Israel's settlements are on shaky ground

This opinion was published in the LA Times June 28, 2009. By Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East Director of Human Rights Watch.

The debate over Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories is often framed in terms of whether they should be "frozen" or allowed to grow "naturally." But that is akin to asking whether a thief should be allowed merely to keep his ill-gotten gains or steal some more. It misses the most fundamental point: Under international law, all settlements on occupied territory are unlawful. And there is only one remedy: Israel should dismantle them, relocate the settlers within its recognized 1967 borders and compensate Palestinians for the losses the settlements have caused.

Removing the settlements is mandated by the laws of the Geneva Convention, which state that military occupations are to be a temporary state of affairs and prohibit occupying powers from moving their populations into conquered territory. The intent is to foreclose an occupying power from later citing its population as "facts on the ground" to claim the territory, something Israel has done in East Jerusalem and appears to want to do with much of the West Bank.

To see the rest of the article: LA Times.

Bibi comments on the Iranian protests

Talk to the hand!

Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu (informally called Bibi) went on NBC's Meet the Press this past Sunday to talk Iran and peace efforts. He largely failed to communicate any new positions or say anything largely surprising. He did, however, make clear his deference to President Obama and subsequently, Israel's intent to wait for U.S. approval on action over the Iranian nuclear program.

However, I must point out Bibi's blind language. In concern to the danger of oppressive regimes: "There is no question we would all like to see a different Iran [Israel] with different policies. Remember, this is a regime that not only represses its own people. Andrei Sakharov, the great Russian scientist and humanist, said that a regime that oppresses its own people sooner or later will oppress its neighbors and, certainly, Iran [Israel] has been doing that." I am glad to see that Bibi owned up to Israel's oppressive policies in concern to the occupation and its own Arab citizens; oh, wait, he didn't, darn.

Furthermore, Bibi spoke on the domestic response to his Bar-Ilan University speech. He almost said what we would all like to hear: "What I am suggesting is that if we are asked to recognize the Palestinian state as the nation state of the Palestinian people, then the Palestinians should recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people who have been deprived of a land of their own and of security for so long." However, Bibi could not see through his own turnspeak and sadly ended the interview with such a backwards statement. Shouldn't Israel recognize a Palestinian people? Who have been deprived of their land and their safety for so long? I'll let you decide.

To see the interview and read the whole transcript, Click here: Bibi on Meet the Press.

All in a Day's Work: Beating and Torturing Children

University at Buffalo Students for Justice in Palestine will occasionally publish articles of interest, which we believe will provide particular insight into the daily lives of Palestinians. The following article was published in Counter Punch and can be found here. Thanks to Professor Holstun of the University at Buffalo for alerting us to the article.

All in a Day's Work for the IDF
Beating and Torturing Children
By JONATHAN COOK, Nazareth.

The rights of Palestinian children are routinely violated by Israel’s security forces, according to a new report that says beatings and torture are common. In addition, hundreds of Palestinian minors are prosecuted by Israel each year without a proper trial and are denied family visits.

The findings by Defence for Children International (DCI) come in the wake of revelations from Israeli soldiers and senior commanders that it is “normal procedure” in the West Bank to terrorise Palestinian civilians, including children.

Col Itai Virob, commander of the Kfir Brigade, disclosed last month that to accomplish a mission, “aggressiveness towards every one of the residents in the village is common”. Questioning included slaps, beatings and kickings, he said.

As a result, Gabi Ashkenazi, the head of the armed services, was forced to appear before the Israeli parliament to disavow the behaviour of his soldiers. Beatings were “absolutely prohibited”, he told legislators.

Col Virob made his remarks during court testimony in defence of two soldiers, including his deputy commander, who are accused of beating Palestinians in the village of Qaddum, close to Nablus. One told the court that “soldiers are educated towards aggression in the IDF [army]”.

Col Virob appeared to confirm his observation, saying it was policy to “disturb the balance” of village life during missions and that the vast majority of assaults were “against uninvolved people”.

Last week, further disclosures of ill-treatment of Palestinians, some as young as 14, were aired on Israeli TV, using material collected by dissident soldiers as part of the Breaking the Silence project, which highlights army brutality.

