Sunday, 5 April 2009

Avigdor Lieberman, a vergonha de Israel

fonte:Counterpunch


Meet Netanyahu's Foreign Minister

Avigdor Lieberman, Israel's Shame

By NEVE GORDON

Thanks to Binyamin Netanyahu's overweening ambition, Israel is to be saddled with a foreign minister who is a national disgrace.

Imagine a country that appoints someone who has been found guilty of striking a 12-year-old boy to be its foreign minister. The person in question is also under investigation for money-laundering, fraud and breach of trust; in addition, he was a bona fide member of an outlawed racist party and currently leads a political party that espouses fascist ideas. On top of all this, he does not even reside in the country he has been chosen to represent.

Even though such a portrayal may appear completely outlandish, Israel's new foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, actually fits the above depiction to the letter.

• In 2001, following his own confession, Lieberman was found guilty of beating a 12-year-old boy. As part of a plea bargain, Lieberman was fined 17,500 shekels and had to promise never to hit young children again.

• In 2004, Lieberman's 21-year-old daughter Michal set up a consulting firm, which received 11m shekels from anonymous overseas sources. Lieberman, according to the police, received more than a 2.1m-shekel salary from the company for two years of employment. In addition, according to an investigation by Haaretz, he allegedly received additional severance pay – amounting to hundreds of thousands of shekels – in 2006 and 2007, while he was minister of strategic affairs and deputy prime minister. According to Israeli law, this is illegal.

• Lieberman is an ex-member of Meir Kahane's party, Kach, which was outlawed due to its blatantly racist platform. Moreover, his views towards Arabs do not appear to have changed over the years. In 2003, when reacting to a commitment made by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to give amnesty to approximately 350 Palestinian prisoners, Lieberman declared that, as minister of transport, he would be more than happy to provide buses to take the prisoners to the sea and drown them there.

• In January 2009, during Israel's war on Gaza, Lieberman argued that Israel "must continue to fight Hamas just like the United States did with the Japanese in the second world war. Then, too, the occupation of the country was unnecessary." He was referring to the two atomic bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

• Lieberman does not live in Israel according to its internationally recognised borders, but rather in an illegal settlement called Nokdim. Legally speaking, this would be like US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton residing in Mexico and UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband living on the Canary Islands.

And yet, despite these egregious transgressions, newly-elected Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has no qualms about appointing Lieberman to represent Israel in the international arena. Netanyahu's lust for power has led him to choose a man who actually poses a serious threat to Israel. Both Lieberman's message and style are not only violent, but have clear proto-fascist elements; and, as Israeli commentators have already intimated, he is extremely dangerous.

Politics being politics, most western leaders will no doubt adopt a conciliatory position towards Lieberman, and agree to meet and discuss issues relating to foreign policy with him. Such a position can certainly be justified on the basis of Lieberman's democratic election; however much one may dislike his views, he is now the representative of the Israeli people. Those who decide to meet him can also claim that ongoing diplomacy and dialogue lead to the internalisation of international norms and thus moderate extremism.

These justifications carry weight. However, western leaders will also have to take into account that the decision to meet Lieberman will immediately be associated with the ban on Hamas, at least among people in the Middle East. In January 2006, Hamas won a landslide victory in elections that were no less democratic than the recent elections in Israel. While Hamas is, in many respects, an extremist political party that espouses violence, its politicians are representatives of the Palestinian people and are seen as struggling for liberation and self-determination.

If western leaders want to be conceived as credible, they must change their policy and meet with Hamas as well. Otherwise, their decision to meet Lieberman will be rightly perceived as hypocritical and duplicitous, and the pervasive perception in the region – that the United States and Europe are biased in Israel's favour – will only be strengthened.

Neve Gordon is chair of the department of politics and government at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev and author of Israel’s Occupation (University of California Press, 2008).

live de Palestina:o mês de março em imagens

fonte:EI


Month in pictures: March 2009
Photostory, The Electronic Intifada, 1 April 2009

The below photographs are a selection of images from the month of March 2009. "The month in pictures" is an ongoing feature by The Electronic Intifada. If you have images documenting Palestine, Palestinian life, politics and culture, or of solidarity with Palestine, please email images and captions to photos A T electronicintifada D O T net.

