Tzipi Livni als premier populairder dan Benjamin Netyanjahoe

 

Sinds de verkiezingen horen we hier weinig meer van Tzipi Livni, maar ze wint in Israel aan populariteit terwijl die van Bibi afkalft.

 

Wouter
___________________

Poll: More Israelis would prefer Livni as prime minister
By Haaretz Service

Last update - 07:32 07/08/2009
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1105791.html

 

For the first time since taking office, the public considers Benjamin Netanyahu less suitable to serve as prime minister than opposition leader MK Tzipi Livni, a new Channel 10 poll said Thursday.

According to the poll, when asked, "Who would you rather see as the next prime minister?" Tzipi Livni was named most qualified, with 36 percent of respondents.

Only 23 percent of those polled said Netanyahu was fit to serve as prime minister.

Defense Minister and Labor chairman Ehud Barak was a distant third with 7 percent of respondents considering him to be the most suitable for the position.

Netanyahu had been leading Livni in polls throughout the elections, as well as in polls conducted as recently as a month ago.

Also on Thursday, MK Shaul Mofaz continued his bid to replace Tzipi Lizni as Kadima party head, urging a change in Kadima's regulations that would allow moving up elections for party chairman.

Mofaz made the comments during a speech given in front of the Kadima convention, assembled in the party's Petah Tikva headquarters.

As party rules stand, Kadima's internal elections would take place three months before the general elections.

According to Mofaz, Kadima's regulations, originally tailored to party founder Ariel Sharon's requirements, did not allow the party to present a political alternative to the Likud as well as a disallowing a the party to function in a democratic fashion.

Mofaz had attacked party head Tzipi Livni in recent weeks, saying she was unfit to lead the party and that he intended to run against her and lead Kadima in the next elections.

Nederlandse subsidie voor Breaking the Silence

De EU financiert een batterij aan op zijn best Israel-kritische, maar vaak ook ronduit antizionistische NGO's in Israel. Breaking the Silence is nog niet de extreemste, maar is wel erg eenzijdig. Erger dan de 20.000 Euro voor Breaking the Silence is wellicht dat zulke partijdige groeperingen zo extreem veel aandacht krijgen in de buitenlandse pers en daar juist als onpartijdig worden gezien. Ook erger dan die 20.000 Euro is het half miljoen dat United Civilians for Peace krijgt van de Nederlandse overheid, waarmee zij allerhande campagnes tegen Israel financieert, een website onderhoudt, en pro-Palestijnse actiegroepen ondersteunt.

 

RP

 

Zie ook: EU-geld voor anti-Zionistische propaganda in Israel moet kunnen?

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

Een column van de hoofdredacteur van Elsevier, Arendo Joustra.

Papieren Elsevier 8 augustus. 2009.

NON SOLUS.
Maxime Verhagen.

De afgelopen decennia is de steun onder de Nederlandse bevolking voor Israël afgenomen. Waarom dat is, zou eens moeten worden onderzocht. Een mogelijke verklaring is dat Israël in de beeldvorming al lang niet meer de onderliggende partij is. Die rol is overgenomen door de Palestijnen, die gewoon Arabieren zijn.

 

Let wel, het gaat om beeldvorming. Want in werkelijkheid is het nog steeds Israél dat voortdurend in zijn bestaan wordt bedreigd. Het aantal inwoners van dit kleine landje aan de Middellandse Zee is een fractie van het aantal Arabieren dat in omliggende landen woont. Ook in de Verenigde Naties ziet Israël zich geplaatst tegenover een overweldigende meerderheid van Arabische landen Daarbij komt dat er voortdurend landen zijn (Iran) of politieke groeperingen (Hamas) die beweren Israël van de kaart te zullen vegen. Israël kan honderd oorlogen van de Arabieren winnen, maar als het één oorlog verliest, bestaat het niet meer. Welk ander land verkeert in zo'n positie?