For the rest of the article, please click here.

Israeli PM concedes little in speech- BBC News

Jeremy Bowen, BBC Middle East Editor

The fact that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu felt it necessary to make a speech at all about a Palestinian state shows that American pressure works.

US President Barack Obama has taken every opportunity he can to restate his view that the only chance of Middle Eastern peace lies with the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel.

Had Mr Netanyahu been prepared to concede the principle of some form of statehood for Palestinians after the Israeli elections in February he might have emerged with a centre-right coalition rather than one dominated by the hard right.

But he did not feel he had to until the Americans indicated he should.

The Israeli prime minister's body language suggested that he was doing it under diplomatic duress.

One Israeli journalist observed that he looked like someone vomiting up the words "Palestinian state".

That was because the idea, however hedged around with conditions, is anathema to his ideology.

To see the rest of the article: BBC News

Action Alert: Buffalo News op-ed

The Buffalo News published an editorial by Mitch Albom this morning, which questions if the Islamic world heard Obama's speech in Cairo. The article was written in response to a bombing this past week in Pakistan, which killed 40 Pakistanis in prayer, in their mosque. The author criticizes the whole Islamic worlds response to the incident:

"If something like that happened in America, we’d be talking about it for a year. Yet it happens in Pakistan, and I don’t see Muslim leaders around the world screaming for this to stop. I don’t see Arab world presidents or prime ministers or princes lamenting the bloodshed in speeches that call for an end to the violence.

"In fact, there’s not a whole lot beyond a few condemnations and the head-shaking acceptance that this is the way it is, the way it has been for centuries and the way it will be for the years to come. Eyes for eyes. Teeth for teeth. Murder in the name of God."

This generalized critique of the Islamic world stinks of American exceptionalism and ethnocentrism; exceptionalism in his "not here in America" attitude and ethnocentrism in his latent allusion to Islamic cultural savagery. Meanwhile, Mr. Albom gives Obama the status of a failed savior- the Western missionary who has tried so hard to save the doomed culture of the East; but was simply not listened to. It is this latent ethnocentrism that we must be on guard for.

The article went on to to blast Islamic fundamentalism without equally doing justice to other forms of religious fundamentalism: "Remember, Taliban sympathizers claim they are aligned with the purest and most stringent form of their religion. These aren’t atheists bombing mosques. These are people who consider themselves true believers. So true, they would kill for it." Now, the suicide bombing he was referring to was incredibly unjust, inhumane and disgusting; however, it is unfair to say that religious fundamentalism affects only Islamic society. This is a problem even here in the United States. Only a week ago, a Christian fundamentalist walked into a church and killed a doctor who performed late-term abortions. One conservative commentator appears to have condoned the murder! And in Palestine, Jewish Fundamentalists have for years violently attacked Palestinians. In one memorable case, a Jewish fundamentalist walked into a mosque during early morning prayers and shot over 30 Palestinians dead; this was in Hebron. There is no exception for the West; fundamentalism is an evil that permeates all religions, Western or Eastern.

In summary, Mr. Albom has not appeared to listen to Obama. The U.S. is not at war with Islam. There is no clash of Fundamentalism's; rather, it is only there if you choose to see it. This attitude will prove fatal if we continue to effect change across the Middle East through a modern form of "cultural imperialism." We cannot "bring democracy" to the Middle East; rather, we must work within the culutral attitudes prevalent in the area and listen to what the people want, not what we would like to see. This will bring change.

Renewed Call For an End to House Demolitions in the Jordan River Valley

Amnesty International has reported the demolitions by Israeli authorities of the homes of 18 families in the Jordan River valley, a supposed security zone. The Palestinian families have lived in the area for over sixty years, and are fighting to stay. However, the Israeli authorities are taking increasingly severe measures to evict them-denying them access to water and confiscating their trailers and tractors. And while the Palestinians continue to be harassed, Israeli authorities continue to build up settlements in the very same area. These settlements, which are illegal under international law, continue to grow despite calls by the US president to freeze their growth. Without continued International pressure to stop these house demolitions, the ability of these farmers to resist eviction becomes increasingly more difficult.

