Saudi Columnist: "The Right of Return Is an Illusion"

Special Dispatch-Reform Project/Arab-Israeli Conflict
April 12, 2007
No. 1540

Saudi Columnist: "The Right of Return Is an Illusion"

To view this Special Dispatch in HTML, visit:
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD154007 .

In two recent articles in the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyassa, Saudi columnist Yousef Nasser Al-Sweidan argued that the Palestinian refugees' right of return is an idea that cannot be implemented, and that the only solution is for the refugees to be naturalized in the countries where they currently reside.

The following are excerpts from the articles:


The Right of Return – An Idea that Cannot Be Implemented

In the first article, published March 5, 2007 and titled "On the Impossible [Idea] of the Right of Return," Al-Sweidan wrote: "...The slogan 'right of return'... which is brandished by Palestinian organizations, is perceived as one of the greatest difficulties and as the main obstacle to renewing and advancing the peace process between the Israelis and the Palestinians based on the Road Map and a two-state solution.

"It is patently obvious that uprooting the descendents of the refugees from their current homes in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and other countries, and returning them to Israel, to the West Bank, and to Gaza is a utopian ideal and [a recipe for] anarchy. More than that – it is an idea that cannot be implemented, not only because it will upset the demographic [balance] in a dangerous and destructive manner, and will have [far-reaching] political, economic and social ramifications in such a small and constrained geographical area, but [mainly] because the return [of the refugees] stands in blatant contradiction to Israel's right as a sovereign [state], while the Palestinian Authority lacks the infrastructure to absorb such a large number of immigrants as long as the peace process... is not at its peak..."


The Refugee Problem is the Result of Mistakes By the Host Countries

"Clearly, the refugee problem is mainly the result of cumulative mistakes made by the countries where [the refugees] live... such as Syria and Lebanon, which have isolated the refugees in poor and shabby camps lacking the most basic conditions for a dignified human existence. Instead of helping them to become fully integrated in their new society, they let them become victims of isolation and suffering... Later, the worst of all happened when Arab intelligence agencies used the Palestinian organizations as a tool for settling scores in internal Arab conflicts that probably have nothing to do with the Palestinians...

"The Israelis, on the other hand, were civilized and humane in their treatment of the thousands of Jewish refugees who had lost their property, homes and businesses in the Arab countries, and who were forced to emigrate to Israel after the 1948 war. The Israeli government received them, helped them, and provided them with all the conditions [they needed] to become integrated in their new society...

"The lies of the Syrian Ba'th regime, and its trading in slogans like 'right of return,' 'steadfastness,' 'resistance,' 'national struggle,' and all the other ridiculous [slogans], are evident from the fact that, to this day, dozens of Palestinian families [remain] stranded in the desert on the Syrian-Iraqi border, because the Syrian regime refuses to let them enter its horrifying Ba'th republic and return to the Yarmouk [refugee] camp.

"The Arab countries where the Palestinians live in refugee camps must pass the laws necessary to integrate the inhabitants of these camps into society. [In addition, they must] provide them with education and health services, and allow them freedom of occupation and movement and the right to own real estate, instead of [continuing] their policy of excluding [the refugees] and leaving the responsibility [of caring for them] to others, while marketing the impossible illusion of return [to Palestine]..."(1)


The Refugees Don't Need Another 60 Years of Misery

In the second article, published March 16, 2007 and titled "Naturalization is the Solution," Al-Sweidan wrote: "There is no doubt that the Palestinian refugees in Syria and Lebanon – who have for many long years been fed by their Arab hosts on impossible dreams and on shiny promises that were soon broken – do not need another 60 years of misery, wretchedness and suffering... in order to figure out for the thousandth time that all the talk about the 'bridge of return' is [nothing but] nonsense and deceit – a fairytale that exists only in the old, worn-out demagogy of the Arab propaganda...

"In reality, there is no 'bridge [of return]'... except for the bridge that we now must pass... called the peace process and normalization of relations between the Arabs and Israel. Undoubtedly, the Arabs cannot continue to avoid the implementation [of the peace process], which brooks no further delay. [Any delay] will have a heavy price for the Arab societies in the present and in the future, considering the sharp strategic changes [occurring] in the Middle East. [These changes] demand an immediate and final solution to the Arab-Israeli conflicts, and [require] the two sides to direct their joint energies and efforts towards confronting the Iranian nuclear threat which imperils us all."


The Inevitable Solution is to Naturalize the Refugees in the Host Countries

"As the Middle East peace process gains momentum, and as the regional and international forces remain committed to the need to resolve this [conflict]... there is a growing necessity for a realistic, unavoidable and bold decision that will provide a just solution to the problem of the Palestinian refugees by naturalizing them in the host countries, such as Syria, Lebanon, and other countries.

"Even though this is a humanitarian [project], it requires intensive efforts on the legislative, economic, logistic, and administrative levels, in order to integrate the Palestinians organically into the social, economic and political fabric of the Arab societies...

"By every conceivable and accepted criterion, naturalizing the refugees [in the Arab countries] is the inevitable solution to [this] chronic humanitarian problem. The fact that [this solution] constitutes an important part of the overall peace process and of the historic reconciliation between the Arabs and the Israelis will help to reinforce [the naturalization process] and to perpetuate it."(2)

Endnotes:
(1) Al-Siyassa (Kuwait), March 5, 2007.
(2) Al-Siyassa (Kuwait), March 16, 2007.


