This month the domestic and international challenges for the way forward in the Middle East are briefly analysed looking at issues from right-wing extremism rife in Israel to the ill-effects of American mediation in the Israeli- Palestinian conflict.
For the last ten months, in accordance with the Palestinian position, international law and the 2003 'Road Map', the Obama administration has maintained its stance on the illegality of continued Israeli settlement expansion and the necessity for a complete freeze on construction as a pre-condition to the resumption of peace talks. However, during a visit to Jerusalem earlier this month, in what appeared to be a major about turn in U.S policy, Hilary Clinton indicated that this was no longer a U.S demand and backed Israeli assertions that a freeze is not necessary. In addition she praised the Israeli offer to curb some settlement expansion as 'unprecedented' and called for the unconditional resumption of peace talks.
Her remarks were met with protest, disappointment, frustration and a sense of betrayal among Palestinians and regional leaders who rejected her call. Negotiations are considered to be in 'a state of paralysis' and on the brink of failure as a result of the infirm U.S stance as well as its backpedalling. In an attempt to avert Arab anger and marry the U.S position, during the G8 conference in Morocco a day later, Clinton attempted to qualify her Jerusalem statements by saying that though the Israeli offer of restraint fell short of the U.S demand, it still had a 'significant and meaningful effect' on limiting growth and could not justify Palestinian refusal to resume negotiations. She insisted that Obama had not betrayed the Palestinians and continued to see settlements as illegitimate. Israel hailed the U.S climb down a diplomatic victory.
The Israeli offer consisted of temporarily suspending plans for future construction and a promise not to create new settlements in the West Bank but refuses to stop building in East Jerusalem or to call off construction of 3,000 apartments already approved. In an astonishing show of defiance the construction of 900 new units in the East Jerusalem settlement of Gilo was announced. The move angered and no doubt embarrassed Washington who released a strongly worded statement condemning settlement construction along with other Israeli practices in Jerusalem such as evictions and house demolitions. It was seen by many as a direct provocation and an attempt to unilaterally torpedo negotiations. Obama asserted that the move was 'very dangerous' and would only serve to embitter Palestinians and further endanger the peace process. Though his comments were cautious, there was a keen sense of U.S dismay at the lack of reciprocity following Clinton's comments. Israel maintained that any negotiated freeze would not include East Jerusalem which it illegally annexed during the 1967 war despite it being the non-negotiable capital of any future Palestinian state.
In a press conference toward the end of the month, Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu proposed a 10 month partial halt to settlement building in the West Bank excluding East Jerusalem and not including the construction of public buildings such as schools and synagogues. Hard-liners in the government refer to West Bank as Judea and Samaria - the alleged ancient Jewish names for the Palestinian region. He claimed his offer constituted a policy of restraint; that it was a far-reaching and painful compromise indicative of a desire to move forward towards peace. He said that it was now time for Palestinians to take steps and insisted on the need for them to accept Israel as a 'Jewish state'. Palestinian officials dismissed the offer as a smokescreen that made no significant improvements on previous offers. They asserted that any offer that did not include East Jerusalem was a non-starter and that only a complete freeze would be acceptable. Washington welcomed the offer saying it helped move efforts toward resolving the conflict forward.
This month marked the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall; a 165km reinforced concrete structure that had been referred to as 'a monument to human enslavement'; it was a symbol of division, death and loss of liberty. In a tribute to its demise and to the values that underpinned the fight against what it represented, world leaders gathered in Germany to mark the historic event.
Ironically, many of those gathered are either directly or indirectly, aiding in the construction of a longer, higher and far more divisive and inhumane concrete barrier; the Apartheid Wall in the West Bank. As a product of Zionist racism, not only does it violate international law but is used as a tool of aggression and theft and a means by which to torture, starve, isolate and economically strangle the civilian Palestinian population. Ronald Reagan is remembered to have said of its counterpart "tear down that wall". To Obama, Brown and all who profess to uphold the values of universal human rights; of life, liberty, the protection of property and rule by the consent of the governed, it is time to similarly demand that Israel "tear down that wall"!
