strip.

In the recent Palestinian unity talks, the substantive questions have not been asked: Has the public in the West Bank and Gaza given up on the link between the two parts occupied in 1967 until the distant realization of the dream of one state? Will the Palestinian leaderships be taken to account by the people for the assistance they gave Israel in severing the two territories? Is the link to the Arab and Muslim worlds more vital for Hamas than the link with the West Bank? Are ceremonial international standing and the perks of senior officialdom more important to the PA and the Palestinian Liberation Organization than the population of Gaza?

The answers must also come from the Israelis, and particularly those who claim to support peace. Prior to Hamas’ election victory in 2006, the PA’s center of rule was in Gaza. That didn’t hinder Israel from perfecting the conditions of separation and severance that turned the Strip into the detention camp it is today while Israeli peaceniks in their multitudes sat on their hands. Even if a miracle happens in Cairo and the Palestinians unite, the government of Israel will not willingly forego its greatest achievement: severing Gaza from the West Bank. This achievement, which will only stoke the fires of a bloody conflict, is the disaster of both peoples.

Amira Hass is a correspondent for the Israeli daily Haaretz. Since January 22 of this year she has been reporting from Gaza. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons.org, an online newsletter that publishes contending views of the Israeli-Palestinian problem.

Jerusalem’s mayor defends demolition of houses in Arab area

April 24, 2009

Nir Barkat rejects international criticism and says east of city could never be capital of Palestinian state

Israel‘s mayor of Jerusalem defended the demolition of houses in the Arab east of the city today and insisted Jerusalem could not be a future capital of a Palestinian state.

Nir Barkat, a secular businessman elected as mayor five months ago, rejected international criticism of demolitions and planning policy in east Jerusalem as “misinformation” and “Palestinian spin”.

There is growing international concern about Israeli house demolitions and settlement growth in East Jerusalem, an area captured by Israel in 1967 and later annexed in a move not recognised by most of the international community. Critics of Israeli policy point out that planning permits are rarely given to Palestinians in East Jerusalem and that space allowed in the east for building is heavily restricted.

Last month the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, described demolitions as “unhelpful” and an internal EU diplomatic report, obtained last month by the Guardian, described them as “illegal under international law” and said they “fuel bitterness and extremism”.

But Barkat told reporters: “There is no politics. It’s just maintaining law and order in the city.” Since January, he said, there had been 35 demolitions, of which 20 were in the east. Asked about the international concern, he said: “The world is basing their evidence on the wrong facts … The world has to learn and I am sure people will change their minds.”

But others on the council disagree. Meir Margalit, an elected councillor from the leftwing Meretz party, said while the demolitions in the east were of Palestinian apartments and houses, in the west of the city they were nearly all small structures added on to buildings, including shopfronts.

Margalit said fewer than 7% of planning applications submitted by Palestinians in East Jerusalem had been successful so far this year, against 14% from the west, while 41% of Palestinian East Jerusalem planning applications had been rejected, against 20% from the west. He said this followed a pattern established over many years, before Barkat’s election.

“The discrimination here is more than ideological,” Margalit said. “It is part of a cultural structure that is the norm in the municipality.” He also produced research showing the municipality spent less than 12% of its budget in the east, where roads are often potholed and services are poor.

Barkat said he wanted to improve the life of all the city’s residents, Jewish and Arab, but that he was committed to maintaining a Jewish majority. Jews make up around two-thirds of the city’s population.

He said he could not accept East Jerusalem becoming the capital of a future Palestinian state. “Jerusalem, both ideologically and practically, has to be managed as a united city, as the Israeli capital, and must not be divided,” he said.

Barkat said he wanted the Israeli government to build a Jewish settlement in an area of the occupied West Bank east of Jerusalem known as E1, a project the US has opposed. He said E1 was part of the “holy land of Israel” and could serve to allow the city’s Jewish population to expand outwards. “I see no reason in the world why the Israelis must freeze expansion and the Palestinians can build illegally,” he said. Under the US “road map”, which remains the basis of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, Israel is committed to freezing all settlement building. Settlements in occupied land are widely regarded as illegal under international law.

Israel criticism sparks UN walkout

April 20, 2009
Al Jazeera, April 20, 2009

A demonstrator is pushed away as Ahmadinejad addresses the Durban Review Conference [REUTERS]

Dozens of delegates have walked out of a United Nations conference on racism after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s president, described Israel as a “racist government”.