*********************
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent, non-profit
organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East. Copies
of articles and documents cited, as well as background information, are
available on request.

MEMRI holds copyrights on all translations. Materials may only be used with
proper attribution.

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)
P.O. Box 27837, Washington, DC 20038-7837
Phone: (202) 955-9070
Fax: (202) 955-9077
E-Mail: memri@memri.org
Search previous MEMRI publications at http://www.memri.org/  

Marwan Barghouti's wife: I would tell terror victim's mother to leave my country

Marwan Barghouti's wife: I would tell terror victim's mother to leave my country
Date: 11 April, 2007

Reporter: If you would have the chance to talk with a Jewish mother who lost her son in an attack planned by your husband, what would you tell her?

Fadwa Barghouti (wife of Marwan Barghouti): I would tell her to leave my country (broad smile).

Interview broadcast on Israel Television Mabat News -  11 April 2007
[Translation of the Hebrew subtitles broadcast in the interview by IMRA]

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-3-7255730
INTERNET ADDRESS: imra@netvision.net.il
Website: http://www.imra.org.il

Palestijnse eenheidsregering (cartoon Berend Vonk)

Deze sterke cartoon van Berend Vonk over de Palestijnse eenheidsregering troffen wij aan op Dutchblog Israel.

 

 

Arabisch vredesplan geen handreiking maar dictaat

In Podium van dagblad Trouw verschenen vorige week twee opiniestukken waarin Israël werd verweten geen vrede te willen sluiten met de Arabische wereld: van oud-ambassadeur Ader en van Haaretz redacteur Barel.

Onderstaande reactie van mij op Barel werd helaas niet geplaatst.

Ratna 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arabisch vredesplan geen handreiking maar dictaat

12.04.2007

In Podium van zaterdag 7 april wordt Israël er - wederom - van beschuldigd het Arabische vredesinitiatief te hebben afgewezen en oorlog boven vrede te verkiezen. De Arabische staten boden Israël vorige week een nieuwe kans zich te ontdoen van zijn gijzelnemers, aldus Zvi Barel van Haaretz, maar het blijft liever gegijzeld dan dat het met de Arabieren over vrede praat. Een vergezochte analogie, en bovendien onjuist.

Premier Olmert heeft het Arabische vredesinitiatief 'een startpunt, maar geen eindpunt' genoemd, en voorgesteld om met de gematigde Arabische staten op basis van dit voorstel te praten over vrede. In onderhandelingen brengen beide partijen hun positie naar voren en proberen vervolgens tot overeenstemming te komen. Bij een serieus conflict tussen twee gelijkwaardige partijen komt het nooit voor dat één partij een voorstel van de andere kant onvoorwaardelijk accepteert, en vervolgens slechts details en technische zaken uitgewerkt hoeven te worden. Toch hebben de Arabische staten en de Palestijnen Olmerts voorstel tot onderhandelingen afgewezen en geëist dat Israël eerst het Arabische vredesplan onvoorwaardelijk accepteert. Zowel Amr Moussa, de leider van de Arabische Liga, als de Saoedische Minister van buitenlandse zaken Saud al-Faisal hebben het onomwonden als een eindbod gepresenteerd, en ervoor gewaarschuwd dat afwijzing door Israël zal leiden tot een escalatie van geweld. Moussa heeft bovendien in een officiële persconferentie verklaard dat er pas sprake kan zijn van 'normale betrekkingen' met Israël nadat het zich uit alle in 1967 veroverde gebieden heeft teruggetrokken, er een Palestijnse staat is, en een 'rechtvaardige oplossing' voor het vluchtelingenprobleem op basis van VN resolutie 194 is gevonden. Dat is niet iets wat je in twee dagen even regelt, en gedurende al die tijd waarin Israël nederzettingen ontruimt, land overdraagt aan de Palestijnen en vluchtelingen opneemt, gaat de Arabische boycot van Israël dus door, evenals de actieve steun van sommige staten aan terrorisme tegen Israël en de verspreiding van de walgelijkste antisemitische leugens. Dit is geen vredesaanbod, maar een dictaat, een eis tot overgave.
Resolutie 194 wordt in de Arabische wereld en door de Palestijnen algemeen geïnterpreteerd als een onvoorwaardelijk 'recht op terugkeer' van alle vluchtelingen en hun nakomelingen naar Israël. Zowel leiders van Fatah als Hamas hebben er tijdens de recent gehouden Arabische top op aangedrongen vooral geen compromis te sluiten wat betreft dit 'recht op terugkeer'. 76 Palestijnse organisaties hebben een officiële brief geschreven met dezelfde oproep. Voor Israël is juist het 'recht op terugkeer' het voornaamste struikelblok in het Arabische vredesplan. Het wijst er terecht op dat dit een twee-statenoplossing tegenspreekt, althans in de zin van twee staten voor twee volken, van erkenning van het recht op zelfbeschikking van zowel Joden als Palestijnen. Immers, de 'terugkeer' van miljoenen vluchtelingen zou spoedig leiden tot een Arabische meerderheid in Israël.
Het Arabische vredesplan spreekt van normale of natuurlijke betrekkingen met Israël, een vage formulering waarbij opzettelijk de gangbare diplomatieke term 'normalisatie van betrekkingen' is vermeden. Ook wordt niet gerept over erkenning van Israël als Joodse staat. De acceptatie van Fatah van een twee-statenoplossing is wat dit betreft eveneens altijd ambigu geweest: men is bereid Israël te erkennen, maar beschouwt tegelijkertijd de Wet op de Terugkeer, die bepaalt dat iedere Jood naar Israël kan immigreren, als racistisch. Terwijl iedere soevereine staat zijn eigen immigratiepolitiek kan bepalen, zou Israël dit recht niet toekomen. De Palestijnse eenheidsregering ging zelfs dit te ver en in de regeringsverklaring wordt in het geheel niet van een twee-statenoplossing en erkenning van Israël gesproken. In de Arabische landen worden de Joden als religie, niet als volk beschouwd, wordt de millennialange band van de Joden met het land Israël/Palestina en Jeruzalem ontkend en wordt geregeld de Holocaust ontkend omdat dit als de belangrijkste rechtvaardiging van de staat Israël wordt gezien. Er is dan ook weinig vertrouwen aan Israëlische kant dat men werkelijk bereid is Israël te erkennen in ruil voor een einde aan de bezetting en een Palestijnse staat, en de vasthoudendheid wat betreft het recht op terugkeer van de vluchtelingen is hier slechts een illustratie van.
Voorafgaand aan serieuze vredesonderhandelingen zouden beide partijen onomwonden het zelfbeschikkingsrecht van de ander in een deel van historisch Palestina moeten erkennen. Vervolgens zouden beide kanten hun goede wil moeten tonen, de Israëli's door het ontruimen van buitenposten, vergroten van de bewegingsvrijheid van Palestijnen en het vrijlaten van gevangenen, de Palestijnen door het tegengaan van wapensmokkel, van het afvuren van qassamraketten en opruiing in de media (allemaal zaken die beide partijen ook volgens de Routekaart voor Vrede moeten doen). Beide kanten zouden bovendien moeten investeren in 'vredeseducatie', in het zien van de andere kant als mensen, niet bezetters of terroristen, met legitieme claims en grieven, en de eigen bevolking moeten voorbereiden op vergaande concessies.
Het Arabische vredesinitiatief is een goed public relations offensief, maar bevat weinig substantie.