Please click the following for more information: Palestinian homes at risk.

UBSJP will be creating a letter for our supporters to sign and send to those Israeli and International authorities who are in a position to act.

Hamas letter to Obama

The following Hamas letter to Obama was sent out to subscribers of the institute for public accuracy listserv.

"As Obama was traveling to Cairo, the Palestinian group Hamas, which won the most recent Palestinian election, sent a letter to President Obama through the feminist peace group CODEPINK, which just had a delegation in Gaza. Here is the text of the letter:"

His Excellency President Barack Obama,
President of the United States of America.
June 3rd 2009
Dear Mr. President,

We welcome your visit to the Arab world and your administration's initiative to bridge differences with the Arab-Muslim world.

One long-standing source of tension between the United States and this part of the world has been the failure to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict.

It is therefore unfortunate that you will not visit Gaza during your trip to the Middle East and that neither your Secretary of State nor George Mitchell have come to hear our point of view.

We have received numerous visits recently from people of widely varied backgrounds: U.S. Congressional representatives, European parliamentarians, the U.N.-appointed Goldstone commission, and grassroots delegations such as those organized by the U.S. peace group CODEPINK.

It is essential for you to visit Gaza. We have recently passed through a brutal 22-day Israeli attack. Amnesty International observed that the death and destruction Gaza suffered during the invasion could not have happened without U.S.-supplied weapons and U.S.-taxpayers money.

Human Rights Watch has documented that the white phosphorus Israel dropped on a school, hospital, United Nations warehouse and civilian neighborhoods in Gaza was manufactured in the United States. Human Rights Watch concluded that Israels use of this white phosphorus was a war crime.

Shouldn't you see first-hand how Israel used your arms and spent your money?

Before becoming president you were a distinguished professor of law. The U.S. government has also said that it wants to foster the rule of law in the Arab-Muslim world.

The International Court of Justice stated in July 2004 that the whole of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem are occupied Palestinian territories designated for Palestinian self-determination, and that the Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are illegal.

Not one of the 15 judges sitting on the highest judicial body in the world dissented from these principles.

The main human rights organizations in the world, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have issued position papers supporting the right of the Palestinian refugees to return and compensation.

Each year in the United Nations General Assembly nearly every country in the world has supported these principles for resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict. Every year the Arab League puts forth a peace proposal based on these principles for resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Leading human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch have also stated that Israels siege of Gaza is a form of collective punishment and therefore illegal under international law.

We in the Hamas Government are committed to pursuing a just resolution to the conflict not in contradiction with the international community and enlightened opinion as expressed in the International Court of Justice, the United Nations General Assembly, and leading human rights organizations. We are prepared to engage all parties on the basis of mutual respect and without preconditions.

However, our constituency needs to see a comprehensive paradigm shift that not only commences with lifting the siege on Gaza and halts all settlement building and expansion but develops into a policy of evenhandedness based on the very international law and norms we are prodded into adhering to.

Again, we welcome you to Gaza which would allow you to see firsthand our ground zero. Furthermore, it would enhance the US position; enabling you to speak with new credibility and authority in dealing with all the parties.

Very Truly Yours,

Dr. Ahmed Yousef
Deputy of the Foreign Affairs Ministry
Former Senior Political Advisor
to Prime Minister Ismael Hanniya

To see the full text of the letter, click here: Institute for Public Accuracy.

News of the Day

News has circled around Obama's speech given yesterday; however, the world keeps turning, even while Obama sleeps. So, for news from the last day: The World Council of Churches is planning to focus on Gaza at a Church week in Bethlehem; the Grand Ole Party has given a grand ole response to Obama's speech-the US is being too evenhanded!; Israeli troops responded proportionately to Palestinian rock throwers-by shooting one of the demonstrators dead; Hamas says Obama's speech was no real change; the World Bank has yet again made clear that the occupation must end; Israeli (oops), Palestinian "security forces" killed Hamas militants in the West Bank; Israeli right wingers didn't like the big man's speech; Hizbullah continues to gain in popularity; Haaretz editorials continue to be wise; settlers have now named an outpost after Obama; Palestinians resist, yet again, efforts to stamp out their culture; and uhh...here are some more opinions on everything:

Ali Abunimah--Obama in Cairo:a Bush in sheep's clothing

David Ignatius: To make peace, Obama will have to make serious enemies

Stephen M. Walt (Why the middle initial, Steve?): Is the Israel Lobby getting weaker?