Subsequent to last month's breakthrough when Hamas released a video showing the French citizen and Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who was captured in a cross border raid in 2006, in exchange for the release of 20 female prisoners, additional progress was made toward securing a further prisoner exchange deal. The last few weeks have seen an intense escalation in diplomatic and political negotiations for the release of the Israeli soldier and Palestinians held by Israel. Optimists predict a breakthrough after the unusual part-media blackout by the Israeli media censor, which according to some British commentators, suggested that 'a prisoner swap agreement' was under way (The Daily Telegraph). Several different accounts have been coming from Israeli and Arab media, some suggesting that Shalit would be released to the Egyptians first in return for 450-890 Palestinian prisoners.
Since Shalits' capture, Israel has lead several military operations in Gaza, culminating in Operation Cast Lead in Dec 2008/Jan 2009, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of innocent civilians, most of whom were children. One British commentator in the Guardian suggests that:
'Shalit's lonely three-year plight has moved and angered Israelis who by and large accept the burden and risks of compulsory national service. Palestinians face the problem on a far greater scale: they count some 11,000 security prisoners in Israeli jails - the admiring Arabic label 'factories for men' masking the toll that this takes on families.'
He goes on to remind us that 'the men Israel calls 'terrorists' are the Palestinians' 'freedom fighters', leading the resistance to occupation'. Israeli officials seem to accept the only way to free him, is through negotiating with Hamas - something that has again divided opinion in the streets of Israel. Those calling for the government to halt further negotiations are questioning why the 'life of one captive [is] such an urgent national priority that the safety and security of every single Israeli citizen must be put at risk?' (Jerusalem Post); others criticise Israeli backtracking on its policy of 'no negotiations with 'terrorists'…that has morphed today into absurd horse-trading of the "any price" variety, including 20 female terrorists for a videocassette.' Right wing elements in Israel are most vocal about their discontent with any swap claiming 'it was forbidden according to Halacha to endanger Jews by releasing Palestinian terrorists in exchange for Shalit.' Although the voices condemning any prisoner swap grow, support for Shalit's release by any means is still very high. A recent survey by the University of Haifa showed that '62 per cent of Israelis support the release of convicted terrorists in order to free Shalit, while 16% oppose such a deal and 22% are undecided'. The Shalit family have also been actively lobbying ministers in the hope that a majority support for the prisoner swap will ensure the return of their son.
Let us not forget the many thousands of political prisoners and detainees held in Israeli detention centres and prisons; a recent Middle East Monitor report highlighted that approximately seven hundred children are currently being detained in Israeli jails together with adult prisoners.
Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority
The Palestinian electoral body has indefinitely postponed the elections scheduled for January. Hamas' objections have not yet been fully addressed and they have thus refused to co-operate in the election process. Earlier this month, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas announced that he would not seek a new term during the elections and it was rumored that he could step down within weeks, however there is doubt that he will resign outright if elections are not being held.
His decision comes as a result of his intense frustration with the current impasse in the peace making process. The sudden shift in Washington's stance on settlements has left Abbas feeling betrayed, humiliated and fatally undermined and has further damaged his dwindling credibility within his party and with the Palestinian people.
Mr. Abbas's announcement of non-participation in the next elections is widely seen as the clearest indication of the insurmountable obstacles to peace talks with Israel and senior Palestinian officials have begun debating alternative strategies for ending the Israeli occupation. One strategy gaining support is the unilateral declaration of an independent Palestinian state within the 1967 territories. The PA's chief negotiator has formally asked the EU to urge the Security Council to recognize an independent Palestinian state. Though the proposal is backed by the Arab League, both U.S and EU officials say the move would be non-starter as it would most likely be vetoed at the UN. Hamas opposed the move and Israel warned that any unilateral action on the part of the Palestinians would trigger counter measures that could include the annexation of additional parts of the West Bank.