Members of the British aid convoy Viva Palestina arrive in the besieged Gaza Strip with aid for Palestinians in Gaza, 10 March. (Wissam Nassar/MaanImages)


Palestinian Bedouin children stand near their camels at sunset on the desert hills outside the West Bank city of Hebron, 10 March. (Haytham Othman/MaanImages)


A Palestinian man collects flowers at a field in the West Bank village of Idna, north of Hebron, 30 March. (Mamoun Wazwaz/MaanImages)


A Palestinian student looks out the window of her newly built classroom in the Gaza Strip, 15 March. (Hatem Omar/MaanImages)


Relatives of Ali Abu Foul, a Palestinian resistance fighter killed in an Israeli attack along with one other on 31 March. (Wissam Nassar/MaanImages)


Palestinian fishermen collect fish from their nets on a beach in Gaza City. The Israeli navy prevents Palestinians from fishing in deeper waters off the coast of Gaza, 26 March. (Wissam Nassar/MaanImages)


Palestinians take part in a protest in Gaza City calling for the release of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, 16 March. (Wissam Nassar/MaanImages)


Chickens sold at a market in Gaza Strip. The Israeli siege and attacks on Gaza have forced the cost of chickens to skyrocket in the Gaza Strip, 24 March. (Wissam Nassar/MaanImages)


Israeli soldiers take positions during clashes with Palestinian youths at a demonstration against Israel's wall in the West Bank village of Jayyous, 13 March. (Khaleel Reash/MaanImages)


A Palestinian man rides a donkey in the West Bank village of Jayyous, 30 March. (Khaleel Reash/MaanImages)


Palestinians in Gaza City wait to receive gasoline, which is one of the goods largely denied from entering the Gaza Strip by the Israeli siege, 14 March. (Wissam Nassar/MaanImages)


Appointed Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad at the opening ceremony of the Presidential Guards College in the West Bank city of Jericho, 15 March. (Mustafa Abu Dayeh/MaanImages)


A Palestinian protestor reacts to tear gas shot by Israeli police during a demonstration against racism in Umm al-Fahem in the northern Galilee, 24 March. (Oren Ziv/ActiveStills)

O Waterloo do estado Sionista

fonte:Counterpunch

s the Power of AIPAC on the Decline?

Was Gaza Israel's Waterloo?

By JOHN GOEKLER

Jay Forrester, the father of System Dynamics, famously observed that people intuitively recognize leverage points in complex systems – and they just as intuitively tend to push them the wrong way. Recent actions by Israel and its primary supporter in the US, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) seem a perfect example. Their apparent victories are likely, in the cold light of history, to be seen as a string of self-inflicted injuries that helped tip the world toward a just peace in the Middle East.

While not terribly important in itself, the Charles Freeman incident is a recent illustration. Freeman, a solid professional, was selected by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair to head the National Intelligence Council. As soon as President Obama nominated him, Freeman was attacked by the pro-Israel lobby on grounds he was insufficiently biased in favor of Israel.

The usual suspects who savage anyone questioning the AIPAC / Neo-Con party line that America and Israel are Siamese twins conjoined by identical interests delivered the attacks. They were coordinated by former AIPAC official Steve Rosen (currently on trial for allegedly passing top secret US documents to Israel) and featured congressional obeisance by members as senior as senators Joseph Lieberman and Charles Schumer.

The counterintuitiveness is stunning. The message that America’s intelligence officers should follow any party line, rather than operate analytically and objectively, is a red flag to thoughtful Americans of all political persuasions. It is particularly foolish mere weeks after the departure of an administration that twisted intelligence to “slam dunk” the US into Iraq.

The subtext is even more important – AIPAC, Lieberman and Schumer have tacitly acknowledged that America’s strategic and security interests are secondary to Israel’s. For this reason, future historians will likely see the Freeman affair as the apex of a policy arc in which America moved toward Israel, and is now beginning to head away.

This irony is especially poignant because AIPAC’s stated mission is, “to help make Israel more secure by ensuring that American support remains strong”. It takes credit for much of the pro-Israel bias in the US Congress, including: “Passing more than a dozen bills and resolutions condemning and imposing tough sanctions on Iran during the past 15 years. Securing critical security assistance to Israel each year to ensure that Israel remains capable of facing increased threats. Passing legislation requiring the administration to evaluate all future military sales to Arab states in the context of the need to maintain Israel’s qualitative military edge over potential adversaries. Passing multiple resolutions affirming congressional support for Israel’s right to self-defense in the face of terrorism by the terrorist groups Hamas and Hizballah.”

AIPAC was also behind the 390 to 5 vote in favor of a US House resolution supporting Israel’s “right to defend itself” during its recent invasion of Gaza. The fact that this “self defense” included using white phosphorous and US-supplied cluster munitions against civilian populations somehow escaped the notice of those 390 supporters, which included the bill’s sponsor, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

What AIPAC failed to notice is that while it has racked up a string of successes in the policy arena, the most important “initial condition” in the equation – the mental models of American Jews – has shifted. The momentum to reassess and revise America’s strategic relationship with Israel is approaching critical mass.