Obama's Speech in Cairo

President Obama gave today what many have said is a critical speech to the Muslim World. Commentators on US television have debated back and forth what he should say, how he should say it and why he should say it. There has been much anticipation, and Obama, yet again, has seemed to carry through. He quoted the Koran, he praised the history of the Islam world, and he managed to not anger any particular group--a very "even-handed" speech. Read the speech here.

Most striking in Obama's speech, however, was his recognition of Palestinian suffering and the concept of "Palestine." To quote directly from his speech:

"On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people -- Muslims and Christians -- have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they've endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations -- large and small -- that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: The situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. And America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own."

It remains to be seen if Obama will follow through on his promise to end the "intolerable" suffering of the Palestinian people; however, I am here to support him in any efforts to do so. Obama was not without critique, however, of both sides.

Obama reestablished the strong U.S. connection to Israel as "unbreakable"; however, he seemed willing to put pressure on Israel and criticize the governments unacceptable actions in relation to the occupation:

"And Israel must also live up to its obligation to ensure that Palestinians can live and work and develop their society. Just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be a critical part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress."

It would be surprising, to see any concrete action to stop Palestinian suffering in Gaza, though. There is already support building in Congress (as usual emanating from AIPAC)to oppose Obama's strong policies on a settlement freeze and any efforts that resemble support for Hamas (an end to the siege) would encounter unbearable opposition. And so goes the discussion in the US congress; however, I applaud the Presidents efforts to place America's interest in the conflict, ahead of Israels. This is change I can believe in.

Obama critiqued, as well, the Palestinians for using violence to achieve their means:

"Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and it does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign neither of courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That's not how moral authority is claimed; that's how it is surrendered."

In this regard, Obama's words hold great standing. Violence is not the answer.

I have been unfailing in my praise for President Obama's words; however, it is what he did not say about the conflict that I criticize. The word violence was attributed to Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims; but never once to America, never once to Israel. There was no criticism of Israeli violence against Palestinians; no change to the one-sided rhetoric that Palestinians must stop their violence; no change to the rhetoric that America is unsullied in its conduct of war in Iraq, and in Afghanistan; no apology for the lives past US diplomacy has taken. There were only demands for a stop to Middle Eastern, to Arab, violence. Am I asking too much that a President denounce his own countries previous (and current) actions in the Middle East? Maybe. Am I asking too much when I demand that he, at least, recognize the undiscerning Israeli attacks in Gaza? No.

President Obama, next time you make a speech about the Israel/Palestine conflict, I demand from you something. That you not only talk about the Palestinian and Israeli obligations, and their mutual suffering; but that you clearly attribute blame to Israel for the suffering and death of thousands of Palestinians.

For more information about his speech, see the reports in: Reuters, CNN, Al Jazeera.

News of the Day

There were many noteworthy articles of interest today: signs that Congress is preparing to fight Obama on his Middle East Policy; Israeli FM Avigdor Lieberman's pronouncement that Israel would not bomb Iran; the much-anticipated Obama speech in Cairo; worrying signs of increasing intra-Palestinian violence; the removal of .33% of Israeli West Bank roadblocks; however, least covered was the increasing settler violence amidst Israeli moves to close illegal West Bank outposts.

