|
|
Dec. 23, 2013
Daily summary - Monday, December 23, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main News
MAAN REVEALS ABU MAZEN’S POSITIONS ON A SOLUTION…WRITTEN FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT BY END OF THE MONTH
Ambassador Mohammed Sbeih, secretary general for Palestinian affairs in the Arab League, told Maan yesterday that US Secretary of State John Kerry would present a written framework agreement by the end of the month to the Palestinian and Israeli sides. He said President Abbas told the Arab ministerial meeting yesterday that as soon as he received the American offer, he would not respond but would first take it to the Arabs to make a joint decision.
Sbeih said Abu Mazen’s positions on the issues pertaining to a settlement are the following:
- He would not accept the presence of one Israeli soldier at the borders.
- He rejects a demilitarized state, saying he would not enter into a race for arms but that he wants to maintain his state’s security.
- He agrees to the premise that an Israeli withdrawal from the Palestinian territories would take three years based on agreed upon timeframes, similar to Sinai.
- He refuses to be given a ‘neighborhood’ in so-called Greater Jerusalem as the capital of the Palestinian state, saying there is no alternative to East Jerusalem as the capital.
- He rejects any temporary solution, saying the solution must be comprehensive.
- He accepts a land swap of equal size and value.
- Abu Mazen does not accept any official Israeli presence in the Jordan Valley but would accept a third party.
Abu Sbeih also said that Abu Mazen told the Arab ministers that the Americans informed them that at the end of the peace process, the Palestinians would be given an area equal to the West Bank and Gaza. He also said that the Arab ministers sent an urgent letter to Kerry specifying the Arab’s vision of the peace process, which is a full Israeli withdrawal from lands occupied in 1967, with equal land swaps. (http://maannews.net/arb/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=659203)
ARAB LEAUGE SOURCES: EARLY SIGNS OF A FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT; MALKI: WASHINGTON HAS NOT PUT FORTH ANYTHING OFFICIAL
Minister for foreign affairs, Riyad Al Mali said yesterday that the American administration had not yet offered anything official to the Palestinians or anyone else that outlined Washington’s stance on the negotiations. “That is why the Palestinians cannot say if they reject or accept the American proposal,” he clarified. He did say however, that there was talk about Kerry presenting something by the end of next month or in February.
The Arab ministerial meeting that convened yesterday, meanwhile, ended with the affirmation of several points, including:laying down a comprehensive strategy that reflects the rights of the Palestinians on Jerusalem, borders, water, the refugees and the prisoner issue, in addition to Israel’s withdrawal to the 1967 borders. They also include Israel halting its attacks on Jerusalem and linking tangible progress in the negotiations with the unity of the Palestinian position and an agreement over the approach and goal of joint action. (Al Quds)
PALESTINIAN FACTIONS CRITICIZE ARAB LEAGUE; ACCUSE IT OF “SUBORDINATION” TO WASHINGTON AND ‘PRESSURE ON THEM” TO ACCEPT KERRY’S PROPOSALS
Hamas called on the Arab League not to put pressure on the Palestinians in terms of accepting American peace proposals; rather, it called on the League to support the Palestinian people and their rights. Meanwhile, Palestinian factions continued to criticize the negotiating process, expressing their rejection of Secretary Kerry’s proposals. The PFLP accused theArab League of ‘pressuring the Palestinians to give concessions. Hamas official Yousef Rizqa said that Kerry’s proposals “don’t meet the demands of the Palestinian people but harm their rights; they turn the occupation into a standardized occupation by way of political agreements with witnesses. (http://www.alquds.co.uk/?p=116335)
MAA’YAH: ISRAEL REFUSES ENTRY TO ARAB MINISTERS TO ATTEND CHRISTMAS CELEBRATIONS
Tourism minister RulaMaa’yah said yesterday that Israel has barred the entry of Arab tourism ministers planning to come to Palestine to attend Christmas celebrations. Maa’ayah said Israel refused to grant entry permits to give Arab ministers who were planning to arrive today in order to attend midnight mass and other Christmas celebrations. She said the move was a further Israeli attempt to undermine the pillars of Palestinian institutions, in this case the tourism sector. She did say, however, that President Abbas, Jordanian foreign minister Nasser Joudeh, the Romanian foreign minister and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton would attend midnight mass in Bethlehem. (http://maannews.net/arb/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=659221)
ISRAELI MILITARY ORDER BARS ENTRY OF ISRAELI ‘TAA’YUSH’ ACTIVISTS INTO THE WEST BANK
According to the Hebrew-language daily Haaretz yesterday, Israeli soldiers barred the entry of Ta’ayush, an Israeli leftist group, from entering the West Bank. According to the newspaper, the ban order came from the so-called Etzion commander, even though Ta’ayush activists come to the West Bank every Saturday to help farmers and shepherds in the southern West Bank and prevent harassment by settlers. After being stopped at the ‘tunnel” checkpoint and told of the order, the activists attempted to get down and walk, taking a Palestinian taxi on the other side. Israeli soldiers confiscated the keys to the taxi and only returned them when the Israeli activists got back out. Three of the 10 activists were still able to get past the soldiers and reach their destination. (Al Hayat Al Jadida)
ISRAEL: ARREST OF THREE PALESTINIANS WHO TRIED TO STAB POLICEMEN IN EAST JERUSALEM
Israeli police claimed last night that it has foiled an attempt by three Palestinians to stab a group of policemen at the Khan Al Ahmar checkpoint in East Jerusalem. According to Israeli sources, the Palestinians who were in a taxi, got off at the checkpoint and approached the policemen; one was carrying a knife. All three were arrested. (http://maannews.net/arb/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=659233)
EXPLOSION IN ISRAELI BUS NEAR TEL AVIV; NO INJURIES; ISRAEL SAYS IT DOES NOT ‘RULE OUT HAMAS”
Israeli police say a bomb they believe was placed by Palestinian activists blew up on a bus after passengers got off near Tel Aviv yesterday; no injuries were reported. According to the Israeli news website Ynet, the Dan bus company spokesperson said that the bus was carrying around 12 passengers when he was informed of a suspicious handbag on the back seat. He ordered everyone off the bus immediately. The incident took place in Bet Yam, a Tel Aviv suburb. Israeli government officials are calling it a “terrorist’ attack. No party took responsibility for the attack, which is the first of its kind since the resumption of peace talks. (Al Hayat Al Jadida). In related news, Israeli police also said another suspicious object was found last night on a bus in Jaffa. Preliminary reports said it was most likely a school bag that got left behind (Al Ayyam)