 

Kortom, het beeld mag anders zijn, in de praktijk is Israël nog steeds de onderliggende partij. De Nederlandse regering doet er weinig aan om die beeldvorming meer in overeenstemming te brengen met de werkelijkheid. Zo heeft CDA-minister Maxime Verhagen van Buitenlandse Zaken 20.000 euro belastinggeld weggegeven aan een actiegroep in Israël, Breaking the Silence, die slechts tot doel heeft de militaire verdediging van Israël te ondergraven. Dat doet deze actiegroep door ongecontroleerde getuigenissen de wereld in te sturen van anonieme soldaten die zich kritisch uitlaten over het Israëlische optreden in de Palestijnse raketten spugende Gazastrook.
Hoe zou Verhagen het vinden als een ander land een Nederlandse actiegroep financieel steunt die het optreden van de Nederlandse militairen in Afghanistan zwartmaakt?

 

EU-geld voor anti-Zionistische propaganda in Israel moet kunnen?

Nadat de actiegroep Breaking the Silence, bestaande uit oud-soldaten, onlangs een bijzonder kritisch en eenzijdig rapport over de Gaza Oorlog uitbracht, denkt Israel over manieren om dit soort NGO's, vaak financieel gesteund door de EU, tegen te werken. Zij heeft al bij Nederland geklaagd over de financiële steun aan BTS, en sommigen overwegen een wet die dit soort financiële steun onmogelijk moet maken. Het is de verkeerde oplossing voor een reëel probleem, al is BTS zeker niet het extreemste geval. De EU ondersteunt organisaties die, in tegenstelling tot BTS, openlijk oproepen tot boycots van Israel, Israels bestaansrecht ontkennen, gewapende strijd tegen Israel rechtvaardigen en opkomen voor het 'recht op terugkeer' van de vluchtelingen. Ook verspreiden zij een enorme hoeveelheid leugens over Israel en het conflict.

 

Een paar jaar geleden was ik in Jeruzalem bij het Alternative Information Center, en kreeg daar een boekje van het Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions met argumenten om in discussies te gebruiken tegen mensen die het voor Israel opnemen. Het was gedrukt met geld van de EU. Waarom betaalt de EU dergelijke zaken? Waarom moet zij de gekleurde politieke campagnes van antizionistische Israelische actiegroepen betalen? Wat heeft dat met de bevordering van vrede en dialoog te maken?

 

Ami Isseroff heeft een betere oplossing voor dit probleem:

 

However, rather than blocking funding, Israel should insist on complete transparency of donor operations and funding, which are currently hidden intentionally in a mire of red tape and euphemisms. NGO status should also be contingent on strict criteria that prevent NGOs from operating in Israel if they are working to destroy the state or encouraging violence. See (How to deal with foreign NGO dunding), The goal is to stop the organizations from operating, not just to cut off funding from a particular source. It is not the business of the Israeli government to tell Europeans how to spend their money. As it is, they are directly or indirectly subsidizing the Hamas regime in Gaza and there is not much Israel can do about it. But it is the business of the Israeli government to decide what groups can be NGOs.

 

RP

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

NGO funding and national priorities: EU support may be conditional on allowing anti-Zionist agitation

http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2009/08/ngo-funding-and-national-priorities-eu.html

Everyone knows the old joke about the mugger who says "Your money or your life." The victim says, "Take my life, I need my money for my old age."

 

This is the proposition that Gush Shalom shamelessly and seriously threatens to try to implement. If Israel does not allow the EU to support anti-Zionist groups like Alternative Information Center, Badil and Adalah, then Gush Shalom will lobby the EU to withdraw support for universities and hospitals. The EU is trying to give complete coverage: first they support the terrorist groups, and then they support the hospitals to fix up the victims. A good deal.

 

Under the rubric of supporting peace, education for democracy and promotion of understanding and dialogue, the EU and some non-EU European countries have funded organizations that educate for violence and armed resistance, fight to destroy the right of the Jewish people to self determination, generate outrageously falsified historical narratives, incite Palestinians to demand "right of return" and encourage one state "solutions." Groups like Adalah, Badil, Alternative Information Center, ICAHD and several other organizations are all trying to destroy the Jewish state, eliminate "Apartheid Israel and fight the "Zionist enemy." With no state, we don't need any hospitals or any universities either, as none of us will be here.