The first cracks in the facade appeared when John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt published an article titled The Israel Lobby in the London Review of Books in early 2006. Mearsheimer, a professor at the University of Chicago, and Walt, a professor at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, boldly stated that, “The combination of unwavering support for Israel and the related effort to spread ‘democracy’ throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized not only US security but that of much of the rest of the world.”

AIPAC and its allies immediately launched a full-scale assault on the paper and its authors, labeling them conspiracy theorists, anti-Semites, academic incompetents and more. Unfortunately for Israel’s supporters, those attacks gave the article, and the follow on book, ever more publicity. By protesting too much, AIPAC gave the idea legs.

Jimmy Carter’s 2007 book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, set off a similar paroxysm of vitriol and paranoia within the American pro-Israel community. Again, rather than engaging in a reasoned debate of the issues (or better yet, from a tactical perspective, speaking kindly of the former president while bemoaning his “naiveté”), AIPAC and its allies brutally attacked the former president. This resulted in even more air time and exposure for the book and Carter’s position. Further, the attacks firmly embedded apartheid in the lexicon of Middle East debates.

It was the January 2009 Israeli invasion of Gaza, however, that shifted the issue from intellectual to visceral. Whereas previous AIPAC moves had stirred discussion, its blind support of Israeli actions in Gaza spurred disgust. Not only did Israel destroy the meager remnants of its David versus Goliath mystique by using fighter bombers, tanks and helicopter gunships against a minor militia equipped only with small arms, it also surrendered forever what remained of its “good guy” image by intentionally leveling hospitals, clinics, schools and mosques.

The effect of this on American Jews was chilling. In recent decades, American Jews have comprised the core of the American liberal movement. They were a persistent voice of conscience through the civil rights era, Viet Nam, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Iraq 1 and 2, Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. They remain among the most passionate advocates for social justice in the world. That they were largely unable to apply that advocacy to Israeli excesses was a bitter, but often unspoken schism that separated the Holocaust generations from their activist children and grandchildren.

Now, the denial many American Jews have maintained around Israel’s immoral and illegal behaviors is evaporating. True change, after all, occurs when the inconsistencies between actual and desired realities become too great – when the resulting tension compels action. The Israeli mugging of Gaza, and AIPAC’s unexamined and unfettered support for it, has clashed with the Jewish ideal of tikkun olam – “repairing the world”.

In light of this, it is likely that AIPAC’s membership, donors and influence over American foreign policy will steadily decline. As they do, more pragmatic and balanced approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will emerge. These may occur because of American leadership; in the absence of an American veto; or through the discontinuation of the American aid that helps keep the scales tilted in favor of Israel. In a best-case scenario, it might occur because of all three.

In our dynamic, nonlinear world, the most successful nations, institutions and individuals are those best able continually to reexamine and narrow the inconsistencies between their beliefs and positions, and objective realities. Institutions built on fundamental inconsistencies – whether companies such as Enron or countries such as the Soviet Union – most often prove insufficiently robust in the long term. To frame it another way, they tend to have a relatively short shelf life in the marketplace of history.

John Goekler is a trainer and consultant specializing in applying emerging scientific understandings to organizational effectiveness, transformative policy and global security. He is the founder of Change Factors, in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

os palestinianos lembrar o dia da terra

Palestinians remember Land Day
Jonathan Cook writing from Arrabeh, The Electronic Intifada, 30 March 2009

Hatim Kanaaneh, a former physician who witnessed the Land Day protests, stands by a monument in Sakhnin's cemetery to six Palestinians shot dead by the Israeli army during the confrontations of 30 March 1976 (Jonathan Cook)

Palestinians across the Middle East were due to commemorate Land Day today, marking the anniversary of clashes in 1976 in which six unarmed Palestinians were shot dead by the Israeli army as it tried to break up a general strike.

Although Land Day is one of the most important anniversaries in the Palestinian calendar, sometimes referred to as the Palestinians' national day, the historical event it marks is little spoken of and rarely studied.

"Maybe its significance is surprising given the magnitude of other events in Palestinian history," said Hatim Kanaaneh, 71, a doctor, who witnessed the military invasion of his village.

"But what makes Land Day resonate with Palestinians everywhere is that it was the first time Palestinians inside Israel stood together and successfully resisted Israel's goal of confiscating their land."

The confrontation took place between the army and a group usually referred to as "Israeli Arabs," the small minority of Palestinians who managed to remain in their homes during the 1948 war that led to the founding of Israel. Today they number 1.2 million, or nearly one-fifth of Israel's population.