Ratna Pelle

America, Israel and the Arab world: A War of Narratives

Volgens David Brooks, columnist bij de New York Times, heeft de notoire 'studie' van Mearsheimer en Walt naar de Joodse lobby in de VS niet alleen anti-Israël sentimenten in de VS versterkt, maar ook geleid tot een minder kritische houding van Arabische elites ten opzichte van de eigen cultuur. Dit moge niet verbazen: zelfkritiek is al niet in overvloed aanwezig in de Arabische wereld, en bevestiging vanuit de westerse wereld dat niet zij maar Israël de oorzaak van alle problemen is, is natuurlijk meer dan welkom. Israël bashers kunnen zich dan ook serieus afvragen of zij de Arabische zaak wel zoveel goed doen.

 

The events of the past three years have shifted their diagnosis of where the cancer is — from dysfunction in the Arab world to malevolence in Jerusalem and in Aipac. Furthermore, the Walt and Mearsheimer paper on the Israel lobby has had a profound effect on Arab elites. It has encouraged them not to be introspective, not to think about their own problems, but to blame everything on the villainous Israeli network.

And so we enter a more intractable phase in the conflict, which will not be a war over land or oil or even democratic institutions, but a war over narratives. The Arabs will nurture this Zionist-centric mythology, which is as self-flattering as it is self-destructive. They will demand that the U.S. and Israel adopt their narrative and admit historical guilt. Failing politically, militarily and economically, they will fight a battle for moral superiority, the kind of battle that does not allow for compromises or truces. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
The New York Times

April 8, 2007

Op-Ed Columnist

A War of Narratives

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/04/08/opinion/&OQ=_rQ3D1&OP=7c27c076Q2FQ27.DpQ27YQ5BQ7EHHYQ27jmmlQ27mxQ27mhQ27HQ2FS2SH2Q27

By David Brooks.

On the Dead Sea, Jordan

I just attended a conference that was both illuminating and depressing. It was co-sponsored by the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan and the American Enterprise Institute, and the idea was to get Americans and moderate Arab reformers together to talk about Iraq, Iran, and any remaining prospects for democracy in the Middle East.

As it happened, though, the Arab speakers mainly wanted to talk about the Israel lobby. One described a book edited in the mid-1990s by the Jewish policy analyst David Wurmser as the secret blueprint for American foreign policy over the past decade. A pollster showed that large majorities in Arab countries believe that the Israel lobby has more influence over American policy than the Bush administration. Speaker after speaker triumphantly cited the work of Stephen Walt, John Mearsheimer and Jimmy Carter as proof that even Americans were coming to admit that the Israel lobby controls their government.

The problems between America and the Arab world have nothing to do with religious fundamentalism or ideological extremism, several Arab speakers argued. They have to do with American policies toward Israel, and the forces controlling those policies.

As for problems in the Middle East itself, these speakers added, they have a common source, Israel. One elderly statesman noted that the four most pressing issues in the Middle East are the Arab-Israeli dispute, instability in Lebanon, chaos in Iraq and the confrontation with Iran. They are all interconnected, he said, and Israel is at the root of each of them.