Meanwhile, Israeli security sources told Israel’s Channel 10 last night that it did not rule out the possibility that Hamas was behind the Tel Aviv bombing. (http://safa.ps/details/news/118754/مصادر-إسرائيلية-لا-تستبعد-وقوف-حماس-خلف-عملية-تل-أبيب.html)
SOURCE: HAMDALLAH IS HOLDING TALKS AHEAD OF A CABINET RESHUFFLE
An unidentified source from the Nablus area told Al Hayat Al Jadida yesterday that Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah was holding contacts with certain Palestinian figures ahead of carrying out a reshuffle in the cabinet. The source, who was also summoned for this purpose but who did not want to give their name, said the reshuffle is expected to be conducted within the next two weeks. The source said they did not think the reshuffle would include the foreign, finance or interior ministries, saying the PM aimed at upgrading citizen services through this reshuffle and bringing new blood into the government (Al Hayat Al Jadida)
DOZENS OF SETTLERS BREAK INTO THE AQSA MOSQUE; JEWISH DECREES TO “ASCEND THE TEMPLE MOUNT”
Around 53 Jewish settlers broke into the Aqsa Mosque Compound yesterday over two shifts under tight Israeli security. According to the Aqsa Institute for Waqf and Heritage, a group of Haradim rabbis have recently issued religious decrees calling for a break in to the Aqsa and for ‘ascending to the Temple Mount” (Al Ayyam)
ISRAELI CONCERN OVER ESCALATION IN GAZA; ASSESSMENTS POINT TO INCREASED ESCALATION BECAUSE OF TIGHTENED SIEGE
The Israeli army expressed its concern yesterday over the growing security incidents in the Gaza Strip, saying they feared the situation would only escalate. In a report published by the Hebrew-language website Walla yesterday, it said five incidents had been reported at the border fence with Gaza this week alone, adding that Hamas was having a hard time imposing calm in light of the financial crisis. The report said this fast increase of attacks expresses the army’s fear more escalation at the southern front and a breach of the status quo. The army said that the growing financial crisis or the Egyptian isolation have raised the level of frustration and desperation among Palestinian elements and the people of Gaza overall, saying that Egypt’s siege has pushed the people further, adding that Egypt has made the decision to paralyze Hamas, adding to the frustration (Al Ayyam)
TODAY, JERUSALEMITE PRISONER SAMER ISSAWI TASTES FREEDOM
Jerusalemite prisoner SamerIssawi is scheduled to be released from Israeli prison today after waging the longest ever hunger strike and coming out a victor. Essawie was arrested after spending 10 years In jail and then being released in a prisoner swap in 2011. He was rearrested in 2012 and began his hunger strike in August of that same year in protest of his arbitrary arrest. He remained on hunger strike for nine months, the longest strike in history. Today he will be released back to his home in Essawiyeh in East Jerusalem. Palestinian organizations and residents have prepared a hero’s welcome for Issawi, hanging pictures of Samer on the streets of the town along with Palestinian flags. A huge festival will be held in the courtyard of a school in Essawiyeh after his release (Al Ayyam)
JERUSALEM: ISRAELI OCCUPATION FORCES RAID HOME OF SAMER ISSAWI FOR THIRD TIME IN TWO DAYS
Israeli occupation forces raided this morning, the home of SamerIssawi in the town of Essawiyeh in East Jerusalem, handing his father a summons to appear before the Israeli intelligence services at the Russian Compound, just hours before his son’s release. Samer’s sister Shirine, said that the raid on their home was the third time in two days and her father’s second summons. The army told her father that there would could be no celebrations or armed shows in celebration of Samer’s released. Shirine said the village was still preparing to celebrate. (http://qudsnet.com/news/View/260770/القدسالاحتلال-يقتحم-منزل-الاسير-سامر-العيساوي-للمرة-الثالثة-خلال-يومين/)
ARRESTS IN HEBRON; DEMOLITION NOTICES FOR HOMES IN THE JORDAN VALLEY
Israeli occupation forces stormed the Quds University in Abu Dis yesterday, shooting dozens of teargas canisters towards students while they took their final exams. A statement by the university said several students suffered teargas inhalation and the windows of a number of cars were broken during the raid.
In Hebron, Israeli forces arrested three men after searching and vandalizing their homes: MuhannadNayrukh, Mas’aabTalahmeh and Mohammed Muhtasib.
Also, Israeli forces handed orders to three families to demolish their homes within a week in the hamlet of Farsiyeh in the Jordan Valley. (Al Quds)
HAMAS APOLOGIZES FOR A ROCKET FIRED INTO EGYPTIAN WATERS
An Egyptian security source said Hamas officially apologized to Egyptian authorities for a rocket falling in Egyptian regional waters. Last night, an Egyptian security source announced that a rocket had fallen into its waters. According to the source, the rocket originated from the Gaza Strip. (http://qudsnet.com/news/View/260749/حماس-تعتذر-عن-سقوط-صاروخ-في-المياه-المصرية/)
|
Headlines
HEADLINES_________________________________________________
*Major settlement activity in Ariel (Al Quds)
*Three Palestinian university students die from asphyxiation in Amman (Al Quds)
*Israeli flags occupy Old City walls in Jerusalem (Al Ayyam)
*Physician’s union wait for incentives draft law; protests over health ministry decisions on doctors (Al Ayyam)
*Netanyahu seeks to slow down improved relations between Iran and the US by upping his demands (Al Ayyam)
*Tomorrow, Israel to open first train station fortified against rockets, in Sderot(Al Ayyam)
*President caps off official visit to Egypt (Al Hayat Al Jadida)
*Israel apologizes to Washington for sale of cooling system technology for missiles to China (Al Hayat Al Jadida)
*Rights group: Israeli violations in Gaza are war crimes (Al Hayat Al Jadida)
|
Front Page Photos
Al- Quds:Tel Aviv: Israeli bus on which bomb exploded
Al-Ayyam:Tel Aviv: Israeli explosives expert checks bus after exploded bomb
Al Hayat Al Jadida:1) bus on which bomb exploded in Bet Yam near Tel Aviv; 2) Christians visit the Nativity Church ahead of Christmas celebrations
|
Voice of Palestine News
Jerusalem: I will start with preparations in Issaweyah since last night for the release of Samer Issawy today. Preparations began late last night and continue until this moment. Despite of the occupation’s warning for Samer’s father and his brother Medhat, to not hold any celebrations, but Issawy family insists on holding celebrations for his release. It is expected that the occupation authorities will try to spoil the celebrations in Issaweyah maybe by releasing Samer in a late hour as happened with his brother Medhat.