Ahmadinejad told delegates at the summit in Switzerland on Monday, that after the Second World War the United States and other nations had established a “cruel, oppressive and racist regime in occupied Palestine”.

“The UN security council has stabilised this occupation regime and supported it in the last 60 years giving them a free hand to continue their crimes,” he told delegates at the Durban Review Conference hall in Geneva.

Dozens of diplomats from countries including Britain and France left the hall in protest as he made the remarks.

Ahmadinejad also asked the conference: “What were the root causes of the US attacks against Iraq or invasion of Afghanistan?

‘Enormous losses’

“The Iraqi people have suffered enormous losses … wasn’t the military action against Iraq planned by the Zionists … in the US administration, in complicity with the arms manufacturing companies?”.

Related
Ahmadinejad speech criticised

Defining racism

Many delegates who remained in the hall applauded Ahmadinejad’s comments.At least three demonstrators, dressed as clowns and shouting “racist, racist,” were expelled as Ahmadinejad began to speak.

Alan Fisher, Al Jazeera’s correspondent at the conference, said Ahmadinejad had reiterated his views on Israel, especially over its 22-day war on Gaza.

He said: “At the time [of the offensive] he said what was going on in Gaza was a genocide … this was an opportunity for him to say that at a world forum.

“There are people in the hall who believe that what Ahmadinejad was saying is correct – that is why there is such a split here.”

President criticised

Alireza Ronaghi, Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Tehran, said: “Ahmadinejad’s words are being criticised in Iran, not just among the youth, but among the different political factions.

Related

Ahmadinejad speech criticised

“This is the exact attitude he has been criticised for some time.””Even among the conservatives they have said such remarks are totally uncalled for.”

Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, condemned Ahmadinejad’s “speech of hate” and called for a “firm and united” reaction from the European Union.

Jonas Gahr Store, Norway’s foreign minister, said the Iranian leader’s comments had “run counter to the very spirit of dignity of the conference … he made Iran the odd man out”.

The speech by Ahmadinejad, who is a frequent critic of Israel and has cast doubt on the extent of the killing of Jews during the Second World War, coincided with Holocaust Remembrance Day in Israel, which begins at sundown on Monday.

The United States, Canada, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Poland and the Netherlands, had earlier said they would not attend the conference amid fears Ahmadinejad would use the summit to propagate anti-Semitic views.

‘Overly critical’

Washington also said it believed a draft text to be discussed was overly critical of Israel and its treatment of the Palestinians.

Opening the five-day summit earlier, Ban Ki-Moon, the United Nation’s secretary general, said he was “profoundly disappointed” that some western countries were not attending, but also condemned those who sought to deny or minimise the extent of the Holocaust.

He said: “Some nations who by rights should be helping us to forge a path to a better future are not here … I deeply regret that some have chosen to stand aside.”

Israel had withdrawn its ambassador to Switzerland in protest over a meeting between Ahmadinejad and Hans-Rudolf Merz, his Swiss counterpart.

The UN organised the summit to help heal the wounds left by its last racism conference in Durban, South Africa, in 2001, when the US and Israel walked out after Arab states sought to define Zionism as being racist.

Barack Obama, the US president, announcing his administration’s decision not to attend the conference, said Washington wanted a “clean slate” before tackling race and discrimination issues at the UN.

Several Muslim nations at the summit called for moves to prevent perceived insults to Islam, which they say have proliferated since the attacks on the US on September 11, 2001.

Palestinian Christians Exodus

April 13, 2009

By  Khalid Amayreh | IslamOnline, Apr 12, 2009

“They can’t easily adapt to the hardships associated with the stressful situation stemming from the Israeli occupation,” Khadr told IOL.

BETHLEHEM — Palestine, the birthplace of Jesus Christ, is losing many of its young Christians who, reeling under the yoke of the Israeli occupation and economic hardships, are seeking a better life abroad.“They can’t easily adapt to the hardships associated with the stressful situation stemming from the Israeli occupation,” Dr. Jamal Khadr, a priest at the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, told IslamOnline.net.

In recent decades, thousands of Christians left the occupied West Bank for a new life abroad, especially in North and South America, Australia, Scandinavia and even Africa.

No precise statistics are available as to the exact number, though it is widely believed to be significantly high.

According to figures compiled by the UN, about one-tenth of the Christian population in Bethlehem and the adjacent towns of Beit Jalla and and Beit Sahour has moved in recent years.

Dr. Khadr, also a professor of Dogmatic Theology at the Latin Seminary, says most of the emigrants are young Christians who are distressed by occupation and crises.