Mofaz Proposes Talks with Hamas
Former IDF Chief of Staff and Kadima MK, Shaul Mofaz, has urged for dialogue with Hamas asserting that "at the moment that Hamas sit down at the negotiating table, assuming that Hamas are elected and want to talk, they accept the Quartet's guidelines and are no longer a terrorist organization." Mofaz has put forward a pragmatic plan which pre-empts the stalled peace process. It aims to hold talks with Hamas and create a Palestinian state on 60% of the West Bank within a year. The state would have provisional borders and settlers would not be removed immediately, however legislation would be put in place to demonstrate Israel's future intent in this regard. In a poll, 57% of Israelis supported the proposal, nevertheless, it is yet to be debated by the Kadima party council and Party Chairwoman Tzipi Livni has stated that any dialogue with Hamas was dangerous for Israel.
Hamas responded by saying that it would never recognize Israel or give legitimacy to the occupation and that they would never negotiate with the "Zionist enemy". Mafaz's offer was referred to as "Zionist vulgarity".
Stalled Peace Talks and Fading Hopes of a Two State Solution
The current attempt to negotiate a peace settlement is at an all time low. Hillary Clinton, tasked with coaxing the two sides back together has managed to anger and alienate Palestinians with her clumsy praise for Israeli 'restraint' while calling for unconditional resumption of peace talks. In a bid to appease Arab anger, during a conference in Morocco she insisted that the American stance remained unchanged, however she then flew to Egypt with the view of gaining Mubarak's support for the unconditional resumption of talks. David Miliband flew to Jordan to do the same there.
Clinton's comments precipitated Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmud Abbas' threat of resignation and along with the stalemate on settlement freeze have effectively brought the process to a grinding halt. Clinton and Obama are widely blamed for fatally undermining Abbas who has been irredeemably tarnished for delaying his endorsement of the Goldstone report under US pressure. Additionally, he was forced into a public handshake with Netanyahu earlier this year which have led to criticisms of collaboration with Israel. His last chance at credibility among his people lies in his ability to stick to his guns on settlement freeze, thus Clinton's demands placed him in an impossible predicament. Should Abbas follow through on his threat of resignation, it would be a massive blow to the US and Israel and hopes of a two state solution would fade as Abbas is unlikely to be replaced by anyone who will negotiate while the colonization of the West Bank continues.
Netanyahu's arrogance and insistence on continuing with settlements has not only alienated Palestinian leaders but he is leading Israel into international isolation and ruin. His obfuscation, provocations and reluctance to co-operate with the Obama administration and with Abbas, far from being a diplomatic victory, amount to national suicide.
The Jewish Terrorist and the Jewish Fatwa
Ya'acov Teitel, the 'Jewish Terrorist', was indicted earlier this month on several offences, including two counts of pre-meditated murder, three counts of attempted murders and 14 separate incidents from 1997-2008. The 37 year old came from the Shvut Rachel settlement in the West Bank and had a long list of accusations against him including the alleged murders of Palestinians, Samir Balbisi June 8, 1997 and Issa Makhamreh August 3, 1997. The families in both cases felt strongly that Teitel was finally caught 'only because he started targeting Jews'. A lone voice from the Haaretz, Avi Issacharoff, highlighted other cases where Palestinian deaths remain unsolved. 'The (justifiably) prevailing feeling among Palestinians in the West Bank is that their blood is of no consequence.' 90% of all police investigations involving Israelis as the prime suspects are left unsolved and are often closed.
Majority of the mainstream Israeli media denounced Teitel and other Jewish extremists for undermining the safety of Israel, with reports of many community leaders coming out and stating 'an entire community should not be expected to apologise for, or be put on the defensive over, the behaviour of one man'. The debate of how local authorities should keep an eye on 'deviant' members of the community also came to fruition, with many commentators focussing the lens on members of the Orthodox right wing community, who claim that these 'wild weeds' are exceptions to the moral values that these communities strive to uphold in their everyday lives. One weary commentator from the Jerusalem Post disagrees, and suggests that it is such ideological settlement-ghettos that create such 'wild weeds' as Teitel, emphatically stating:
'Ya'acov Teitel of Shvut Rachel is not the exception that proves the rule. Instead, he is the latest, but not the last in a long line of extreme but authentic products of an environment that's spiritually ill, at times even toxic.'