The Likud party decided on its meeting to allow Jews to pray in Al-Aqsa, at a time when it was revealed that the High rabbinate council decided to joint extreme Jewish groups and call for enforcing new reality in Al-Aqsa by dividing it between Muslims and Jews. In this regards, Rabbis visited Al-Buraq yard to check the so-called Temple and the golden Menorah set in front of LA-Aqsa.
Tens of extreme Jews stormed Al-Aqsa yesterday under Israeli police protection; we expect that these raids will continue today.
Inside 1948:
Q: Can you tell us more about the explosion of an explosive device in a bus in Tel-Aviv?
Israel is holding Fateh responsible for the incident according to Israeli analyst; this is still not an official position, but the position of most analysts, saying that the PA did not say a word about the incident, so did Fateh. Analysts say that this is a result of Fateh moving towards armed struggle. This is at least what is being said by Israeli analyst. Official sources say that the explosive device exploded in a bus in Bat Yam, near Tel Aviv, while the bus was empty after the driver asked everyone to leave the bus when realizing the device. Israeli president Peres called the driver and praised his behavior. The most important issue is talks about Israel’s fear in going back to the scenes of attacks inside Israel.
|
Voice of Palestine Interviews
** Naser Qous, Director of the Prisoners’ Club in Jerusalem, on the release of Samer Issawy.
Q: How are preparations going to receive Samer Issawy?
Preparations are very intense, but the occupation is trying to spoil any celebration. This morning the occupation summoned Samer’s father and issue an order for not showing any celebration signs in Issaweyah, and that police chief can close the entrance to Issaweyah at any moment, kike what is happening right now.
Q: Is there already a set time for Samer’s release or he will be released in the late night hours?
Yesterday, the decision was to release Samer today but we don’t know when or where from, no one knows, we are waiting at any moment, we will be waiting and will celebrate with Samer his release.
** Issam Baker, coordinator of Ramallah and Al-Bireh activities, on calls to receive Kerry in Ramallah and Al-Bireh with demonstrations against a framework agreement.
Q: you called for demonstrations, when will it take place?
We had a meeting yesterday to discuss the dangers of the US plan to put forwards proposals, we decided that Kerry’s visit will be received with popular demonstration to show that our people insists on its positions and national rights. The leadership rejects all pressures but there are a lot of pressures on the leadership, so these demonstrations come to announce the importance of continuing to reject such proposals that will lead to concessions on such rights.
Q: Why this visit, Kerry is visiting always?
Until now we still don’t know when Kerry’s visit will take place, but we know that this time Kerry will have 150 people joining him, and he announced that he will present a framework agreement during this visit…
Q: Excuse me, did you see this agreement?
No, I’m talking about what is being reported in the media, and through pressures being imposed on the leadership to pass such an agreement, and the Economic peace… the American envoy met three times last week with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu…
Q: Mr. Issam, let us be rational, you are calling for demonstration against Kerry’s visit and a framework agreement, let us say that Kerry arrives and no agreement is signed?
Even so, we are very rational; we are talking about evidences of the American role against our people and our leadership…
Q: So it is a demonstration rejecting the American policy?
Yes, of course, but there are some news almost official about enforcing signing a framework agreement, we know this is a right wing government, we will continue with our struggle, without agreeing to any concessions on these rights. Rationality says my friend, that the current negotiations are between Israel and the American administration, and the Palestinian should agree on what they agree to.
** Dr. Saeb Erekat, member of the PLO Executive Committee.
Q: We understand that you are in Qatar, can you tell us why?
Yes I’m in Qatar for some meetings to strengthen the bilateral relations with Qatar, and discuss some files with our Qatari brothers, with regards to different issues, including negotiations, Gaza etc…
Q: With regards to the Arab Foreign Ministers meeting, and discussing the negotiations?
The meeting led to full support for the Palestinian position, and a written letter to Minister Kerry and permanent members of the Security Council, affirming that the Arab position is the same as the Palestinian position, regarding the 1967 borders, solving the refugees issue, settlement and the release of Palestinian prisoners etc… we had a full Arab support and we praise this support. Now we say a lot of attempts to check how the Palestinians will react if… for example this who story about a written American plan that will be presented by Kerry, this is not true, Kerry came and met with Abu Mazen, ideas were presented, but they did not present any agreement at all, it is needed now that the world understand that President Abbas sent a clear letter to Obama, and that the Arab League sent a clear letter to also, reaffirming what was agreed in previous Arab League summits. Also, a lot has been said, that I said we might extend the negotiations period, this is nonsense! This is not true.
Q: I have two headlines, “Erekat agrees for extending negotiations” and “Erekat: we reject extending negotiations”, so this is not clear.