We Americans tried to press our Arab friends to talk more about the Sunni-Shiite split, the Iraqi civil war and the rise of Iran, but they seemed uninterested. They mimicked a speech King Abdullah of Jordan recently delivered before Congress, in which he scarcely mentioned the Iraqi chaos on his border. It was all Israel, all the time.

The Americans, needless to say, had a different narrative. We tended to argue that problems like Muslim fundamentalism, extremism and autocracy could not be blamed on Israel or Paul Wolfowitz but had deeper historical roots. We tended to see the Israeli-Palestinian issue not as the root of all fundamentalism, but as a problem made intractable by fundamentalism.

In other words, they had their narrative and we had ours, and the two passed each other without touching. But the striking thing about this meeting was the emotional tone. There seemed to be a time, after 9/11, when it was generally accepted that terror and extremism were symptoms of a deeper Arab malaise. There seemed to be a general recognition that the Arab world had fallen behind, and that it needed economic, political and religious modernization.

But there was nothing defensive or introspective about the Arab speakers here. In response to Bernard Lewis's question, "What Went Wrong?" their answer seemed to be: Nothing's wrong with us. What's wrong with you?

The events of the past three years have shifted their diagnosis of where the cancer is — from dysfunction in the Arab world to malevolence in Jerusalem and in Aipac. Furthermore, the Walt and Mearsheimer paper on the Israel lobby has had a profound effect on Arab elites. It has encouraged them not to be introspective, not to think about their own problems, but to blame everything on the villainous Israeli network.

And so we enter a more intractable phase in the conflict, which will not be a war over land or oil or even democratic institutions, but a war over narratives. The Arabs will nurture this Zionist-centric mythology, which is as self-flattering as it is self-destructive. They will demand that the U.S. and Israel adopt their narrative and admit historical guilt. Failing politically, militarily and economically, they will fight a battle for moral superiority, the kind of battle that does not allow for compromises or truces.

Americans, meanwhile, will simply want to get out. After 9/11, George Bush called on the U.S. to get deeply involved in the Middle East. But now, most Americans have given up on their ability to transform the Middle East and on Arab willingness to change. Faced with an arc of conspiracy-mongering, most Americans will get sick of the whole cesspool, and will support any energy policy or anything else that will enable them to cut ties with the region.

What we have is not a clash of civilizations, but a gap between civilizations, increasingly without common narratives, common goals or means of communication. 

__,_._,___

Fatah leden niet blij met mogelijke vrijlating Marwan Barghouti

Niet alle Palestijnen zijn blij als Marwan Barghouti, die een nationale heldenstatus heeft, in de aanstaande gevangenenruil vrij zou komen. Terecht wordt gevreesd dat zijn vrijlating vooral Hamas zal versterken, dat de Israëlische soldaat kidnapte waartegen de vele Palestijnse gevangenen worden uitgeruild, en niet zijn eigen Fatah partij.

Fatah prefers to see Barghouti released as part of a goodwill gesture by Israel to President Mahmoud Abbas.

Zo'n 'goodwill gesture', een paar weken nadat de Israëlische soldaat is vrijgelaten, is natuurlijk nauwelijks geloofwaardig. Wellicht was het beter geweest als Israël had aangeboden Barghouti vrij te laten in ruil voor concessies van Fatah. Het zou sowieso beter zijn als men geen grote hoeveelheden gevangenen vrij laat voor Shalit, want dit is een beloning voor het ontvoeren van Israëli's. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fatah members fear Barghouti's release

Fatah says release of former Tanzim leader as part of prisoner exchange deal with Israel may increase public support for Hamas, spark upheaval within faction; Barghouti's associates: Fatah members are wary of his 'threatening status'

Ali Waked - YNET Published: 04.08.07, 23:01 / Israel News

While Hamas leaders have already promised Marwan Barghouti's family that the former Tanzim leader in the West Bank would be included in a prisoner exchange deal with Israel, some Fatah members would rather see him remain in jail.

Barghouti is at the top of the list of senior prisoners the Palestinian Authority is demanding Israel free in exchange for IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, but some Fatah members fear his release would boost support for rival faction Hamas.

Senior Fatah officials are trying to convince Barghouti's family to back efforts to release him as part of a more comprehensive deal with Israel for which Hamas does not get all the credit.

The Islamic group claimed responsibility for the kidnapping of Shalit in a cross-border operation near Gaza in June of last year.

Fatah prefers to see Barghouti released as part of a goodwill gesture by Israel to President Mahmoud Abbas.

'Release would spark changes within the party'

Barghouti's associates have accused Fatah members opposed to his release of being concerned with Barghouti's 'threatening status within Fatah.'

Barghouti, whose relations with Hamas' leaders are excellent, was instrumental in the drafting of a document drafted by Palestinian prisoners, which urged the formation of a Palestinian unity government and to end internal strife.

Along with Hamas, he also helped devise a ceasefire between rival Palestinian factions, which was declared in March 2005 in Cairo.

Several Fatah leaders fear that Barghouti's release would spark the beginning of changes within the party, some of which they may not approve of.

In the past Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said he was opposed to releasing Barghouti in exchange for Shalit, but no final decision has been made.