In the last several days, settlers have taken responsibility for numerous attacks upon both Palestinian civilians and IDF troops. The unwarranted attacks have consisted mainly of rock-throwing and blocking of roads. In one noteworthy incident, settlers set aflame several Palestinian fields in the northern West Bank. They subsequently left oil and nails along access roads to impede Palestinian firetrucks trying to put out the fires. These violent settler outbursts are in response to increasing Israeli government efforts to close illegal West Bank outposts. These outposts are typically manned by the most ardent of settlers, who believe it is sacred land. In a statement to reporters, a settler group said the attacks were "the price for harming our sacred land." Most exceptionally, the Israeli government has so far taken little action on illegal outposts; however, the government of Israel is expected to further broaden crackdowns on illegal outposts in repsonse to U.S. pressure. It is expected, of course, that this will result in only increased violence. Stay tuned.

And for a good editorial on why Obama should visit Gaza, see Benjamin at electronic intifada: Obama should visit Gaza.

Obama, Israel, and Settlements

The following two articles highlight the Presidents new objective to freeze Israeli settlement growth. Obama has stated that freezing settlements is one of his top priorities and necessary if there is to be a peace agreement. He also appears ready to pressure Israel to accomplish his objectives. This is a significant change from Bush 43, who acquiesced to virtually all Israeli demands and tacitly supported "natural growth" in settlements. A battle between Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Obama appears to be brewing, as Netanyahu and his government has adamantly opposed a full settlement freeze.

Obama Talks of Being 'Honest' With Israel
By: Helene Cooper

Published: June 1, 2009
New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Obama indicated on Monday that he would be more willing to criticize Israel than previous administrations have been, and he reiterated his call for a freeze of Israeli settlements.

“Part of being a good friend is being honest,” Mr. Obama said in an interview with NPR News. “And I think there have been times where we are not as honest as we should be about the fact that the current direction, the current trajectory, in the region is profoundly negative, not only for Israeli interests but also U.S. interests.

“We do have to retain a constant belief in the possibilities of negotiations that will lead to peace,” he added. “I’ve said that a freeze on settlements is part of that.”

To see the rest of the article: New York Times

Israeli Minister's Visit Aims to Calm Settlements Dispute
By: Glenn Kessler
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Washington Post

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak began a round of meetings with top U.S. officials yesterday in a bid to head off an increasingly sharp dispute between the United States and Israel over the expansion of Jewish settlements in Palestinian territory.

To see the rest of the article: Washington Post

No Electricity in Gaza

Living without electricity this week (the prior tenant at my apartment was disinclined to pay the electricity bill) has reminded me of what life must be like for the Palestinians living in Gaza. I have no ability to refrigerate or freeze products, I have no hot water, no television, no internet, no DVD's, no ability to charge my cellphone, and of course, no lights! My house is a mess as I just moved in; yet, as I work during the day, I can never clean it, since it is dark by the time I get home. Yet, my miseries are nothing compared to those Palestinians living in Gaza without any electricity, clean water, or even basic foodstuffs.

The lack of energy for Gaza (fuel and electricity could be used to manufacture rockets...) has left Palestinians jobless, as industry has collapsed under the weight of a crippling Israeli siege. The daily life of a Gazan is centered on the basics: waiting in line for bread, building a new home or outfitting the UNRWA supplied tent, taking care of the kids, and maybe working, if work can be found. There is no ability to cross the border one mile away and work in Israel. If blessed enough to own a field, it is often at serious risk that one farm it. Those same fields are under constant Israeli attention and farmers have consistently been subject to attack. But, back to life without electricity. During the January offensive, it was often noted in Western media that Israel was acting in a humane way--they alerted Palestinians with flyers and text messages to leave their homes. Not only was there no place to flee to (the gaza strip is the size of two D.C.'s), without electricity how does one charge a phone to receive a text message!??! Furthermore, there are the hospitals and the medical care- having power in a hospital less than 24hrs a days is unacceptable. It should be noted that Israel controls electricity for Gaza, as well as the fuel to run generators and electric plants based in Gaza. Limiting energy going to Gaza is collective punishment and under humanitarian law, an occupying power may not collectively punish the occupied for the resistance of a few. If one makes the argument that Gaza is not occupied, ask oneself: does controlling electricity, water, food, borders, airspace, radio waves, sewage, and coastal waters equal occupation? I believe the only answer is yes. End the siege on Gaza.

List other effects of life without electricity below...