It should be clear, we agreed on nine month to reach an agreement, and we said that we will not extend even for one day, since we agreed not to approach the UN during this period to release the prisoners, so extending is rejected, since it is our right if Israel refused to reach an agreement to approach international organizations for membership, so this was all nonsense, I said that if we reach an agreement on all final issues we might continue discussing details, but we never mentioned a framework agreement at all. I don’t know how said framework agreement, the important issue for us here is to reach a comprehensive agreement dealing with all final status issues.
Q: With regards to the framework agreement, some say that you said you will sing on such an agreement and some quoted you saying that you won’t, today we know that demonstrations will take place against signing such an agreement, and I hear from you that until now there is no such an agreement.
There is no agreement!
Q: So we will have demonstration in Ramallah against a framework agreement while there is no agreement?
There is nothing, there is no agreement on any kind of agreement.
Q: So why you don’t tell the Palestinian citizens what is going on in the negotiations?
This is what I’m doing with you now, we are very clear, the President is very clear, but there are some who would like to make an issue out of anything. We refuse any extension, we seek a comprehensive agreement, we reject any interim agreements, and this is the only truth.
Q: When would Kerry visit again?
We don’t know yet.
|
More Headlines
Three Palestinian university students die from asphyxiation in Amman
Three Palestinian students from the University of Jordan died on Saturday night, in their apartment in the Jbeiha neighborhood in Amman. Jordanian officials said the three young men – Abdallah Saleem Matar, Majdi Shanti and Oday Baraka, are all from the Gaza Strip. The sources said the three died after suffocating from a gas leak inside their apartment. (Al Ayyam)
Rights group: Israeli violations in Gaza considered war crimes
The Palestinian Center for Human Rights said yesterday that it was ‘deeply concerned” with the Israeli army’s use of ‘excessive force” after shooting a Palestinian man on Friday, resulting in his death. The Center, which is in the Gaza Strip, said that army killed Odeh Hamad, 27 and wounded his brother Raddad, 22, while they were collecting metal scraps at a dumpsite near the border strip between Gaza and Israel in Beit Hanoun. The center said in a statement that the army used ‘excessive force” and shot them at point blank range even though they were civilians and only collecting metal and plastic scraps from the junkyard. The center cited another incident on Friday when the army opened fire at three Palestinians near Jabaliya in response to rock throwing. The statement said that ‘they viewed these incidents with the utmost seriousness” saying these violations were ‘war crimes.” (Al Hayat Al Jadida)
Israeli occupation forces arrest seven youths in Tulkarm and Jenin
Israeli occupation forces arrested this morning five youths from Anabta after storming their homes. The five were identified as: Samer Awartani, 23, Saber Abu Asal 20, Khaleel Abu Raya 20, Hani Makhlouf, 24 and Oday Obeid 19. In Jenin, Israeli troops also arrested two men: Waseem Awartani , and in the neighboring village of Sanur, Najeh Habaybeh was also arrested. (http://maannews.net/arb/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=659293)
Israeli authorities release prisoner went was on hunger strike for 130 days
Israeli occupation forces released last night Ayman Hamdan, 32 from Bethlehem after he spent 15 months in administrative detention and waged a 130-day hunger strike. Hamdan was released late last night from the Ofer Prison near Ramallah. (http://safa.ps/details/news/118771/الاحتلال-يفرج-عن-أسير-أضرب-130يومًا.html)
|
Arab Press
No peace without a Palestinian state
By HASSAN BARARI
Many observers, Arabs included, think that Israel has some legitimate security demands. But not all agree on the course adopted by successive Israeli governments, which only perpetuates the Israeli presence in the Palestinians territories.
A few days ago, David Brooks from the New York Times wrote, “Israel is caught in a tragic situation. It’s surrounded by an Arab world that is largely hostile to its existence. No Arab leader has enough legitimacy to make peace. It is in a region marked by failed states, decentered radical Islam and rampant turmoil.”
If one takes this characterization at face value, then he or she will not understand how to mitigate the situation and create the conditions for peace in the region. What escaped David Brooks is the fact that we had in the past three Arab leaders who tried to make peace amid similar political environment. President Sadat of Egypt and King Hussein of Jordan signed and upheld peace treaties with Israel. Arafat tried but he was not given enough to end the state of war between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Meanwhile, successive Israeli governments never put a cap on settlement activities thus sending a clear message to the Arabs that Israeli leaders have only been paying a lip service to the notion of the two-state solution.
Brooks points out to an interesting book written by a renowned Israeli journalist Ari Shavit of Haaretz. In his book, “My Promised Land,” Shavit writes, “If Israel does not retreat from the West Bank, it will be politically and morally doomed, but if it does retreat, it might face an Iranian-backed and Islamic Brotherhood-inspired West Bank regime whose missiles could endanger Israel’s security. The need to end occupation is greater than ever, but so are the risks.” According to David Brooks, this is a tragic situation with which the Israeli leaders should grapple.
There is one notion on the part of many American intellectuals and politicians that sums up the American official reading of the Arab-Israel conflict. Ideology aside, the vast majority of American politicians seem to be interested in only ensuring Israel’s security. The American administration position boils down to this vital issue. The problem with this simplistic notion is that it does not distinguish between the security and survival of Israel and the latter’s expansion at the expense of the Palestinians land.
Some American observers criticize the American approach to the peace process and indirectly blame the American naïve position for the perpetuation of the conflict. In his gripping book “The Much Too Promised Land,” Aaron David Miller accuses the American peace team of being “Israeli Lawyers.” Just for the record, Aaron David Miller was part of the very peace team he criticizes.
The point that Brooks and others should think of is that for Israel to enjoy peace, it should give up Palestinian land and allows the Palestinians to establish their own independent and viable state. Short of doing that, Israeli will always be caught in a tragic situation.
More often than not, the American presidents try to force the Palestinians to conform to Israeli positions. When they fail, they blame the Palestinian leaders. President Clinton just did that! But no American president reminds the Israeli that the root cause of the conflict is occupation and putting an end to the occupation is the prerequisite for lasting peace with the Palestinians. In fact, the ineffectiveness of the American administrations to pressure Israel has made it pretty difficult for moderate political forces in Israel to challenge the rightwing position that has dominated Israeli politics for almost 13 years. Worse, Israel may soon contend with a different tragic situation if the notion of two-state solution becomes impractical.