 

As far as anyone knows, however, there is no actual proposition afoot for blocking NGO funding by anyone, just some unnamed "senior officials" who were thinking aloud. Gush Shalom therefore seems to have floated this balloon in order to get a bit of publicity for themselves, a forgivable and understandable propensity of such groups. If they can blacken Israel in the process, so much the better.

 

However, rather than blocking funding, Israel should insist on complete transparency of donor operations and funding, which are currently hidden intentionally in a mire of red tape and euphemisms. NGO status should also be contingent on strict criteria that prevent NGOs from operating in Israel if they are working to destroy the state or encouraging violence. See (How to deal with foreign NGO dunding), The goal is to stop the organizations from operating, not just to cut off funding from a particular source. It is not the business of the Israeli government to tell Europeans how to spend their money. As it is, they are directly or indirectly subsidizing the Hamas regime in Gaza and there is not much Israel can do about it. But it is the business of the Israeli government to decide what groups can be NGOs.  

 

In any case, it is a monstrous idea to propose that the EU can force Israel to allow them to subsidize groups that advocate overthrowing the state in order to get funding for universities. Would Spain tolerate a proposition that requires that they allow funding of the ETA terrorists if they want funding for hospitals?

 

Here is Gush Shalom's proposition:

As the Israeli government steps up efforts to limit foreign funding for human rights group, an Israeli peace organization sent a letter to European diplomatic missions in Israel this week urging them to tell Israel that that legislative action against NGOs may threaten the budget of universities, hospitals and other non-profit organizations.

 

The government has sought to limit the activity of Breaking the Silence, an organization that has published a damning report of the IDF's conduct during last winter's Operation Cast Lead in Gaza.

 

In the letter, Gush Shalom told the diplomats that "the discriminatory blocking of European government funding to a specific group of legal and legitimate NGOs may well result in a public backlash in the EU, which would force your government to cut all funding to Israeli NGOs, including to universities and hospitals."

The group added that it had been opposed to campaigns, which sought to withhold funding to Israeli non-profits, in the hope that the Israeli government would also reconsider.

 

Gush Shalom also noted that the tax exemptions for non-profit organizations constitute indirect funding for organizations, and asked that the EU Commission warn the Israeli government that these benefits "could be withdrawn for the large number of Christian Zionist organizations in the EU financially supporting West Bank settlement activities."

 

Human rights groups in the European Union are reportedly preparing to launch a public campaign lobbying EU governments as well as the
European Commission to stop funding Israeli non-governmental
organizations.

 

Ami Isseroff

 

De radicalisering van Fatah op de Bethlehem conferentie

De pessimistische verwachtingen die Toameh vooraf had van de Fatah conferentie zijn helaas uitgekomen.

 

Andere berichten hierover:

Fatah congres stelt dubbele agenda op betreffende Israel

Fatah stelt 14 voorwaarden aan hervatten vredesonderhandelingen met Israel

 

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

 

 

The Radicalization of Fatah

by Khaled Abu Toameh

 

Many in Washington and some European capitals are hoping that the Fatah faction, which controls the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, is headed toward moderation and reforms as it holds its sixth general assembly in Bethlehem this week.

 

But on the eve of the conference, which is being held for the first time in two decades, there are growing indications that Fatah is actually headed in the opposite direction. Perhaps one of the most disturbing signs of the growing radicalization of Fatah can be seen in calls by top representatives for a "strategic alliance" with Iran's dictatorial and fundamental regime.

 

In January 2006, Fatah lost the parliamentary election in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to Hamas largely because of its leaders' involvement in financial and moral corruption. Since then, not a single Fatah official has been held responsible for the humiliating defeat. Nor has Fatah drawn the conclusions from its expulsion from the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2007.