They largely travelled to North America and Sweden, where usually some family members had previously settled.

Nabil Kukali, a professor of education and public opinion pollster, agrees that the stressful conditions under the Israeli occupation are forcing many young Christians to migrate.

“These young people want to build a future for themselves and this is very hard to do here,” explains Kukali, a Christian himself.

About 50,000 Christians live in the West Bank, Al-Quds (occupied East Jerusalem) and Gaza Strip, according to MP Bernard Sabella, a former Professor of Sociology at Bethlehem University.

Christians make up less than 1.5 percent of the total population inside the occupied Palestinian territories, 10 percent of Israeli Arabs and slightly more than 6 percent of the world’s Palestinian population of more than 9 million.

Economy Factor

“Christian are more economically and in other ways, language, church and other connections, able to leave than…Muslims,” notes Qumsiyeh.

The tough economic conditions in the occupied territories, aggravated by the strangling occupation, are a major factor in making migration decisions.“Palestinian Christians are economically better off than most other Palestinians,” notes Khadr.

“They are generally accustomed to a certain pattern of bourgeoisie life.”

He insists that emigration is not confined to Christians and that Muslims, too, are moving out.

Khadr explains, however, that emigration within the Christian community is more conspicuous due to the small size of the community.

Mazen Qumsiyeh, an American-Palestinian professor of genetics and former academic at Yale University, says pressures on Muslims are just as daunting but Christians are more economically able to find a way out.

“Both are subject to the same pressures,” he told IOL.

“Christian are usually more economically and in other ways, language, church and other connections, able to leave than their fellow compatriots who are Muslim.”

Battle

Unsettled by the phenomenal shrinkage of their community, Christian leaders are trying to find ways and means to encourage mainly young Christian males to resist the temptation of emigration.

“The only way to prevent a further deterioration is by discouraging emigration and encouraging people to stay through lasting incentives,” a Greek Orthodox clergyman told IOL.

He added that the exodus has created a serious social imbalance.

“Today in Bethlehem there are two or three young [Christian] females for every young [Christian] male within the marriage age, and that is a real problem.”

Christian organizations in the West Bank, subsidized by Christian groups abroad, have been making strenuous efforts to encourage potential emigrants to stay home.

They are offering young Christians financial assistance in housing, education and in maintaining businesses.

Christian or mainly Christian institutions of higher education, such as the Catholic University of Bethlehem, also try to help in resisting the phenomenon of emigration.

“There is a real problem, and it won’t go away just by talking about it,” says Kukali, the education professor.

“I believe that the Palestinian Authority should create work opportunities here and enhance the overall psychological atmosphere.”

He notes that for some Christians, fleeing is just not an option.

“I was born here, my father is buried here, and my grandfather is also buried here. So I am staying here. I have no other homeland.

“I am Palestinian and will always be Palestinian.”

Taking Off the Blinders in the U.S.

March 28, 2009

By A.M. Khan | ZNet, March 28. 2009

A.M. Khan’s ZSpace Page


“There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz but was that their [the Palestinians] fault? They only see one thing: We have come here and stolen their country.”

–David Ben-Gurion, one of the founders of Israel and the first Prime Minister

Now that Israel’s bombardment of Gaza is off the front page and the Gazans are left to deal with the aftermath outside of world media attention, it makes sense to step back and review how the Israel-Palestine conflict is depicted in U.S. mainstream media. This depiction shapes how the U.S. public views the recent events in Gaza. It also shapes how the public understands what constitutes a just resolution to the conflict.

The nature of U.S. mainstream media coverage of events in Gaza and of the Israel-Palestine conflict renders Americans grossly misinformed. U.S. media representations are largely absent of historical context and omit the fact that for decades Israel has committed human rights violations against the Palestinian people and occupied their land. The media lens in mainstream U.S. coverage (print and television) obscures core issues and creates a false framework of the conflict. In the U.S., the Israel-Palestine conflict is framed as “a cycle of violence” between two adversaries of equal power engaged since millennia in a conflict based on religious and ethnic difference.  Not a single element of this frame is true.

Myth Number 1: The conflict has been ongoing since millennia.

The conflict is less than 100 years old. Before 1900, Jews, Christians, and Muslims lived together in the Holy Land mostly peacefully in a quiet agrarian society. While some European Jews immigrated in the late 1800’s to what was then Ottoman Empire-controlled Palestine, their numbers were small. In 1917, as World War I was coming to a close, the British government became the colonial power in control of historic Palestine (the area known today as Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip). With the 1917 “Balfour Declaration” the British made clear their support for a Jewish state in Palestine. After 1917, immigration of European Jews to Palestine escalated, increasing each year as time wore on. Many of these new immigrants were in flight from anti-Semitism in Europe.