The logical conclusion of Ari Shavit’s book is different from what Brooks wants us to see. Shavit warns against the one-state solution in which Israeli will lose its demographic superiority in a decade to come. In this case, a bi-national Greater Israel will lose its Jewish character. For Zionists, this will be an anathema that should be fought tooth and nail. To avoid this grim scenario, Israel is better off to take the risk of peace. In his memoires published in 1979, Rabin wrote, “There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the risks of peace are preferable by far to the grim certainties that await every nation in war.”(http://www.arabnews.com/news/497016)
Is BDS' campaign against Israel reaching a turning point?
By Omar Barghouti
The movement calling for the boycott, divestiture and sanction of Israel is gaining momentum globally.
At the height of its military - particularly nuclear - and economic power, Israel is feeling uncharacteristically vulnerable; but this time the threat is ironically coming from a nonviolent movement anchored in international law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Last June, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu effectively declared the Palestinian-led global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement a "strategic threat" to Israel's regime of occupation, colonization and apartheid by deciding to assign the overall responsibility for fighting against the BDS to the ministry of strategic affairs.
This dramatic shift reflects the failure of Israel's well-oiled "Brand Israel" campaign, run by the foreign ministry since BDS was launched in 2005, which sees culture as a propaganda tool and whose logic is to use Israeli artists and writers to show the world "Israel's prettier face".
The realization by many people of conscience around the world that Israel's impunity can be brought to an end only through popular internal resistance coupled with effective, morally-consistent and sustained international pressure and accountability, has given great impetus to BDS campaigns. Israel's brutal and illegal blockade of Gaza; its untamed construction of illegal settlements and a separation wall in the occupied West Bank; its "strategy of Judaization" in Jerusalem, the Galilee, the Jordan Valley and the Naqab (Negev), as a ranking UN official reports; its adoption of new racist laws; and its denial of the rights of refugees, have all alienated many of its hitherto supporters.
... A South Africa moment is being reached by the BDS movement.
BDS' successes in the last couple of years may be the factor that has rattled the Israeli regime. The African National Congress' endorsement of the movement in December 2012; support for BDS and the cancellation of events by world-renowned artists and music bands; the decision by the world's leading scientist, Stephen Hawking, to respect the boycott and cancel his participation in a Hebrew University conference; and the recent spate of boycott resolutions by US academic associations, have all contributed to the analysis that a South Africa moment is being reached by the BDS movement.
But Israel's standing in world public opinion has been eroding for quite some time now, due to two main factors: The moral power of the global BDS movement, including its crucial anti-colonial Israeli component, and Israel's political shift to the far right. A 2013 BBC poll shows Israel competing with North Korea as the third or fourth worst-perceived country in the world in the opinion of large majorities in Europe and elsewhere.
What is BDS?
The BDS call was launched on July 9, 2005 by an alliance of more than 170 Palestinian parties, trade unions, refugee networks, NGOs and grassroots associations calling on international civil society organizations and people of conscience to "impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era".
Specifically, BDS calls for an end to Israel's occupation of Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including dismantling the wall and colonies; an end to Israel's system of racial discrimination against its Palestinian citizens; and the UN-sanctioned and inherent right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes of origin.
These three basic rights correspond to the three main components of the Palestinian people: those in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem (38 percent of the Palestinian people, according to 2011 statistics), those in the 1948 territory who live under Israeli apartheid (12 percent), and those in exile (50 percent). More than two-thirds of Palestinians are refugees or internally displaced persons.
Soft power at work
Figures with the public profile and influence of Desmond Tutu, Roger Waters, Naomi Klein, Alice Walker, Judith Butler, John Berger, Ken Loach, Angela Davis, Arundhati Roy, Marcel Khalife and Aijaz Ahmed have reached the conclusion that, as in the struggle against South African apartheid, BDS is crucially needed to compel Israel to comply with its obligations under international law.
By appealing to people of conscience around the world to help end Israel's three-tiered system of oppression, the BDS movement is not asking for anything heroic, but for fulfilling a profound moral obligation to desist from complicity in oppression. Given the billions of dollars lavished on Israel annually by Western states, particularly the US and Germany, and the lucrative military trade with Israel, taxpayers in those countries are in effect subsidizing Israel's violations of international law at a time when domestic social programs are undergoing severe cuts, unemployment is rising, and the environment is being devastated. Ending complicity in Israeli crimes is not just good for the Palestinians, it is certainly good for the "99 percent" around the world struggling for social and economic justice and against perpetual war.
Building on its global ascendancy, the BDS movement - led by the largest coalition in Palestinian civil society, the BDS National Committee (BNC) - is spreading across the world, scoring significant victories.
Just a few days ago, the American Studies Association adopted the academic boycott of Israel with a stunning 2:1 support ratio in its general membership. In April, the Association for Asian-American Studies became the first academic body in the US to adopt the academic boycott of Israel. Around the same time, the Federation of French-Speaking Belgian Students (FEF), representing 100,000 members, adopted the boycott of Israeli academic institutions, and so did the Teachers Union of Ireland. In March 2011, the University of Johannesburg severed links with Ben Gurion University over human rights violations.
Student councils at several North American universities, including the University of California, Berkeley, adopted divestment from companies profiting from Israel's occupation.
Israel's violent repression, ethnic cleansing and siege against the Palestinians is escalating, but the fact that the global BDS movement is winning the battle for hearts and minds across the world gives us hope that we shall overcome.
The list goes on and on
Support for BDS came from major international trade union federations with millions of members in South Africa, Britain, Ireland, India, Brazil, Norway, Canada, Italy, France, Belgium, and Turkey, among others.
Veolia, a corporation complicit in Israel's occupation, has lost or had to withdraw bids for contracts worth billions of dollars, mainly in Sweden, the UK, Ireland and now the US.