 

Hopes that the conference would pave the way for the emergence of a new and younger leadership have faded as old guard officials of Fatah appear determined to hold on to their positions regardless of the price.

 

Fatah is therefore unlikely to emerge stronger and younger from its sixth general assembly. By adopting a hard-line approach toward the conflict and blocking reforms, Fatah is sending a message both to the Palestinians and the world that it's still not ready for any form of compromise or reforms. As such, Fatah remains part of the problem, and not part of the solution.

 

During the three-day conference, about 2,200 delegates would be required to vote for new members of Fatah's two most important decision-making bodies: the Central Committee [21 seats] and the Revolutionary Council [120 seats].

 

The Central Committee has long been dominated by old timers and former cronies of Yasser Arafat who over the past four decades have stubbornly resisted attempts to inject fresh blood into the committee. The Revolutionary Council, on the other hand, consists of representatives of both the old guard and the new guard. But this council has never been taken seriously and its decisions are regarded by the Fatah leadership as nothing but mere recommendations. Days before the conference was opened in Bethlehem, Fatah members were surprised to discover that Mahmoud Abbas and his old guard colleagues had selected more than half of the delegates who were invited to the meeting.

 

In protest, young guard representatives decided to drop their candidacy for the prestigious Central Committee after realizing that their chances of beating the old guard members were slim, if not impossible. This means that the committee will continue to be controlled by former Arafat cronies, some of whom are even publicly opposed to the Oslo Accords with Israel.

 

To further strengthen the old guard camp, Abbas sought and received permission from Israel to allow Mohammed Ghnaim, a hard-line Fatah leader, to move from Tunisia to the West Bank. Ghnaim is one of a handful of senior Fatah leaders who remain strongly opposed to the Oslo Accords, insisting that the "armed struggle" against Israel is the only way to "liberate Palestine."

 

Ghnaim is now being touted as Abbas's successor as head of Fatah and the Palestinian Authority as to ensure the continuity of the old guard hegemony over the affairs of the Palestinians in the West Bank. Many Fatah operatives, including some of Abbas's closest allies in Ramallah, have made it known that they would oppose any move to abandon the "armed struggle" option during the Bethlehem assembly. Their statements came in response to reports according to which the Fatah conference is set to endorse a more moderate and pragmatic approach toward the conflict with Israel.

 

Moreover, a majority of Fatah members appear to be vehemently opposed to the idea of recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. A draft plan of Fatah's political platform that was leaked to some Arab media outlets last week clearly states that Fatah will remain strongly opposed to Israel's demand that the Palestinians recognize the state as a homeland for the Jewish people.

 

In other signs of continued intransigence, the political platform opposes any concessions regarding the "right of return" of Palestinians to their original homes inside Israel.

 

Khaled Abu Toameh

 

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

 

For more information about Israel and the Middle East please enter the blog "Middle and Terrorisme" : http://israelagainstterror.blogspot.com/

 

"Middle East and Terrorisme" analyses for you the situation in the Middle East since more than 100 years. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists. Most of these articles seldomly appear in the press.

 

 

Fatah congres stelt dubbele agenda op betreffende Israel

 

Fatah heeft op haar congres afgelopen week twee documenten opgesteld, een voor extern gebruik met relatief gematigde taal en een voor intern gebruik waarin onder andere staat:

 

"The armed struggle is a strategy and not just a tactic and the armed revolution of the Arab Palestinian people is a decisive factor in the war of liberation and the elimination of the Zionist existence, and the struggle will not end until the elimination of the Zionist entity and the liberation of Palestine."

 

Dat lijkt me duidelijke taal.

 

RP

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

 

Fatah prepares two different stories - retains goal of elimination of Israel

http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2009/08/fatah-prepares-two-different-stories.html

The big story about the Fatah congress is not whether or not it will give up the "right" of armed struggle. Rather, the problem seems to be, as related below, that Fatah is preparing two documents. A document for external use that calls for a two state solution, and an internal document that reportedly calls for elimination of Israel and implementation of a so-called "One State Solution" as its real and only goal. Here is what Fatah plans:

Article 22 calls for: "objection by force to all political solutions that are offered as an alternative to the extermination of the occupying Zionist entity in Palestine and all the projects that aim for the elimination of the Palestinian problem, or seek to internationalize it or put an outside custodian on its people from any possible party."⁴ This article is in contradiction to the call in the Political Program for greater international involvement in the problem and its welcome for the involvement of international forces in Palestine. 