Barghouti was captured in Ramallah in April 2002 during Operation Defense Shield. He was arrested not far from the office of former Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat after a long manhunt by IDF and Shin Bet forces.


 

Vrijlating van 'zware jongens' geeist in ruil voor Israelische soldaat

Wat zullen al deze gevangenen - met name de planners van verschillende dodelijke zelfmoordaanslagen - doen als zij vrijkomen?? De Koran bestuderen? Wellicht is het beter als Israël één man opgeeft om er vele in de toekomst te redden. Uiteraard kan men wel aanbieden om mensen die voor kleinere zaken vastzitten (geen bloed aan hun handen hebben) en vrouwen en jongeren vrij te laten.

_______________________________________________________  

 

Notorious Palestinian prisoners demanded in Shalit exchange

Palestinians demand release of terrorists convicted of murdering hundreds of civilians in exchange for kidnapped Israeli soldier. List includes masterminds behind Ze'evi assassination, Karin A weapons ship, scores of suicide bombings

 

Ali Waked Published:  04.09.07, 20:29 / Israel News

 

The captors of the Israeli soldier, Cpl. Gilad Shalit, have handed over the names of the hundreds of Palestinian prisoners they want released to Israel several days ago, through Egyptian mediators.

 

 Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti, the most senior Palestinian held by Israel, is among the hundreds of inmates the Hamas organization wants in exchange for the release of kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, Palestinian Information Minister Mustafa Barghouti said Monday. The information minister and the prisoner are distant relatives.

Marwan Barghouti, seen as a potential successor to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, is serving five consecutive life terms for his involvement in the murders of four Israelis and a Greek monk, and the demand for his release could complicate the swap as Barghouti's release would require a pardon by Israel's president since he was tried in a civilian, not a military court.

 

Before the eruption of the Palestinian intifada in 2000, Barghouti was seen as a moderating influence among Palestinians, pushing for peace talks and a Palestinian state next to Israel. Israeli peace activists met with him frequently.

 

 Additional Palestinian prisoners on Hamas' list include Ahmed Saadat, who headed the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a small PLO faction. In 2001, gunmen from Saadat's faction assassinated an Israeli Cabinet minister, Rehavam Zeevi, in a Jerusalem hotel.

 

Four PFLP members have been charged in the assassination, but Israel's attorney general said there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute Saadat in the killing. Saadat faces trial in a military court for unspecified security offenses.

 

Masterminds behind hundreds of deaths

 

The list includes, among others, the names of prisoners convicted for their involvement in dozens of suicide bombings inside Israel. The most prominent of these is Abdullah Barghouti, a Hamas leader in the West Bank who is serving out 67 consecutive life terms. Barghouti pleaded guilty to building the bombs that murdered 66 people and wounded more than 500 in a series of suicide bombings.

 

Hamas is also demanding the release of Hassan Salama, a Hamas leader who in the mid-90's led a wave of suicide bombings. Salama was convicted of murdering 67 Israeli citizens and was sentenced to several dozen consecutive life terms.

 

Another name on the list likely to cause outrage is Fouad al-Shoubaki. In his capacity as former chief of military financial affairs for the Palestinian Authority under Yasser Arafat, al-Shoubaki orchestrated the arrival of the Karin A weapons ship which was intercepted by the IDF in 2002 while en route from Iran to Gaza. Al-Shoubaki was arrested in March 2006 during Israel's raid on the Jericho prison.

 

The list also calls for the release of some 40 Palestinians imprisoned since before the Oslo accords in 1993.

 

 

The Associated Press contributed to this report__._,_.___

.

__,_._,___

Shin Bet: Hamas bereidt nieuwe aanslagen voor

Dit is de Hamas betekenis van het 'recht op verzet tegen de bezetting', zoals het in de Palestijnse regeringsverklaring is opgenomen. Men doet wat men zegt. 

"The picture that emerges in interrogations of the members of the cell
clearly signals that the Hamas organization in Qalqilyah has shifted from
the stage of 'force building' to the operational stage and the carrying out
of attacks, including suicide attacks inside Israel. According to
information, they continue to work on planning and execution of significant
attacks, including ones in the immediate future," the Shin Bet announcement
read.

En dit is de betekenis van het staakt-het-vuren dat er is tussen Israël en de Gazastrook:

Egypt recently arrested a Hamas suicide bomber who was trying to cross from
the Gaza Strip into Israel through Sinai.

Hamas militants were also involved in a number of sniper attacks targeting
Israelis driving close to the fence separating Israel from the Gaza Strip.
In one of the attacks, an Israel Electric Corporation employee was
moderately wounded.

De Palestijn die de aanslag wou plegen kon Israël binnenkomen omdat hij met een Israëlisch-Arabische vrouw is getrouwd. Dit spreekt de vele aantijgingen tegen dat Israëlische Arabieren hun Palestijnse echtgenoten niet over kunnen laten komen, en laat bovendien zien dat aan de ruimte die Israël wat dit betreft biedt wel degelijk gevaren kleven. 

The suicide bomber, a member of the Qalqilyah cell, managed to enter Israel
because he holds an Israeli identity card. Although a resident of Qalqilyah,
he is married to an Israeli Arab from Taibeh - and received residency status
as part of the program of reuniting families.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shin Bet: Hamas planned T.A. Passover bombing
By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent / Last update - 03:01 10/04/2007

The Shin Bet announced Tuesday morning that in late March it broke up a Hamas cell in Qalqilyah that had planned to detonate a car bomb in Tel Aviv during Pesach, apparently at the time of the seder, on the holiday's first night.