G4S, the largest security company in the world, is experiencing major symbolic defeats due to BDS activism in Norway, South Africa, the European Parliament, several British universities, and elsewhere as a result of its involvement in Israeli prisons, where Palestinian prisoners, including children, are tortured, and in several projects that violate international law. Admitting the damage BDS campaigns have done to its reputation, G4S is already promising to phase out its involvement in Israel's violations of international law.
The British Co-op supermarket chain, the fifth largest in the UK, has adopted a policy of boycotting companies operating in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
The United Methodist Church last year called for a boycott of products from Israel's colonies, and so did the Presbyterian Church USA and the United Church of Canada. The Mennonite Church USA went even further by deciding not to invest in any company involved in the Israeli occupation.
The Dutch government has publicly "discouraged" [Du] Dutch companies from doing business with Israeli entities in the OPT, leading the largest Dutch construction company, Royal Haskoning DHV, to withdraw from a sewage treatment project with Israeli municipality in occupied East Jerusalem. In the same context, the publicly-owned Dutch water company Vitens, has also terminated a contract with the Israeli national water company, Mekorot.
In the same vein, the British government has issued guidance on business involvement with illegal Israeli settlements. These steps follow the publication of EU guidelines against funding Israeli projects and entities in Palestinian territories.
Deutsche Bahn, a German government-controlled rail company, pulled out of an Israeli project encroaching on occupied Palestinian land, and German foreign ministry officials informed Palestinian civil society representatives that they have advised all German academic institutions to avoid dealing with Ariel, an Israeli colony-college in the West Bank.
Israel's violent repression, ethnic cleansing and siege against the Palestinians is escalating, but the fact that the global BDS movement is winning the battle for hearts and minds across the world gives us hope that we shall overcome. We may well be reaching a tipping point. (http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/12/bds-campaign-against-israel-reaching-turning-point-201312225320764121.html)
If sanctions work against Iran, why not Israel?
By Stuart Littlewood
William Hague, the British foreign secretary, was recently halted in his tracks by Parliament when he and Cameron were straining at the leash to assault Syria. So when he rose in the Commons to make a statement on the Iran nuke deal last month and bask in the glow of congratulation, the House and the nation were aware that, if he’d had his way, there might have been nothing to celebrate.
Hague said the agreement had shown that pressure through sanctions coupled with a readiness to negotiate was the right policy. “For a long time, that has been the united approach of this country…”
Let’s hang on to that thought while noting that more MPs now seem willing to speak out and challenge the Government’s inexplicable blind-spot with regard to nuke-bristling Israel.
Sir Gerald Kaufman (Lab) called it an exceptionally important agreement. “Will the right hon. Gentleman point out to the Prime Minister of Israel, who yesterday said that nuclear weapons are the most dangerous weapons in the world — he should know because he has a stockpile of several hundred nuclear warheads and the missiles with which to deliver them — and who in addition refuses to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, that any attempt to damage or attack the agreement in any way will be unacceptable and will be opposed?”
Sir Menzies Campbell (LibDem) was also concerned about Netanyahu’s public response to the agreement, and asked what assessment the foreign secretary had made of the risk of Israel taking unilateral action that might undermine it.
To which Mr. Hague simply replied that he would strongly discourage any country, including Israel, from seeking to undermine the agreement, and that he had seen no sign of any country doing so.
Committed to the plan?
Yet, as he spoke, some senior U.S. officials, if reports are to be believed, were already saying the Obama administration “is not fully committed to the conclusion of a final pact, under which economic sanctions would be completely lifted.” At a briefing in Geneva one was reported as saying: “In terms of the ‘end state,’ we do not recognize a right for Iran to enrich uranium.” Another remarked: “We’ll see whether we can achieve an end state that allows for Iran to have peaceful nuclear energy.” It sounds as if America itself may scupper the deal somewhere along the line for its own tortured reasons.
Dr. Julian Lewis (Conservative) reminded MPs that no such agreement would have been reached had the plan for an Anglo-American military attack on Syria gone ahead. “So while we are busy conferring praise on Governments past and present, can we at least have a pat on the back for Parliament for its role in preventing such an ill-considered move?”
In the spotlight
This must have been acutely painful for Hague, who nevertheless replied: “I always want to pat Parliament on the back, even when I disagree with it, but I do not agree with my hon. Friend’s analysis. I agree — not with him, but with others — that the contemplation by the United States of military action produced a very important breakthrough on the dismantling of Syria’s chemical weapons.”
Jim Cunningham (Labor) also reminded Mr. Hague that President Obama and the American Congress postponed a decision as a result of the UK Parliament reining in the foreign secretary. More importantly, he said, if it was sufficient to sit down with the Iranians why are we not facilitating talks on Syria?
Mr. Hague replied that he had met the Syrian opposition in Istanbul and hosted the Friends of Syria core group in London to encourage their participation in a peace conference on Jan. 22. He wants to do everything he can to bring about a peaceful solution on Syria “just as we have on the Iranian nuclear program,” but he didn’t say if he’d invite the key player, Bashar Assad.
Dry Matthew Offord (Conservative) wanted to know what reassurance the Secretary of State could give in view of the remark by Iran’s President Rowhani that, no matter what interpretations are put on it, “Iran’s right to enrichment has been recognized?”
Mr. Hague gave a very odd answer. “The E3 plus 3 countries do not recognize a right to enrich.”
He went on at some length to explain the guts of the deal:
“In return for those commitments Iran will receive proportionate and limited sanctions relief from the United States and the European Union. For its part, the U.S. will pause efforts to reduce crude oil sales to Iran’s oil customers, repatriate to Iran some of its oil revenue held abroad, suspend sanctions on the Iranian auto industry, allow licensing of safety-related repairs and inspections for certain Iranian airlines and establish a financial channel to facilitate humanitarian and legitimate trade, including for payments to international organizations and Iranians studying abroad.
“It is proposed that the EU and the U.S. together will suspend sanctions on oil-related insurance and transport costs, which will allow the provision of such services to third states for the import of Iranian oil. We will also suspend the prohibition on the import, purchase or transport of Iranian petrochemical products and suspend sanctions on Iranian imports of gold and precious metals. But core sanctions on Iranian oil and gas will remain in place.