Article 9 states clearly that "the liberation of the Holy Land and the defense of its holy sites (that are forbidden to infidels) is an Arab, Muslim, and humanitarian duty."⁵

...

Article 13 calls for "establishing a sovereign democratic Palestinian state on the entire Palestinian territory that will preserve the legitimate rights of the citizens on the basis of justice and equality without discrimination on the basis of race, religion and belief, and Jerusalem will be its capital."⁷ While the Political Program lists the "one-state solution" as an option in case the "two-state solution" fails, the Internal Order document mentions the "one-state solution" as the only solution.  
Article 17 says: "The armed popular revolution is the only inevitable way to the liberation of Palestine."⁸

Finally, Article 19 notes: "The armed struggle is a strategy and not just a tactic and the armed revolution of the Arab Palestinian people is a decisive factor in the war of liberation and the elimination of the Zionist existence, and the struggle will not end until the elimination of the Zionist entity and the liberation of Palestine."⁹ 

Read the whole thing below, and think about whether peace is really possible if this report is correct. [A.I.]

=====================

 

 

Will Fatah Give Up the Armed Struggle at Its Sixth General Congress?
04/08/2009 Pinhas Inbari -  Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

The Sixth Fatah General Congress, convening for the first time in twenty years, will be judged mainly by two factors: its decisions and the composition of its new leadership. Here we will examine the nature of its expected decisions and leave the evaluation of the new leadership for future examination.

There is great international interest in the Fatah Congress since so much of the international community perceives the Palestinian problem as the key to the entire spectrum of conflicts in the Middle East. Many observers are watching to see to what extent the congress will advance or retard the prospects for re-launching the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, and even launching a regional peace process based on the Israeli-Palestinian bilateral track.

In this regard, the crucial question is: Is Fatah going to waive its historical principle of "armed struggle" - muqawama - and devote itself to peace negotiations based on compromise, as was discussed extensively between the former Kadima-led Israeli government and Palestinian negotiators - led by PA leader Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) and former Prime Minister Abu Ala?

  Two Documents: One for International Consumption and the Other for Internal Use

The two relevant documents to be discussed and approved by the Fatah Congress are the Political Program¹ and Fatah's "Internal Order."² The Political Program might be seen by many as reflecting progress in terms of accepting a political solution and rejecting violence - but it falls short of waiving the principle of armed struggle. The document endorses the Arab Initiative, talks in vague expressions of the "right of return" - using a formula "based on UN Resolution 181" and not on fulfillment of this resolution, and offers the model of the "Intifada of the Stones" (the first intifada) as preferred over the model of military struggle.

The principle of the "armed struggle" is mentioned as an option of the past that must be re-examined in comparison to other options of struggle. The model seen to fit our times is the anti-wall campaigns in Nil'in and Bil'in, but "10,000 times as fierce." The political program uses the term "the struggle" (not quite describing it as the "armed struggle") and even the "peaceful struggle." However, there is more than one reference to the term "the struggle of all options," that includes the armed struggle as well. In an interview with Maan News, the Fatah leader in Lebanon, Sultan Abu al-Einein, made it clear that the "struggle of all options" includes the armed struggle as well.