Shortly after the fiasco of the Jewish Terrorist, the Israeli media was once again inundated with commentaries and articles about the publication of 'Torat Hamelech: Dinei Nefahot Bein Yisrael Le'Amim' (The King's Torah: Laws of Life and Death between Jews and the Nations') by Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira and Rabbi Yosef Elitzur. The book advocates the killings of gentiles who endanger the lives of Jews - including innocent children. Labelled the 'Jewish Fatwa' by Israeli commentators, it states:
'…gentiles non-combatants including innocent children and babies, can be killed in situations in which their presence endangers, even indirectly, the lives of Jews'
Jerusalem Post commentator, Matthew Wagner, describes its content and more worryingly, describes its potential influence on an already extreme right-wing society with its discriminatory and inflammatory content:
'… the subject of killing gentiles, and more specifically Palestinians as part of the ongoing battle against terrorism, is particularly relevant for students at the yeshiva who have served, are presently serving or plan on serving in the IDF.'
The authors' provisions of practical implications for how 'religious soldiers' would address such situations should be taken seriously and with the Gaza Massacre of 2008/2009 still fresh in the minds of many, the thought of IDF soldiers heartlessly and mindlessly rampaging and slaughtering innocents is still very real.
Religious Zionism spreading within the IDF
Some Israeli Defence Force recruits have been causing an unprecedented stir amongst their ranks by visibly protesting against carrying out forced evictions from settlements in the West Bank. An act that has divided opinion amongst scholars and laymen alike, the Israeli media have been awash with reports and counter-reports analysing the 'threat' that these IDF soldiers' actions will have. One army official warned of dire consequences "if the issue of insubordination in the IDF is not rooted out [as] it could ruin the army from the inside." The fact that these protestations are coming from the religious right wing Zionists within the IDF causes further consternation amongst the Left- that religious zealots are gaining ground in the battle to win the hearts and minds of the Israeli people.
Some commentators have questioned whether 'religious Zionism' has a place within the army, claiming that Religious Zionists are 'no longer dedicated to the state of Israel' (Jerusalem Post), where as others vehemently deny there being any agenda other than protecting the Jewish people. The number of incidents has seen IDF soldiers protesting 'the task of evacuating 'unauthorized' West Bank outposts, marking a shift in right-wing activity from attacks on Palestinians to protest in army ranks' (Haaretz). High ranking Israeli officials, including Netanyahu have condemned any sign of insubordination amongst the ranks warning, "If you want to get rid of the IDF, then support refusal - it will bring about the collapse of the state."
Together with the anxiety over Jewish terrorist, Ya'acov Teitel and the publishing of the 'Jewish Fatwa', the dangerous voice of the right-wing religious Zionists are coming to the forefront more and more. The Shimshon and Nachshon Battalions, where most of these dissenting protests are coming from, are both part of the Kfir Brigade, which 'has been under military investigation for several high-profile cases where Palestinian civilians complained of abuse by the brigade. Its former commander was reprimanded for sanctioning use of force during questioning of suspects'. Army battalions and regiments such as the Kfir Brigade are harbouring extremist doctrines and hateful ideologies that seem to be spreading amongst its recruits. The fact that media outside of Israel have not taken on these stories shows that the threat of religious Zionist extremism is still not being recognised as a major source of injustice and inhumanity, even though it has the potential to sabotage any progress in the peace process.
Frosty courtship: Obama and Netanyanhu relationship sours
Although hardly alluded to in the British media, President Barak Obama and Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu's meeting on November 10th was put under intense scrutiny in the Israeli media. Why, some may ask? Because there wasn't the usual cheesy-grin, shaking-hands- in- front of- the- press to show the whole world how Israel and the US-are the best of friends palaver. Instead, the 'secret' behind the closed doors meeting, remained as such - secret, having lasted approximately one hour and 40 minutes, where nearly an hour was 'devoted to a tense tête-à-tête between Netanyahu and Obama. Speculation as to what exactly was discussed between the two was rife when instead of the normal official press conference/photo opportunity; the White House broke protocol, barring all media.