“It is intended that the EU will also increase by an agreed amount the authorization thresholds for financial transactions for humanitarian and non-sanctioned trade with Iran. The EU’s Council of Ministers will be asked to adopt legislation necessary to amend those sanctions and the new provisions would then apply to all EU member states. The total value of the sanctions relief is estimated at $7 billion over the six-month period. There will be no new nuclear-related sanctions adopted by the U.N., EU and U.S. during that period.
“However, the bulk of international sanctions on Iran will remain in place. That includes the EU and U.S. oil embargo, which restricts oil purchases from Iran globally, and sanctions on nuclear, military-related or ballistic missile-related goods and technology. It includes all frozen revenue and foreign exchange reserves held in accounts outside Iran and sanctions on many Iranian banks, including the Central Bank of Iran, which means all Iranian assets in the U.S. and EU remain frozen, apart from the limited repatriation of revenue agreed under this agreement. Iranian leaders and key individuals and entities will still have their assets in the EU and U.S. frozen and be banned from travelling to the EU and U.S., and tough financial measures, including a ban on using financial messaging services and transactions with European and U.S. banks, also remain in place. Those sanctions will not be lifted until a comprehensive settlement is reached, and we will enforce them robustly. That ensures that Iran still has a powerful incentive to reach a comprehensive solution…”
“The $7 billion of sanctions relief is actually available to Iran over the six-month period once that period has begun, which we hope will be by the end of January. A good deal of the $7 billion involves the unfreezing of assets, so those assets will be unfrozen in stages. Iran will not therefore receive $7 billion on the first day, and then decide whether to implement its side of the agreement.
“It is also important to see that $7 billion in perspective. In January, Iran’s Oil Minister acknowledged that the fall in oil exports as a result of sanctions was costing Iran between $4 billion and $8 billion every month. Reports suggest that Iran currently has between $60 billion and $100 billion of assets frozen overseas that it cannot access. The $7 billion of relief is therefore a very small proportion of the total frozen assets and of the total effect of sanctions applied to Iran.”
Economic sanctions: are they moral, or even legal?
Hague has led the charge on oil sanctions and other measures to make life a misery for Iranians. But are he and his chums on safe legal ground?
The International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL) in a statement on Nov. 26, 2011, said they were deeply concerned about the threats against Iran by Israel, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Referring to a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), IADL stated that the threats by Israel, the U.S. and the UK were unacceptable and dangerous not only for all the region but for the whole of humanity, and that Article 2.4 of U.N. Charter forbids not only use of force but also the threat of force in international relations. The right of defense does not include pre-emptive strikes.
Sanctions, if pressed home with the vigor and ruthlessness exerted against Iran, should do nicely for Israel
Stuart Littlewood
The IADL also pointed out that while Israel was quick to denounce the possible possession of nuclear weapons by others, it illegally had possessed nuclear weapons for many years. The danger to world peace was so great as to require the global eradication of all nuclear weapons, and to immediately declare the Middle East a nuclear free zone and a zone free of all weapons of mass destruction, as required by U.N. Security Council resolution 687.
Furthermore, Article 33 states that “the parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means…”
Economic ‘terror’ tactics such as the vicious sanctions deployed by Hague and friends – and the similar measures used by Britain and America 60 years ago to bring down the government of Dry Mossadeq and reinstall the hated Shah – are not part of the approved toolkit.
Remember the context
In early 2012 the U.S. intelligence community was saying that Iran hadn’t got an active nuclear weapons program, and Israeli intelligence agreed. The Director of the National Intelligence Agency, James Clapper, reported: “We assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons… We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons…”
Why has Hague been so focused on Iran when Israel is the one with a runaway, unsafeguarded nuclear weapons program, a deranged leadership and a dreadful track record?
U.N. Security Council resolution 487 of 1981 called on Israel “urgently to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards”. Israel has been allowed to ignore it for 32 years. In 2009, the IAEA called on Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, open its nuclear facilities to inspection and place them under comprehensive IAEA safeguards. Israel still refuses to join or allow inspections.
The Zionist regime is reckoned to have up to 400 nuclear warheads at its disposal. It is the only state in the region that is not a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (Iran is). It has signed but not ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. As regards biological and chemical weapons, Israel has not signed the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. It has signed but not ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention.
So Hague is kicking the wrong ass. He needs to propel the toe of his boot into the U.S.-subsidized derrière of the Zionist entity. That’s where his “unprecedented” sanctions are need.
Negotiations in bad faith
In 2003 the Foreign Ministers of the UK, France and Germany visited Tehran for discussions with Iran on its nuclear program. This of course was pre-Hague. In a statement issued at the time, the three EU states said they recognized the right of Iran to “enjoy peaceful use of nuclear energy in accordance with the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty]” – i.e. Iran had a right to uranium enrichment on its own soil like other parties to the NPT. This was repeated and confirmed at the Paris Agreement in 2004. Iran agreed “on a voluntary basis” to suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities. The three EU states recognized the suspension as “a voluntary confidence building measure and not a legal obligation.”
However, proposals published by the UK, France and Germany the following year demanded that all enrichment and related activities on Iranian soil cease for good. Iran’s voluntary suspension of these activities was suddenly to become permanent. The trio’s earlier acceptance of Iran’s right to enjoy peaceful use of nuclear energy in accordance with the NPT had vanished into thin air. Henceforward Iran would be treated as a second-class party to the NPT, with fewer rights than the others.
Paul Flynn (Labor), in the wake of Hague’s statement this week, asked pointedly if it would be right for the Government to now approach Israel and ask for a reciprocal gesture, opening its nuclear facilities to international inspection in order to de-nuclearize the whole Middle East.
Mr. Hague was evasive: “politics is the art of the possible… and it has turned out that this agreement [i.e. with Iran] is possible. The hon. Gentleman is trying to lead me into something that it would probably not be possible for us to obtain.”