According to the details released by the security service, the driver, a suicide bomber, had managed to cross into Israel in a vehicle laden with about 100 kilograms of explosives. However, once he reached Tel Aviv, and for reasons that are still unclear, he changed his mind and returned to Qalqilyah.

Nineteen members in the cell have been arrested by the security forces. No names of the suspects were released for publication.

"The picture that emerges in interrogations of the members of the cell clearly signals that the Hamas organization in Qalqilyah has shifted from the stage of 'force building' to the operational stage and the carrying out of attacks, including suicide attacks inside Israel. According to information, they continue to work on planning and execution of significant attacks, including ones in the immediate future," the Shin Bet announcement read.

This latest incident has further boosted the evidence that Hamas has resumed its terrorist activities following a long hiatus that began with the cease-fire in the Gaza Strip last November.

Egypt recently arrested a Hamas suicide bomber who was trying to cross from the Gaza Strip into Israel through Sinai.

Hamas militants were also involved in a number of sniper attacks targeting Israelis driving close to the fence separating Israel from the Gaza Strip.
In one of the attacks, an Israel Electric Corporation employee was moderately wounded.

It is believed that behind the attacks is Ahmed Jabari, the head of the military wing of Hamas in the northern Gaza Strip, who opposed the establishment of the unity government between his party and Fatah. Jabari is particularly dissatisfied with the fact that he and his men are not being awarded the positions of power they believe they deserve.

The degree to which Jabari and the Qalqilyah-based cell are linked is unclear. During the past two years, most of the Hamas cells operating in Samaria had followed orders originating in the Gaza Strip.

The suicide bomber, a member of the Qalqilyah cell, managed to enter Israel because he holds an Israeli identity card. Although a resident of Qalqilyah, he is married to an Israeli Arab from Taibeh - and received residency status as part of the program of reuniting families. The vehicle he was driving had Israeli license plates, and had collected intelligence on possible targets for an attack.

The terrorist changed his mind, returned to Qalqilyah, and left the vehicle in the backyard of a home. Arrests of suspects began shortly after his return, and then the vehicle exploded. There were no casualties as a result of the explosion.

The Shin Bet has described the explosion as a "work accident," euphemism for a technical malfunction.

The Qalqilyah cell is the largest Hamas grouping to have been exposed in the West Bank in recent years. The last time a Qalqilyah-based Hamas cell carried out an attack in Israel, 21 teenagers were killed in a blast at the Dolphinarium in Tel Aviv, in June 2001.

UN vormt mogelijk commissie om wapensmokkel naar Hezbollah te onderzoeken

 

Een goed geluid vanuit de VN. Men neemt eindelijk de wapensmokkel naar Hezbollah serieus.  

Er is helaas een addertje onder het gras: 

 

However, the statement stipulates that the proposed committee will only
be formed if all 15 members of the Security Council vote in favor of it.

The Security Council presidency is rotated alphabetically each month.
This means the formation of the committee is dependent on the consent of
member countries such as Qatar, South Africa, Indonesia and Russia,
among others.

De kans dat al deze landen met de vorming van een dergelijke commisssie instemmen is uiterst klein.   

07/03/2007 Haaretz
UN may form c'tee to review weapons smuggling to Lebanon
By Shlomo Shamir

NEW YORK - The United Nations Security Council will consider forming a
special committee to review accusations that Syria and Iran are
smuggling arms to Hezbollah through southern Lebanon.

The possibility of forming committee was included in a statement by the
Security Council president, U.K. Ambassador to the UN Sir Emyr Parry
Jones. The statement was circulated among member states in preparation
of a discussion on the matter tomorrow.

The statement proposes forming a team of experts commissioned by
Britain, France and the U.S., to examine whether weapons are indeed
being smuggled to Lebanon, as Israel has repeatedly claimed. The
initiative was launched Friday, and was considered a significant step
toward resolving the issue.

However, the statement stipulates that the proposed committee will only
be formed if all 15 members of the Security Council vote in favor of it.

The Security Council presidency is rotated alphabetically each month.
This means the formation of the committee is dependent on the consent of
member countries such as Qatar, South Africa, Indonesia and Russia,
among others.

"The initiative is a demonstration of the ongoing effort to counter the
efforts of Hezbollah and to promote stability within Lebanon," a senior
diplomat told Haaretz.

The initiative is a result of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's
briefing last week to member states, following his tour in the Middle East.

Sources in New York said the secretary-general informed the Security
Council that he had obtained evidence from Israel and from "another
country" that indicate Syria and Iran were indeed smuggling arms into
Lebanon.

_.___

.

__,_._,___

EU Funding Promotes ICAHD's Ideological Agenda

Het door de Europese Unie gesubsidieerde "Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions" voert een radikale anti-Israël agenda, inclusief oproepen tot sancties tegen hun eigen land en actieve samenwerking met bedenkelijke Palestijnse organisaties.

Onder het "Partnerschap voor Vrede" programma van de EU ontvangt de ICAHD bijna een half miljoen Euro per jaar. Een partner voor de Palestijnen zijn ze zeker, maar een partner voor vrede?!?