The 'near-total' media blackout, according to some Israeli commentators could have been due to the contents 'either [being] so negative or so classified' or as one Israeli attorney suggested in Ynet News, a more sinister reason for the Israelis was that 'Netanyahu had agreed to far-reaching concessions to the Palestinians and wanted to keep the details under wraps for now to avoid a political storm at home'. Both White House representatives and Netanyahu's government came out refuting any claims of there being any ill-feeling between the two leaders, culminating in the White House releasing a photograph of the meeting four days later. This came after further speculation that the 'lack of a photo opportunity was an 
intentional slight' by Obama of his dissatisfaction with the 'premier's unwillingness to make further concessions on West Bank settlement construction' (Haaretz).
The manner in which this story was played out in the Israeli media shows to some extent the dismay some Israeli's have with Obama's current role in the Palestine-Israel conflict. Once thinking of herself as the 'belle of the ball', with the US being her 'Prince Charming'; Israel is realizing that the playing-hard-to-get and wooing period of the Bush-era is over. A new prince is in town and he doesn't really find the 'belle' all that attractive.
The Israel Lobby in Britain
Channel 4 Dispatches recently aired a documentary produced by Peter Oborne and James Jones entitled 'Inside Britain's Israel Lobby'. The programme sought to investigate a topic not many journalists are willing to risk their careers over and to "ask a question that has never been seriously addressed in the mainstream press: is there a Pro-Israel lobby in Britain, what does it do and what influence does it wield?"
The lobby operates from within Britain in support of the interests of a foreign power - the state of Israel. While the report probed a number of issues it focused on the power wielded by this lobby within two major spheres of influence; politics and the media. It threw open a number of questionable practices including the use of financial leverage to influence British policy; political donations from individuals with financial stakes in illegal enterprises; the pressure and often harassment that certain media outlets are subjected to in order to promote a particular agenda and how the label of anti-Semitism is used and abused in order to enforce a form of censorship with regard to Israel and its policies.
The program attracted much anger and criticism from Jewish circles including from the Board of Deputies, the Zionist Federation and the Community Security Trust. It was considered by some as an attack and denounced for the anti-Semitic feeling it was claimed that it would and did attract. It was variously dismissed as being shoddy, shallow, flawed, irresponsible, manipulative, counter-productive, unnecessary, unfounded, one-sided and lacking in substance, context and perspective. One writer asserted it contained barely concealed anti-Semitic undertones and another - crude anti-Jewish invective. Figures for donations the program claimed were made to the Conservative Friends of Israel. These were called into question while some attempts were made to justify certain of its findings. The Guardian's Antony Lerman attempted to restore calm and objectivity to the discourse.
Channel 4 completely rejected claims that the documentary was anti-Semitic. Standing by the program, it upheld that the topic was a legitimate arena for journalistic investigation. It also stated that it received few complaints about the program and a large amount of appreciative comments.
Middle East Monitor (MEMO) and The Cordoba Foundation (TCF) Book Launch of 'Palestine in Pieces: Graphic Perspectives on the Israeli Occupation' By Bill and Kathleen Christison
November 12th saw Middle East Monitor and The Cordoba Foundation hosting the book launch of Bill and Kathleen Christison's most recent contribution in their long standing effort to bring into the public domain the realities and horrors of the Palestinian people's plight as a colonized and oppressed nation living under Israeli belligerent occupation. Throughout their narrative they interweave their own first-hand experience of being in Palestine, where they have travelled extensively on numerous occasions, with the personal stories of the Palestinian people and friends they met along their way.
One of the distinguishing features of this book is not only their accessible writing style and frank assessment of the situation on the ground but also their use of over 50 photographs and maps to illustrate their points and provide a "Graphic Perspective" of the situation on the ground. In their relatively short book they manage to cover a great number of vital issues including the illegal Israeli settlements, the Separation Wall, the systematic campaign of house demolitions and the inhumane siege on Gaza. As they have clearly stated on many occasions, there is a great need to let the world see with their own eyes what is going on hidden away behind the Wall and that exposure and accessibility is what they hope their book will achieve.
The authors were joined by a distinguished panel of guests including, Oliver McTernan (Co-Founder and Director of Forward Thinking), John McHugo (Chair of the Liberal Democrat Friends of Palestine), Anas Al-Tikriti (CEO of the Cordoba Foundation) and Dr Daud Abdullah (Director of the Middle East Monitor).
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|