But sanctions, if pressed home with the vigor and ruthlessness exerted against Iran, should do nicely for Israel. People around the world are already applying their own sanctions because their weak politicians won’t act.(http://english.alarabiya.net/en/views/2013/12/23/If-sanctions-work-against-Iran-why-not-Israel-.html)
|
Opinions
Things that should be disclosed
Al-Khaleej Editorial
Much controversy revolves around John Kerry's proposals on resolving the Palestinian issue raise many questions, some regarding transparency, and what is not being talked about. What leaks from the news about the US proposals is that they align with the Israeli side, particularly regarding the security issue. It seems like Israelis are not getting enough with the US support for a Palestinian State free of arms, with raped resources, and forced to dependency, they want a military presence within this state and on its borders.
The problem is not with the Palestinian and Arab sides thatrefuse Israeli military presence in the Palestinian State, but with not knowing what was rejected and what was not in this regard. There is not enough information, except for leaks, which cannot determine the positions of countries precisely. Lack of information, lack of transparency is unaccepted in principle, because what is being negotiated is the Palestinian people’s fate, which should be fully familiar with all that is going on, especially with respect to principles agreed upon all the Palestinian institutions and factions.
Knowing the technical and logistical issues is not required, but the Palestinian people should be informed of what is being negotiated. This transparency concerning principles will not harm the negotiation process, but will support negotiators because they will gain sympathy when their positions are firm with regard to Palestinian rights. This is the greatest support Palestinian negotiators need in an environment of political, economic and security pressure surrounding them. And since there is a loss of transparency in this area, much of the Palestinian people feel suspicion about what is going on.
Perhaps the most serious question posed is the one about things that should be disclosed in these negotiations. The security aspect with its dangeris not more important than Palestinian rights such as the right of return, the return of Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine and settlement.
Does the dispute over the security aspect mean that there is no dispute about the other issues? If this is true then where did the negotiation reach on these issues? These questions haunt Palestinians and Arabs and needs to be clarified. Continued uncertainty and replace facts with rumors undermine Palestinian negotiators, because that puts them between the hammer of the enemy and the anvil of their people.
Thus, the Palestinian negotiator can turn the equation, and convert popular pressure to resist pressures from the enemies; the need for transparency is now more than ever. (http://www.alkhaleej.ae/studiesandopinions/detailedpage/f22764f5-efdb-4058-be01-68dd84da07ce)
The framework agreement ... The Palestinian constants
Al-Quds Editorial
President Mahmoud Abbas was clear during theemergency Arab meeting in Cairo with regards to Palestinian principles on resolving the Palestinian issue or any framework for an agreement that Secretary of State John Kerry is said to be formulating, to present it to the Palestinian and Israeli sides in his upcoming visit ... Thus, President Abbas is reminding Arab leaders of their historical responsibilities towards the Palestinian issue and its resolution, at a time when he seeks a Palestinian-Arab united position against any diminution of the Palestinian people’s legitimate rights.
It is evident from leaks of the Arab League meetingin Cairo and statements by Ambassador Mohamed Sobeih, Assistant Secretary-General for Palestine and Arab lands at the Arab League, that President Mahmoud Abbas told Arabs clearly the Palestinian leadership rejection of the presence of any Israeli soldier on the border of the Palestinian State, and the rejection of any Israeli official presence in the Jordan Valley, in addition to his rejection of any concession on occupied Arab Jerusalem as the capital of the Palestinian State, and that the idea of delivering any neighborhood in Jerusalem to the Palestinian side cannot be a substitute for occupied Arab Jerusalem, which should be returned to the Palestinians. President Abbas also rejected talk of a demilitarized state; the Palestinian constants relating to the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people cannot be compromised by any Palestinian leader, since these are sovereignty issues.
It is clear that real, lasting and just peace cannot be based on diminution of the Palestinian people’s rights, decided by the international legitimacy, and most importantly is the right of our people to establish an independent State with full sovereignty on the territories occupied since 1967, including Arab Jerusalem, and resolve the refugee issue on the basis of UN resolution 194 which guarantees the right of return and compensation for Palestinian refugees.
If any peace deal is not possible without resolving the core issues including Jerusalem, refugees, borders, settlements, water and other issues on the basis of international legitimacy resolutions, the US administration and Foreign Minister Kerry who is developing proposals for a framework agreement, must realize that Palestinian people who made painful concessions for peace and who is the victim of an illegal occupation for decades, will not give up any of its legitimate rights and constants, and that the victim is the most in needof security guarantees expressed in a framework agreement, in addition, Kerry and the international community are aware that Israel, the occupation state, has a sophisticated conventional and nonconventional weapons making it a superior military power, and security pretexts are an to excuse of the occupying large parts of the Palestinian territories, and that this only reflects a bad faith that should not exist when talking about real peace.
Kerry must also realize that the Palestinians, who have suffered too long from this illegal occupation supported by the United States, is not prepared today to accept partial interim solutions while Israel is offering illegal settlement proceedings on a daily basis in Arab occupied Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank.
A comprehensive and just peace means solving on of the most central painful issues, the issue of refugees who were been forced to leave their homes, a solution in line with international legitimacy and on the basis of international resolutions including resolution 194, it also means that all settlement actions and proceedings imposed by Israel in the occupied territories and condemned by the international community. Since it contradicts with international law and the resolutions of international legitimacy, must be canceled and return the rights to their legitimate owners, not rewarding the illegal occupation for unlawful exercise of occupation and violations over decades.
What must be said here is that the Palestinian serious position, supported by a united Arab position must evolve rapidly in confronting any attempt rejected byany Palestinian and Arab, we believe in a comprehensive and lasting peace based on justice, based on resolutions of international legitimacy which cannot harm Palestinian constants, which are a red step no Palestinian or Arab can pass, no matter what the circumstances are, Palestinians cannot be demanded for concessions on these constants. (http://www.alquds.com/news/article/view/id/479410)
|
|
WHAT'S NEW
BACKGROUND
POLLS
WAYS TO GET JMCC
CONTACT US
|
To subscribe to free newsletter submit your email |
|
|
|