"We were given citizenship by Israel, but have always been treated as an enemy, perceived of as a threat to the state's Jewishness," said Dr. Kanaaneh, who last year published his memoir, A Doctor in Galilee, which offers a rare account in English of Palestinian life inside Israel during the Land Day period.

In 1976, Dr. Kanaaneh, having completed his medical studies at Harvard University in the United States, was the only physician in Arrabeh.

Israel crushed organized political activity among Israel's Palestinian citizens between 1948 and 1966, Dr. Kanaaneh said. Nonetheless, popular frustration had mounted as the state expropriated privately-owned Palestinian land to build new communities for Jewish citizens, many of them recent immigrants.

During military rule, historians have noted, vast swathes of land were taken from Palestinians, both from refugees in exile and from Israel's own citizens. Jews had bought only six per cent of Palestine by the time of the 1948 war, but today the state has nationalized 93 percent of Israel's territory.

"Government policy was explicitly to make the land Jewish -- or Judaize it, as it was called," Dr. Kanaaneh said.

The announcement in the mid-1970s of the confiscation of a further 2,000 hectares led to the creation of a new body, the National Committee for the Defense of Arab Lands, which provided a more assertive political leadership.

The minority's decision to strike, Dr. Kanaaneh said, shocked the Israeli authorities, which were not used to challenges to official policy. "Both sides understood the significance of the strike. For the first time we were acting as a national minority, and Israel was very sensitive to anything that suggested we had a national identity or a unified agenda, especially over a key resource like land."

Although the strike was strictly observed by Palestinians throughout Israel, the focus of the protest were three villages in the central Galilee that faced the loss of a large area of prime agricultural land: Arrabeh, Sakhnin and Deir Hanna.

The prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, and his defense minster, Shimon Peres, acted on the eve of the strike.

"What was surprising was that they didn't send in the police, as you'd expect when dealing with citizens of a country, but the army," Dr. Kanaaneh said.

The government's original plan, he said, was to break the strike and force employees to go to work, but when villagers began throwing stones, the army imposed a curfew.

"When a neighbor called me to attend to his wife who had gone into labor, I walked out of my house towards an armored vehicle waving my stethoscope," Dr. Kanaaneh said. "A soldier aimed his rifle straight at me and I hurried back inside."

Ahmed Khalaila stands by a road sign dedicated to his brother, Khader, who was shot dead by the Israeli army during Land Day protests in the village of Sakhnin in 1976. (Jonathan Cook)
Ahmed Khalaila, who was 18 and living in Sakhnin, remembered being woken early by loudspeakers. "Soldiers were calling out that we must not leave the house ... We couldn't even look out of the windows," he said.

When a neighbor stepped outside her house, she was shot and injured, Khalaila said. He and his older brother, Khader, tried to help the woman. When they were about 50 meters from her, Khader was shot in the head.

"He was still breathing and we hoped he could be saved, but there were checkpoints at all the entrances to the village. We knew no ambulance would be coming for him."

Eventually the family managed to get him into a car and drove towards the nearest hospital. Held at a checkpoint, Khalaila said, the family watched as Khader bled to death as he lay across his younger brother's legs on the back seat. Khader was 24 and recently married.

No one ever came to investigate what had happened, or offered the family compensation. "It was as if a bird had died," he said. "No one was interested; no questions were asked in the parliament. Nothing."

As well as the six deaths, hundreds more Palestinians were injured and sweeping arrests were made of political activists.

Dr. Kanaaneh said the stiff resistance mounted by the villagers eventually forced the government to revoke the expropriation order.

Victory, however, was far from clear cut. The next year, Ariel Sharon, as agriculture minister, announced a program of new Jewish settlements called "lookouts" in the Galilee "to prevent control of state lands by foreigners," meaning Israel's own Palestinian citizens. The three villages were surrounded by the lookout communities, which came to be known collectively as Misgav regional council.

"They were intended to be agricultural communities, but Land Day stopped that," Dr. Kanaaneh said. "Instead they became small bedroom communities, and much of the land we defended was passed to Misgav's jurisdiction.

"Today the owners of the land pay taxes to the regional council rather than their own municipalities, and Misgav can decide, if it wants, to try to confiscate the land again. We may have got our land back, but it is not really in our hands."

Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net.

A version of this article originally appeared in
The National, published in Abu Dhabi.

Fonte: EI

Israel e a anexação ilegal de Jerusalém oriental

fonte: Palestine Chronicle

Israel's illegal annexation of East Jerusalem



'The idea is to toughen policies against East Jerusalem Palestinians.'