 

______________________________________________________

 

EU Funding Promotes ICAHD´s Ideological Agenda

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/eu_funding_promotes_icahd_s_ideological_agenda

NGO Monitor

March 26, 2007

   

Summary:  The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) claims to be "a non-violent, direct-action group … to oppose and resist Israeli demolition of Palestinian houses in the Occupied Territories."  A recipient of EU funding, ICAHD partners with radical NGOs such as Sabeel, Christian Aid, and LAW to campaign against the two-state solution, promote the "Durban Strategy" of boycotts and demonizing Israel, using terms such as "apartheid", and grossly distorting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

 

Introduction

The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) claims to be "a non-violent, direct-action group … to oppose and resist Israeli demolition of Palestinian houses in the Occupied Territories."  ICAHD states that its activities center on "resistance and protest actions…; efforts to bring the reality of the Occupation to Israeli society; and mobilizing the international community for a just peace."

Founded in 1997, ICAHD is led by Jeff Halper, formerly affiliated with Ben Gurion University.  While some of ICAHD's activities are coordinated by others, such as Amos Gvirtz and Angela Godfrey-Goldstein, Halper is the public face of ICAHD, both in Israel and internationally.  As the NGO's highest profile representative, Halper's activities are indistinguishable from ICAHD's, and his visibility is facilitated by the NGO.

As documented in previous NGO Monitor reports, ICAHD continues to use its EU funding to promote a highly one-sided view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  It consistently ignores the context of ongoing Palestinian terror attacks, promotes the "Durban strategy" of demonizing the Jewish state, campaigns against the two-state solution, and partners with radical NGOs.  ICAHD's international backing lends the NGO a legitimacy and credibility that is highly disproportionate to its status in Israel.

Funding

According to ICAHD's website, its "activities …depend on assistance from individuals and organizations in Israel and abroad. ICAHD also receives financial support from the European Union."  The EU provided ICAHD with €472,000 in 2005 under the Partnership for Peace program, and updated figures and other sources of funding are unavailable. NGO Monitor contacted the European Union delegation in Israel for more recent funding information on ICAHD, but as of March 26 no response had been received. 

International Advocacy

ICAHD regularly participates in United Nations sponsored events, and Halper takes an active role in pro-Palestinian activities, serving as a member of the steering committee of the UN Conference on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP). 

Representing ICAHD, Halper delivered a speech at the United Nations Latin America and Caribbean Meeting on the Question of Palestine in Caracas on 13 December 2005.  In his comments, Halper ignored Israeli security concerns, noting that "Israel's moves were all unilateral to create an illusion of a Palestinian state, but which would leave Israel in control."  Halper also stated that "Ninety-five percent of the cases of house demolitions had nothing to do with security," providing no source or evidence for his claims. 

In May 2005, ICAHD took part in a session of CEIRPP, which discussed implementation of the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion on the construction of Israel's separation barrier.  The session emphasized adverse affects on the Palestinian population, while neglecting to mention the reduction in terrorist attacks since its construction.  Other NGO participants in the session included Al-Haq, Ha-Moked, and World Vision International. 

As in the past, ICAHD publicly expresses support for the imposition of a broad range of punitive measures by the international community upon Israel.  A 2005 statement published on the ICAHD-UK website entitled "A Statement on Sanctions," outlined support for "a multi-tiered campaign of strategic, selective sanctions against Israel" and "selective divestment and boycott as tools of moral and economic pressure." On 30 January 2007, ICAHD joined with Interpal, Jews for Justice for Palestinians, War on Want, Medical Aid for Palestinians, and Pax Christi in a new "anti-occupation" coalition that called for sanctions against Israel.

In February 2007, ICAHD invited Judge Juan Guzman, the judge who indicted Chile's Augusto Pinochet, to visit Israel and provide "his legal opinion … to build an international legal case against Israelis involved in the demolition of Palestinian homes." (Guzman stated "that he had not formally agreed to work for ICAHD, nor was it clear to him that there was a basis for … a case").

Additionally, a 31 January 2007 posting on ICAHD's website announced a "two-day mobilization on June 10/11, 2007 in Washington, DC, including a massive rally, teach-in, and grassroots lobbying day," which will be organized in tandem with the U.S. Campaign to End the Occupation and United for Peace and Justice .

Publications

In its publications and interviews, ICAHD consistently promotes the "Durban strategy" of demonizing Israel, continuing to use terms such as "apartheid" to describe policies of the Israeli government.   A 2006 working paper begins by stating that "…within the next year – four at the most – an expanded Israel will officially and unilaterally impose an apartheid regime over the remaining tiny, isolated and impoverished islands of a Palestinian Bantustan."

In a 2 February 2007 article on Al-Jazeerah's website, Halper is quoted referring to the separation barrier as the "Apartheid Wall" and describes its purpose as being "to continue ethnically cleansing Palestinians and keep those remaining virtual prisoners in restricted cantonized OPT areas."  Additionally, Halper states in an April 29, 2004 article entitled "Towards a Middle East Union" that "two states, Palestine and Israel, [will] eventually join in a bi-national federation that in time will include Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and ultimately Egypt and other countries of the Middle East – a Middle East Union."  