As the Nazis came to power in Germany in the early 1930’s and began their oppression and later genocide of European Jews, the numbers of European Jewish immigrants to Palestine increased dramatically. Through these early decades of the 20th century, between the British commitment to creating a Jewish state in Palestine and as more European Jews flooded in, tensions between the European newcomers and the native Palestinian Arabs began and increased over time. After the genocide and near annihilation of European Jewry by the Nazis during World War II, the movement to make a Jewish homeland in Historic Palestine found understandable sympathy. The fly in the ointment was the fact that another people already lived in that land.

In 1948 the state of Israel was established by these European Jewish immigrants, adherents of an ideology called “Zionism.” There were different opinions among Zionist leaders as to how to deal with the native Palestinian Arabs. Some advocated peaceful co-existence and others advocated dispossession and expulsion. There were also positions in between. In the end, the more regressive positions prevailed. In their writings, Zionist leaders like David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, were explicit and unapologetic about their aim to expel the native Palestinian Arabs and take their land.

The 1948 nation building of Israel was premised on dispossession of the natives, including a premeditated campaign of ethnic cleansing and massacre. In 1948, Zionist military forces expelled about 750,000 Palestinians from 78% of Historic Palestine into the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and exile abroad. After statehood, these Zionist forces became the Israeli army. In 1967, again through military means, Israel took control of the remaining 22% of historic Palestine (i.e., the West Bank and Gaza Strip). The Palestinians driven into the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1948 (as well as those already there) came under Israeli military occupation in 1967, where they remain today 41 years later. Thus, in 1948 Israel proper was created on 78% of historic Palestine and since 1967 Israel has occupied the remaining 22% of historic Palestine.

Myth Number 2: The conflict is a cycle of violence between adversaries of similar power

The Israel-Palestine conflict is between two parties vastly unequal in power. Israel, the nuclear-armed occupier, has the fourth most powerful army in the world and cutting edge military weaponry. The Palestinians, an occupied and stateless people, are largely unarmed. The Palestinians have no army, no air force, no planes, no tanks, no gunships, and no nuclear weapons. This is why we see pictures of Palestinians throwing stones at tanks. If you possessed anything more powerful, would a stone really be your weapon of choice against a tank?

Myth Number 3: The conflict is based on religious and ethnic differences

The Israel-Palestine conflict is about possession and control of a small piece of land approximately the size of New Jersey. Israel believes itself entitled to all of the land because in the Bible God promised all of historic Palestine to the Jews. Since 1967, in violation of international law, Israel has moved 500,000 of its citizens into the West Bank. These settlers are connected to Israel through Israeli-only roads that crisscross the West Bank. West Bank Palestinians are not allowed to use these roads and must take circuitous routes on older roads in order to go around Israeli settlements, often adding hours to their journeys.

Regarding the “peace process,” Israel’s talk of making peace has been a rhetorical screen. Behind this screen each and every Israeli government since 1967,whether its flavor was left, right, or center, has continued the campaign begun in 1948, of land grab, human rights violations, and imprisonment of the Palestinians into multiple separate enclaves within the Occupied Territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Since 1967 every Israeli government has continued a national construction project (based on a plan created in the late 1960’s by Labor Minister Yigal Allon)to separate, isolate, and enclose every Palestinian city and most towns and villages by surrounding them with Israeli settlements. Today, that project is essentially complete. In addition to the settlement building, Israel’s construction of the Wall (86% of which is in the West Bank rather than along the 1967 border) and ongoing annexation of land and water resources have created facts on the ground establishing Israel’s dominance over all of historic Palestine. Today, Israel’s mission of total dominance is near completion.

In 1988, the Palestine Liberation Organization (as representative of the Palestinian people) agreed to recognize Israel, forego claim to 100% of historic Palestine, and accept a nation on 22% of their original land (i.e., on the West Bank and Gaza Strip). Israel has never agreed to this. Israel has made clear that it wants a future Palestinian state to be a version of 80% of 22% of 100%. Such a “state” would be a non-contiguous series of disconnected cantons. Israel’s Wall cuts deep into the West Bank and incorporates into Israel West Bank settlements and aquifers. This is the desert after all, and water is treasure. The Wall and settlements segment the West Bank and make a contiguous Palestinian state unlikely, if not impossible. Israel also wants control over exit and entry from that 80% of 22% of 100%. An analogy for this: imagine that in each of the rooms of your house you can do as you wish but that someone with guns controls all the hallways between the rooms. Is this a viable structure for life?