By Stephen Lendman – Chicago

So says a confidential EU report revealed on March 7 by The London Guardian's Rory McCarthy. It accuses Israel "of using settlement expansion, house demolitions, discriminatory housing policies and the West Bank (Separation) barrier as a way of 'actively pursuing the illegal annexation' of East Jerusalem." More still, including restrictive permits, "closure of Palestinian institutions," and various other ways to "increase Jewish presence in" the city, "impede Palestinian urban development, and separate East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank" incrementally to annex it.

It says plans are now accelerated and have undermined the Palestinian Authority's (PA) credibility as well as weakened support for peace. It calls "Israel's actions in and around Jerusalem....one of the most acute challenges to Israeli-Palestinian peace-making (yet) have limited security justifications." In addition, they're illegal.

Israel dismissed the criticisms as "a disinformation campaign" and claimed that "mayor Nir Barkat continues to promote investments in infrastructure, construction and education in East Jerusalem, while at the same time upholding the law throughout West and East Jerusalem equally without bias." Those comments, of course, have no basis in fact nor do any from Israeli officials with regard to Palestinians.

The EU report cites Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention that prohibits "Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory...." Neither shall "The Occupying Power....deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." In addition, numerous UN resolutions established "no legal validity" for settlement building or for East Jerusalem's annexation.

Yet settlement expansions continue at a "rapid pace" - in the past year alone with nearly 5500 new units submitted for public review, 3000 of which have been approved. Through yearend 2008, they number in total around 470,000, including 190,000 in Arab East Jerusalem.

Of particular concern are "settlements inside the Old City, where there were plans (for) 35 housing units in the Muslim quarter, as well as (more) for Silwan, just outside the Old City walls" - the idea being to connect East Jerusalem with Old City settlements, then "sever" them from the West Bank.

The Guardian's McCarthy states:

"There are plans for 3500 housing units, an industrial park, two police stations and other infrastructure in a controversial area known as E1, between East Jerusalem and the West Bank settlement of Ma'ale Adumin, home to 31,000 settlers." The EU report called Israeli E1 measures "one of the most significant challenges to the....peace process."

Israel responded as expected - that it's "committed to the continued development of the city for the benefits of all its population," and that East Jerusalem Palestinians are better off than those in the West Bank," according to Olmert spokesman, Mark Regev. The EU clearly disagrees. So do human rights activists and Palestinians throughout the Territories living under an oppressive military occupation where international laws are debased so none of their rights are observed.

More from the "EU Heads of Mission Report on East Jerusalem"

No longer confidential, the reports documents numerous abuses in spite of Israeli denials to the contrary. Besides the above:

-- in October 2008, a new synagogue was inaugurated "in the immediate vicinity of the Haram Al Sharif/Temple Mount" raising Palestinian concerns about Israel's plans to take over the sanctuary as extremist settlers are promoting;

-- the recent "Mufti's Grove" confiscation of 29 dunums (around seven acres) for settler development;

-- increased settler incursions into the Haram Al Sharif on the Temple Mount, at times protected by Israeli security forces;

-- Palestinian properties are being targeted and families evicted from their homes;

-- provocative settlement expansions are continuing "in the heart of the Palestinian population;"

-- Palestinian urban development is being impeded "by depriving East Jerusalem of most of the still vacant areas available for economic and demographic growth;"

-- land is being confiscated for road construction;

-- the Separation Wall and "permit regime" cause "serious humanitarian, social and economic impact on Palestinian life;" in addition, 86% of it is on stolen land inside the Green Line; "the Wall in the Jerusalem area de facto annexes 3.9% of the West Bank" and extends Israel's border illegally; by including "illegal settlements, (the Wall) cuts off 285,000 Palestinians," including East Jerusalem, from the West Bank creating enormous hardships as a result;

-- as more of the Wall is completed, "the checkpoint and permit regime imposed on West Bankers is being tightened;" only around 20% of farmers have permits for their land; the impact on their lives is "serious;" once the Wall is completed, it's "estimated that 35,000 Palestinians will need permits for their own homes" with no assurance they'll get them;

-- East Jerusalem's Al Quds University's Beit Hanina Campus is also affected; it reports a 70% drop in students;

-- fewer Palestinian Christians and Muslims have access to religious sites;

-- West Bank and East Jerusalem economies have declined with customers cut off from markets and services;

-- East Jerusalem hospitals providing specialist healthcare face "increasing difficulties providing services for (West Bank) patients" who can't access it without permits;

-- East Jerusalemities get miniscule budgets that greatly restrict essential public services - "in sharp contrast to areas where Israelis live both in West Jerusalem and East Jerusalem settlements;"