Fatah's Internal Order Presents a Different Face

Developing the Nil'in-Bil'in model of struggle is problematic because it can easily deteriorate into violence, as past experience shows, but the real problem lies in the Internal Order document. All of the phrases that were omitted in the Political Program are present in this would-be "bureaucratic" document. The term "armed popular struggle" appears at the very beginning. While the Political Program sought to subordinate the struggle to the need for "international legitimacy," the Internal Order is very clear in rejecting all international peace initiatives: "The projects, agreements, and resolutions that were issued or will be issued by the UN or group of states or any separate state on the Palestinian problem that waives the rights of the Palestinians on their homeland is null and void."³

Furthermore, Article 22 calls for: "objection by force to all political solutions that are offered as an alternative to the extermination of the occupying Zionist entity in Palestine and all the projects that aim for the elimination of the Palestinian problem, or seek to internationalize it or put an outside custodian on its people from any possible party."⁴ This article is in contradiction to the call in the Political Program for greater international involvement in the problem and its welcome for the involvement of international forces in Palestine. 

Article 9 states clearly that "the liberation of the Holy Land and the defense of its holy sites (that are forbidden to infidels) is an Arab, Muslim, and humanitarian duty."⁵

Fatah Retains the Strategy of the Armed Struggle

And here we come to the essence: Fatah retains the armed struggle as a strategy in order to liberate the whole of Palestine and eliminate Israel. Article 12 calls for "the liberation of Palestine completely and the elimination of the state of the Zionist occupation economically, politically, militarily, and culturally."⁶ (Indeed, one of the methods mentioned in the Political Program for the "peaceful intifada" is an economic boycott of Israel.) 

Article 13 calls for "establishing a sovereign democratic Palestinian state on the entire Palestinian territory that will preserve the legitimate rights of the citizens on the basis of justice and equality without discrimination on the basis of race, religion and belief, and Jerusalem will be its capital."⁷ While the Political Program lists the "one-state solution" as an option in case the "two-state solution" fails, the Internal Order document mentions the "one-state solution" as the only solution.  
Article 17 says: "The armed popular revolution is the only inevitable way to the liberation of Palestine."⁸

Finally, Article 19 notes: "The armed struggle is a strategy and not just a tactic and the armed revolution of the Arab Palestinian people is a decisive factor in the war of liberation and the elimination of the Zionist existence, and the struggle will not end until the elimination of the Zionist entity and the liberation of Palestine."⁹

While Fatah's Political Program tries to accommodate international expectations and seems designed to mobilize international legitimacy for the re-launching of a "peaceful intifada," Fatah's "Internal Order" reminds us how deeply ingrained in Fatah is its ideology from the 1960s and 1970s.

*     *     *
Notes
1 http://www.e-fateh.org/paper_full_1.aspx.
2 http://www.e-fateh.org/paper_full_3.aspx.

3 المشاريع والاتفاقات والقرارات التي صدرت او تصدر عن هيئة الامم المتحدة او اية مجموعة من الدول او اي دولة منفردة بشأن قضية فلسطين والتي تهدر حق الشعب الفلسطيني في وطنه باطلة ومرفوضه.

4 لمادة (22) - مقاومة كل الحلول السياسية المطروحة كبديل عن تصفية الكيان الصهيوني المحتل في فلسطين، وكل المشاريع الرامية الى تصفية القضية الفلسطينية او تدويلها او الوصاية على شعبها من اية جهة.

5 لمادة (9) - تحرير الديار المقدسة والدفاع عن حرماتها واجب عربي واسلامي وانساني.

6 المادة (12) - تحرير فلسطين تحريراً كاملاً وتصفية دولة الاحتلال الصهيوني اقتصادياً وسياسياً وعسكرياً وثقافياً.

7 المادة (13) - اقامة دولة فلسطينيه ديمقراطية مستقلة ذات سيادة على كامل التراب الفلسطيني تحفظ للمواطنين حقوقهم الشرعية على اساس العدل والمساواة دون تمييزفي العنصر او الدين والعقيده وتكون القدس عاصمة لها.

8 المادة (17) - الثورة الشعبية المسلحة هي الطريق الحتمي الوحيد لتحرير فلســطين.

9 المادة (19) -الكفاح المسلح استراتيجية وليس تكتيكاً والثورة المسلحة للشعب العربي الفلسطيني عامل حاسم في معركة التحرير وتصفية الوجود الصهيوني ولن يتوقف هذا الكفاح الا بالقضاء على الكيان الصهيوني وتحرير فلسطين.