In a 25 November 2006 article, Halper wrote that "the problem in the Middle East is not the Palestinian people, not Hamas, not the Arabs, not Hezbollah or the Iranians or the entire Muslim world. It's us, the Israelis."  Halper used this article to promote his radical views that erase any Palestinian reasonability for conflict, deny serious existential threats to Israel, ignore key contexts of terrorism and Arab rejectionism, and promote a clearly pro-Palestinian narrative that describes Yasser Arafat as "by far the most congenial and cooperative partner Israel ever had."

Activities in Israel

ICAHD's major activities in Israel involve conducting tours for international groups, individuals, and organizations in order to disseminate the NGO's views, and rebuilding houses.  In contrast to the terms of its funding from the EU, which was for "Providing a Coherent Paradigm of Peace to the Israeli Public", many of ICAHD's activities focus on introducing visiting foreign nationals to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, presenting a paradigm that excludes or greatly distorts the State of Israel.

Participants in ICAHD's annual summer camp in 2007 will be "rebuilding a house and demonstrating non-violent resistance to the Occupation." Additionally, participants in the summer camp "will have the opportunity to learn about the facts on the ground through a full program which includes presentations from key organizations working for a just peace in Palestine and Israel, films about aspects of the conflict, and tours to other parts of the Occupied Territories, Jerusalem and Israel." These tours present "settlement activity, the emergence of a 'Greater' Jerusalem and the 'Matrix of Control'" to international audiences.  In Spring 2007, ICAHD will promote its highly biased view of the conflict during a "Study Tour" that will include "meetings with organizations such as Breaking the Silence, Zochrot, Christian Peacemakers Teams, BADIL, Sabeel and many more."  Participants will be afforded the chance "to hear different voices ranging from a member of the Knesset to an extremist settler and a British diplomat."

 The International Solidarity Movement, which has been involved in tragic confrontations with the IDF and has been linked to terrorist figures, including two suicide bombers of British nationality, sends volunteers to participate in ICAHD house rebuilding campaigns. 

Outside Contributors

ICAHD regularly publishes articles on its website by British-born journalist Jonathan Cook, who has written for Al-Jazeerah's online English edition and Electronic Intifada.  In a 1 December 2006 article, Cook describes a suicide bombing as a choice between "death and resistance over powerlessness and victimhood." Another article by Cook from 7 December 2006, entitled "The Struggle for Palestine's Soul," argues that Israel "has not for one moment renounced violence against Palestinian resistance to occupation." He continues by writing that if Hamas wins its political and military battles with Fatah "then the Palestinians will have the chance to re-energize the intifada, and launch a proper, consensual fight to end the occupation."

Collaboration with Radical NGOs

ICAHD networks with a significant number of NGOs to publish reports, coordinate speeches, and organize events.  In tandem with politicized NGOs such as Al-Haq, Al-Mezan, BADIL, and Ittijah, ICAHD authored a Joint NGO submission in May 2006 to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (UN CERD).  ICAHD's contribution to CERD claims to provide "statistics" on the numbers of Palestinian homes demolished in the West Bank.  No sources or evidence for these statistics are provided, making independent verification of ICAHD's allegations impossible.

Sabeel, which leads international church divestment campaigns and uses anti-Semitic imagery to attack Israel, continues to be one of ICAHD's main partners.  In 2006, Halper appeared at Sabeel's Kansas City Conference with Phyllis Bennis, co-founder of the U.S. Campaign to End the Occupation as well as at a conference on divestment from Israel sponsored by the Canadian Friends of Sabeel.  Halper also spoke at the 2006 Sabeel Washington DC Conference, demanding that civil society be "mobilized in an urgent and effective campaign, calling for the use of boycott, divestment and sanctions."  In February 2007, Halper joined the founder of Sabeel, Rev. Dr. Naim Ateek at a "public hearing" sponsored by the Council on National Interest.  The event was co-sponsored by the CNI and the Washington Interfaith Alliance for Middle East Peace, organizations who stress the need for a "just solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict" and a "just peace", but whose websites advertise activities such as the selling of "two-sided cards with maps showing Israel's takeover of Palestinian lands since 1946." Such activities undermine Israel's legitimacy, even within pre-1967 borders. Halper used this platform to repeat his mantra of Israel's "apartheid" state, its "matrix of control," and to argue against the two-state solution. 

ICAHD is a partner of the UK-based Christian Aid (CA), which provides it (and Halper) with additional international exposure.  CA publishes material that erases Palestinian responsibility, ignores terrorism and demonizes Israel and the NGO's activities have reflected classical anti-Semitic themes. Pressureworks.org, Christian Aid's youth arm, promotes ICAHD house parties and features an interview with Halper on its website. 

ICAHD also works with LAW, an NGO that led the Israel demonization during the  2001 Durban Conference, in order to bring international delegations to Israel to tour the West Bank and "to engage in solidarity actions and help mobilize international public opinion." 

Conclusion

With ample financial support provided by the European Union, ICAHD propagates a one-sided view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  Inspired by Halper's radical opinions, ICAHD continues to promote its agenda in the UN, supports boycotts and sanctions, and holds Israel solely responsible for the conflict. Furthermore, ICAHD's claim to be working for a "just peace" falls short in the face of its collaboration with NGOs that propagate anti-Semitic themes and its highly biased publications which promote an extreme pro-Palestinian narrative.  ICAHD's politicized activities are at odds with EU funding guidelines and raise serious questions about the oversight of such grants.