-- severe municipality restrictions impede "the building of Palestinian housing in East Jerusalem;" very few permits are issued for it;

-- "since Israel annexed East Jerusalem, more than 35% of its territory has been expropriated (more than 24 sq. km);" of the remainder, much is unzoned and off limits for construction; even in zoned areas, "development has been artificially 'capped,' leaving only 12% of East Jerusalem (mostly originally Palestinian owned land) for Palestinian residential purposes;"

-- building anywhere without permits means likely demolition, but getting one is onerous; authorities issue fewer than 200 a year, and "even these require a wait of several years and are usually a costly affair;"

-- various other obstacles and restrictions make life for East Jerusalem Palestinians difficult to impossible, yet Israel finds new ways of imposing them.

Bricup's "Report on East Jerusalem"

Bricup is the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine, "an organisation set up in response to the Palestinian Call for Academic Boycott" - with twin missions:

-- "to support Palestinian universities, staff and students," and

-- "to oppose the continued illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands with its concomitant breaches of international conventions of human rights, its refusal to accept UN resolutions or rulings of the International Court (ICJ), and its persistent suppression of Palestinian academic freedom."

Undated but likely from mid to late 2005, its report calls "East Jerusalem....of central importance to the Palestinians in political, economic, social and religious terms. Several inter-linked Israeli policies are reducing the possibility of reaching a final status agreement on Jerusalem," and show Israel's clear intent to make its East Jerusalem annexation "a concrete fact" by:

-- completing the Separation Wall to encircle the city;

-- continuing illegal settlement expansions;

-- annexing East Jerusalem one demolished home at a time;

-- strictly enforcing rules separating East Jerusalem Palestinians from those in the West Bank, including by a reduced number of work permits; and

-- the Jerusalem municipality's discriminatory taxation, expenditure, and building permit policies.

Along with continued home demolitions, expanding the Ma'aleh Adumin settlement into area E1 threatens to completely encircle the city with Jewish settlements and split the West Bank in two. Once the Separation Wall is completed, East Jerusalem will be isolated physically, politically, commercially and socially. With justification, Palestinians fear that Israel will "get away with it," seriously erode any chance for peace, and radicalize "the hitherto relatively quiescent " East Jerusalem population.

Jerusalem remains one of the thorniest issues in reaching an equitable resolution to the Israeli - Palestinian conflict, yet Tel Aviv appears determined to make it harder. EU policy is based (if not enforced) on the provisions of UN Security Council Resolution 242 (November 1967) that calls for "Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict." As a result, EU member states (nominally at least) reject East Jerusalem's annexation or any measures to change its status. Nonetheless, Israel continues to violate international laws, and as a result, creates huge humanitarian and political fallout, so far with impunity.

Bricup wants but hasn't gotten clear EU and Quartet statements for Israel to desist from all illegal and disruptive policies or face political consequences if it refuses. As long as that persists, resolution to the long-running conflict remains stymied with Israel in command and Palestinians faced with the continued loss of their rights and land.

Historical Background and Basic Information on Occupied Palestine and Jerusalem

In November 1947, six months before Israel became a state, the General Assembly Partition Plan (Resolution 181) gave Jews 56% of historic Palestine, Palestinians 42%, with 2% kept under internationalized trusteeship, including Jerusalem. Israel's 1948 War of Independence seized 78%. Then in December, UN Resolution 194 mandated free access to Jerusalem, other holy places, and granted Palestinians the right of return.

In May 1949, UN Resolution 273 gave Israel UN membership conditional on it accepting resolutions 181 and 194 and "unreservedly (agreeing to honor) the obligations of the United Nations Charter." However, earlier in June 1948, the Israeli cabinet (with no formal vote) barred Palestinian refugees from returning and adopted "Israelification" and "De-Arabization" as policy, especially with regard to Jerusalem. The same policy holds today to preserve Israel's "Jewish character" and confine Palestinians to isolation, confinement, and continued oppression under military occupation.

From May 1948 until June 1967, Israel controlled West Jerusalem's 38 square kilometers while Jordan governed East Jerusalem's six square km area. After the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel annexed 70 square West Bank km, including East Jerusalem, 28 Palestinian villages, and parts of Bethlehem and Beit Jala's municipalities to make Jerusalem Israel's largest city. Also its most controversial by creating a Jewish majority to solidify Israeli sovereignty over the city henceforth.

Palestinian villages were divided to exclude heavily-populated areas, and much of their land was expropriated for Jews. Remaining Palestinians became "permanent residents:"

-- unwanted on their own land;

-- treated like foreign immigrants;

-- denied most citizenship rights, even for native Jerusalemites with roots going back generations or longer; and

-- targeted by Israel for removal - one home demolition at a time to make way for new Jewish settlements.