What holds all this in place and allows it to continue is that Israel has the multibillion dollar per year financial support and diplomatic cover of the most powerful nation in history, the United States. The U.S. has agreed to provide Israel with $30 billion dollars in military aid over the next 10 years and has provided billions upon billions of dollars in aid to Israel in the past. For decades, Israel has been the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid and receives one-third of the total U.S. foreign aid budget. The U.S., a veto-wielding member of the United Nations Security Council, has also vetoed each and every resolution put forward by the United Nations in response to Israel’s multiple violations of international law. In each of the U.N. votes on these resolutions against Israeli government actions, year after year, the U.S. and Israel (and a few small Pacific Island nations) stand alone against the rest of the international community in siding with Israel against international law and world opinion.

All of the facts above are available from easily accessible public sources. The facts are not in dispute. However, they have been obscured by a web of misinformation that hides the truth. Because the facts are what they are, when Israel is criticized, its proponents, who cannot rely on facts to support their cause, resort to personal attacks and charges of “anti-Semitism.” Their charges of anti-Semitism presuppose that all criticism of Israel as a state actor and all efforts to hold Israel, which is after all a nation state like any other, accountable for its actions are inherently anti-Semitic. When the truth cannot be bent to their narrative, proponents of Israeli government actions, no matter what those actions are, resort to the cudgel of anti-Semitism to silence and censor criticism of the actions of the state of Israel. So far, this method of silencing critics has proven highly effective in the U.S. Publicly criticizing Israel has cost academics their jobs and members of congress political office. These examples keep the rest of us in line as well.

Decades of misinformation and a mythical story (i.e., a land without a people for a people without a land), as well as the daily falsehoods we continue to be fed, can make the situation in Israel-Palestine seem more murky, complicated, and relativistic than it actually is.

When the American colonists were dispossessing the Native Americans, there was violent resistance. A people being dispossessed will resist. They resist because of their dispossession (not because they are crazy, evil, or filled with hate because of their religion). And, of course, violent native resistance hurts the occupier and harms innocents. However, when the occupier casts itself as the victim and says it is acting only in “self-defense” against native “attack”, it has turned logic on its head. Israel’s propaganda campaign over the last 41 years, casting itself as the only and perpetual victim, has been extremely successful in making this bizarre topsy-turvy spin seem logical and correct. It is yet another example of the effectiveness of saying the same thing over and over again until people start believing it is true.

There are many situations in history where two opposing perspectives are not of equal moral weight. The colonial campaign China continues in Tibet, the former British Empire’s actions around the globe, the apartheid system in South Africa, Belgium’s enslavement and killing of 10 million Congolese for natural resources, the genocide of the Jews by the Nazis, the genocide of the Armenians by Turkey all come to mind. The moral equation in Israel-Palestine is as simple and clear.

While discussion of U.S. national interest and geopolitical strategy take up much space in newspapers and conversation among the pundit class, the dimension of morality, the concern with doing the right thing, rarely enters our public discourse. In the end, the situation in the Occupied Territories of Gaza and the West Bank calls on our moral sense. It calls on our humanity, compassion, and sense of fairness. Our silence and complicity in Israel’s dispossession of the Palestinians and its ongoing human rights abuses over decades is a moral lapse of huge proportion.

Americans have a larger stake in this issue than citizens of other countries because we foot the bill to the tune of $8 million a day in aid to Israel. All of us who pay U.S. income taxes funded the recent atrocities in Gaza. We paid to drop white phosphorus on civilians. We paid to level homes, clinics, and schools. We paid to kill children and whole families as they slept in their beds. We are complicit in the bloodbath in Gaza. We are complicit in children starving to death laying next to their dead mothers buried in rubble as the International Red Cross documented in Gaza. We fund acts of state terror in which people watch their beloved daughter, son, father, mother be literally torn apart. We pay for a military machine that maims, kills, and holds captive an unarmed civilian population of men, women, and children, enclosing them in prison-like cantons within the West Bank and Gaza. For decades, we have been paying for the slow annihilation of a society and people who have done absolutely nothing to us.