As of year end 2005, Jerusalem's population was 723,700, according to B'Tselem - 482,000 Jews (67%) and 241,000 Palestinians (33%). The Jewish Virtual Library's numbers are even more one-sided at 582,700 Jews (69%), 240,900 Palestinians (29%), and 15,700 Christians (2%) for an 839,300 total.

Israel constrains a faster-growing Palestinian population by:

-- expropriating Palestinian land, by individual seizures and the Separation Wall;

-- physically isolating East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank;

-- employing discriminatory policies, including land expropriation, home demolitions, building restrictions including denial of permits, and other restrictive measures;

-- revoking residency and other benefits of Palestinians who stay abroad for seven years or who can't prove that Jerusalem is their home; and

-- providing East Jerusalem few services to cause severe deprivation and encourage its residents to leave; sanitation facilities are sorely lacking; sewage and drainage infrastructure is grossly inadequate; infrastructure overall is in disrepair; trash goes uncollected and piles up in streets; the postal service barely functions; few neighborhoods get fresh water; educational facilities are few and deplorable, and much more;

-- raising poverty to outlandish levels; in 2003, Central Bureau of Statistics data showed the damage - 64% of East Jerusalem Palestinians lived in poverty; for children, it was 76%; today the numbers are likely higher; and

-- using police and security force harshness to exacerbate conditions through harassment, violence, terror, and killings.

East Jerusalem remains illegally annexed and occupied. In addition, all the above infringements violate Fourth Geneva law that requires an occupying power to provide essential goods and services and do nothing to restrict them. It also prohibits "violence to life and person (including) murder, mutilation, cruel treatment, torture (and) outrages upon personal dignity." It designates everyone under occupation as "protected persons" fully covered by law. It bans "Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons (anywhere) or transfer (of) parts of its own population into the territory it occupies." Israel is in violation on all counts, and consider others as well below.

Obstacles to Palestinian Family Unification

Until May 2002, Israeli citizens, including Arabs, married to Palestinians in the Territories could live with their spouses in Israel, after completing a lengthy Ministry of Interior process to OK it. No longer after the government froze the application process and on July 31, 2003 passed the Nationality and Entry into Israel (Temporary Order) Law, 5763 - 2003. Thereafter, it was renewed.

The statute henceforth prohibits Israelis from bringing their Territory spouses into Israel, and children as well are harmed. Those residing in East Jerusalem who were born in the Territories are barred from residency in Israel.

As a result, tens of thousands are affected. Couples violating the law risk serious recriminations if caught, even in East Jerusalem, the West Bank or Gaza. Without a special permit, Israelis are forbidden to enter Gaza or Area A in the West Bank. However, couples who married before the law's enactment, in cases where Territory spouses hadn't yet received permanent Israeli status, may live together provided the Civil Administration issues a permit, something extremely hard to get and often cancelled.

Israel's "demographic bomb" is the problem - meaning the time when a faster-growing Palestinian population becomes a majority and threatens the Jewish State's character. Israel's solution is repressive laws and violent ethnic cleansing to prevent it, in Israel and the Territories.

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel, the Adalah Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, some Knesset members, and couples harmed by the law petitioned the Supreme Court to void it. However, on May 14, 2006, Israel's High Court of Justice upheld it in spite of several UN agencies (UNHRC, UNCERD, and UNCEDAW) and human rights organizations calling for its revocation.

Its opponents call it discriminatory, racist, and in violation of international law for infringing on family life, privacy, dignity, and equality by treating Jews one way and Palestinians another. Various international conventions to which Israel is a signatory prohibit the practice, including the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention for the Rights of the Child. Nonetheless, so far it stands.

Annexation Through One Home Demolition at A Time

The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) helps rebuild homes. It also resists "land expropriation, settlement expansion, by-pass road construction, policies of 'closure' and 'separation,' " destruction of agricultural land and crops, and the repressive effects of occupation, but its original mission was to oppose and resist house demolitions in the Occupied Territories.

From 1967 through December 2008, ICAHD estimates that 23,535 Palestinian homes overall have been destroyed from information gotten from the Israeli Ministry of Interior, the Jerusalem Municipality, the Civil Administration, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs(OCHA), other UN sources, Palestinian human rights groups, Amnesty International (AI), Human Rights Watch (HRW), and other sources. It classifies types of demolitions as:

-- punitive as punishment for actions associated with the houses (around 8.7%);

-- administrative for lack of a building permit (around 26.7%);

-- land-clearing and by the military to clear land for any reason, achieve an IDF goal, or accompany extrajudicial assassinations (about 64.5%); and

-- other reasons so far undefined.

Below is an account of one for lack of a permit - a clear testimony to the harshness of the practice.

On July 28, 2008, Hiba al-Almi gave this account about her family's dream to buy a home. In 2002, her father spent $200,000 for an apartment, "all his savings. The contractor showed him the building permit he had received" to reassure him. In June 2006, "we moved in. The next day, policemen and Jerusalem Municipality officials came and handed us a demolition order." The building permit apparently wasn't valid.

On October 18, 2006, final demolition orders were posted on the building, "and we began to remove our furniture." With legal help, the order was postponed, and by November her family moved back. In July 2008, "teams of inspectors and Border Police forces came to the house a few times." They photographed the building without explanation.

On July 27 at around 11:30AM, "my parents were abroad and I was home alone. The bell rang and when I opened the door, I saw three Jerusalem Municipality inspectors and a Border Police officer with high ranking insignias on his shoulder." They entered and inspected room to room.

Hiba slept that night at her aunt's house as she didn't want to be at home alone. At around 1AM, a neighbor called, said police might return that night, so "Around 2, I returned home with my aunt....Around 3:30AM, I heard" stun gun grenades exploding, then banging on the door. "When I opened (it), a few policemen burst in with black masks on their faces," accompanied by "five huge dogs...."

She and her aunt were ordered out of the building "immediately," not allowed to get dressed, sworn at, slapped, hit in the back, threatened by one of the dogs, then grabbed by the hair, thrown to the ground, and kicked. A policeman then pushed her out of the apartment and down the stairs. Other police were in the stairway, and they hit and punched her as well. She begged them to let her go back to retrieve valuables and a school project on her computer. They refused and said everything would be brought out with the furniture.

Her father returned the next day at 11:30AM but was prevented from entering the building. At around 6:30PM, there was a loud explosion after which the "whole building collapsed, and my life was buried with it. All my mementos and pictures of the family were buried in the ruins." All the furniture and much other property and valuables were lost. The family now lives in a rented house, deeply scarred by the incident, that's repeated many times throughout the West Bank and in East Jerusalem.

Denial of Social Rights to East Jerusalem Palestinians

To receive them, including health coverage, individuals must be an "Israeli resident." East Jerusalem Palestinians are not so are lawfully excluded from entitlements. Especially suspect are East Jerusalemites married to non-resident Palestinians so nearly always allotment request investigations are conducted to check their validity - to verify if applicants live in Jerusalem lawfully. They take months and are often denied in violation of residents' rights. When resident parents want to register children, additional investigations are begun that again take months so that thousands of resident minors end up denied services.

The idea is to toughen policies against East Jerusalem Palestinians and make their lives as harsh as possible toward the goal of reducing their numbers to provide more areas for Jews.

A Final Comment

Early in its history, Zionists chose confrontation over conciliation and used violence to achieve political aims. Thereafter came wars, state-sponsored terrorism, military occupation, ethnic cleansing, land theft, police state justice, and slow motion genocide to rid "Greater Israel" of Arabs and solidify its character as a Jewish state - most of all in Jerusalem, a "sacred city" for Zionists with lots of biblical nonsense and myths for support.

Ever since, Palestinians have suffered grievously for over six decades and under occupation since 1967. Sabbah Haitham's blog says it well:

"YOU take my water, burn my olive trees, destroy my house, take my job, steal my land, imprison my father, kill my mother, bomb my country, starve us all, humiliate us all....BUT....I am to blame: I shot a rocket back."

Nothing on the horizon promises Sabbah relief because world leaders, above all in America, exempt Israel from international law and give its government license to plunder, oppress, and terrorize defenseless Palestinians with impunity, separate them in isolated cantons, keep them under military occupation, starve them to death in Gaza under siege and ruthless bombings, and purge them relentlessly from the "sacred city" of Jerusalem.

That's where things stand today under new leadership in Tel Aviv, Washington, and a complicit West Bank coup d'etat Palestinian government serving Israel as its enforcer and in the process betraying its own people.

When will it end? When people everywhere say enough is enough and join the Global BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanctions) Movement to punish Israel until it complies with international law, recognizes Palestinian self-determination, ends its illegal occupation, disbands its settlements, demolishes the Separation Wall, grants Israeli Arabs equal rights as Jews, recognizes the right of return, and gives Palestinians their legal claim to Jerusalem for their capital. Global grassroots movements are determined to make it happen.

- Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com. Contact him at: lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. (Also listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday through Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues.)

gaza_black_ribbon
 
Palestine Blogs - The Gazette Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.