So what can we do as individual citizens? Call your congresspeople to demand an even-handed U.S. policy in Israel-Palestine. Call the Obama White House to do the same. Learn about the growing Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions campaign against Israel (modeled on the anti-apartheid campaign against South Africa). Don’t buy Israeli products. Tell your local grocer you won’t shop there until they stop carrying Israeli products. Educate your neighbor. Educate yourself. Watch the documentary film “Occupation 101.” Read “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine” by Israeli historian Ilan Pappe. Read the writings of Palestinian intellectuals Edward Said and Rashid Khalidi. Go to www.endtheoccupation.org to find a political group in your area working for justice in Israel-Palestine. Most of all, do something. Do not be silent. Do not be complicit.

A.M. Khan is an Indian American psychologist by day and an activist and beginning documentary filmmaker by night. She welcomes correspondence on her work and can reached at: amkhan601@gmail.com.

Palestinian Revolution?

March 26, 2009

by Roane Carey | The Nation, March 26, 2009

On Friday I went to the anti-separation wall demo in Ni’lin in the West Bank, the same village where International Solidarity Movement activist Tristan Anderson was critically wounded last week. Several hundred villagers were accompanied by Jewish Israeli activists (most with Anarchists Against the Wall ) and ISMers, plus a few journalists like me. The IDF started firing tear gas at us even before we got close to the wall. The shebab (Palestinian youth) responded with stones, and the game was on: back and forth street battles, with the soldiers alternating between tear gas, rubber-coated steel bullets and occasional live ammunition, often fired by snipers, and the shebab hurling their stones by slingshot against the Israeli Goliath.

The IDF often fires tear gas now with a high-velocity rifle that can be lethal, especially when they fire it straight at you rather than pointed up in the air. Pointed straight, it comes at you like a bullet. That’s what seriously wounded Anderson. I saw these projectiles coming very near us, and saw how dangerous they could be. Not to mention the live ammo they occasionally fired–but they fired live rounds only at the shebab, never at the Jews or internationals. After a few hours, the clashes died down. Six were injured, one critically. Me, I just coughed and teared up from the gas on occasion. (In simultaneous demos in the nearby village of Bi’lin, three were injured, including two Americans.)

I mistakenly thought the army would be less aggressive on Friday, and not only because of the negative publicity surrounding the shooting of Anderson (the killing of Palestinians is of course routinely ignored in Western media; in Ni’lin alone, four villagers have been killed in the past eight months, with hundreds injured). The day before Friday’s march, revelations from Israeli veterans about war crimes they’d committed in the recent Gaza campaign made world headlines .

As villagers prepared yesterday’s march, Jonathan Pollock, a veteran activist with AATW, showed me where Anderson was standing when he was shot and where the IDF soldier was standing who shot him, just up the hill. The soldier had fired a high-velocity tear-gas canister at close range–what looked to me like about fifty or sixty meters–directly at Anderson, hitting him in the head. It was hard to imagine the intention could have been anything other than to seriously maim or kill.

The courage and steadfast resistance of the people of Ni’lin, and many other West Bank villages just like it that are fighting the wall’s illegal annexation of their land, is truly remarkable. Every week, for years now, West Bank Palestinians have stood up against the world’s fourth-most-powerful military machine, which shows no compunction about shooting unarmed demonstrators. This grassroots resistance–organized by the villagers themselves, not Fatah or Hamas–has gotten little publicity from the world media , which seem to prefer stories about Hamas rockets and the image of Palestinians as terrorists.

The village protests against the wall are inspiring, and not just because they’ve continued for so long, against such daunting odds. The villagers recognize the power and revolutionary potential of mass, unarmed resistance, and the shebab with their slingshots hearken back to the first intifada of the late 1980s and the “children of the stones,” when hundreds of thousands of men, women and children were directly involved in the struggle against the occupation. The Israeli government knows how difficult it is to suppress that kind of mass resistance, which is why it has used such brutality and provocation against the villagers. The army wants to shut this uprising down before it spreads, and would like nothing more than for the villagers to start using guns, as the IDF is certain to win a purely military confrontation. The other inspiration of this struggle is the courage and solidarity of the Israeli and ISM activists. They risk their lives day after day, and the villagers appreciate it. I saw signs in Ni’lin praising Tristan Anderson, who, just like Rachel Corrie six years ago, was willing to sacrifice his life for Palestinian justice.

Roane Carey, managing editor at The Nation, was the editor of The New Intifada (Verso) and, with Jonathan Shainin, The Other Israel: Voices of Refusal and Dissent (New Press).