Pinhas Inbari is a senior policy analyst at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He is also a veteran Palestinian affairs correspondent who formerly reported for Israel Radio and Al Hamishmar newspaper, and currently reports for several foreign media outlets. He is the author of a number of books on the Palestinians including The Palestinians: Between Terrorism and Statehood.

Palestijnse Authoriteit wil financiële steun aan Gazastrook stopzetten

Een deel van de Fatah leden kon niet bij dit belangrijke congres aanwezig zijn, omdat Hamas hen verhinderde van de Gazastrook naar de Westoever te reizen. Misschien dat Meulenbelt en Van Agt c.s. deze ontoelaatbare schending van de bewegingsvrijheid eens kunnen veroordelen, of is zoiets alleen erg wanneer Israel het doet?

Volgens onderstaand bericht zal Fatah haar financiële steun aan de Gazastrook stopzetten, omdat die door Hamas wordt gebruikt voor haar eigen politieke doeleinden en niet bij de bevolking van Gaza terechtkomt. Als dat zo is, geldt dat naar ik aanneem ook voor de financiele steun van de EU en andere landen en organisaties? Het is nou eenmaal erg moeilijk om de bevolking te helpen zonder dat het regime ervan meeprofiteert. Wanneer Fatah een dergelijke beslissing neemt, zou dat (EU) landen die contacten met Hamas hebben of die willen aangaan, aan het denken moeten zetten.

 

RP

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


Palestinian Authority to Stop Financing Gaza Strip
By Kifah Zaboun Asharq Al-Awsat

05/08/2009
http://aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=1&id=17668

 

Bethlehem, Asharq Al-Awsat- Authoritative sources in the Fatah movement have asserted to Asharq Al-Awsat that the Palestinian leadership has decided to stop all the funds it pays to the Gaza Strip from the Palestinian Authority's [PA] budget apart from the salaries of its own employees.

According to the sources, this decision was taken the night before yesterday at an extraordinary meeting of the Palestinian leadership that President Mahmud Abbas called for holding. They said the PA is financing the coup in the Strip and paying the electricity, water, and fuel bills to the Israelis while the Hamas leadership waits for these supplies to reach it.

Fatah movement leaders tried to keep these decisions secret and when Asharq Al-Awsat asked some of them in Bethlehem's hotels they said such decisions would be announced at the end of the movement 6th Congress. Abdullah Abdullah, head of the political department in the Legislative Council, replied: "Measures will be taken at the highest levels which Hamas does not expect and we will be keen not to let the Gazan citizen pay the price."

Abbas Zaki, the PA's ambassador in Beirut who is a candidate for Fatah's Central Committee, hinted that such a decision would be taken by telling the official Palestinian television that "the PA might have naively financed the coup. Do not forget that we pay the salaries of 77,000 employees and give 58 percent of the PA budget to the Strip. This will not remain since Hamas does not understand the rules of the game and national action" and added" I tell Hamas if you see the lion's baring its teeth do not think it is smiling."

The sources went on to say: "We are paying a heavy price to the Israelis for everything that enters Gaza and Hamas seizes them and then we are accused of participating in the blockade. We believe this farce should end and Hamas must shoulder its responsibility toward the people over whom it has installed itself." The PA's response is expected at the end of the Fatah Congress -- which starts today and lasts until Thursday and will elect a new leadership for the movement whose tasks will include dealing with Hamas's control of Gaza - and will be in response to the Hamas measures that prevented the Fatah congress members from leaving the Strip to Bethlehem to take part in it. Among the other measures that the PA might take will be the arrest and trial of the Hamas political leadership in the West Bank. The Fatah movement's Revolutionary Council was supposed to have met late last night after having postponed its meeting from Sunday so as to give the Syrian mediation efforts a chance but Fatah officially announced the failure of these efforts. Fatah's Official Spokesman Ahmad Abdul-Rahman asserted that the council's meeting would put the final touches and approve the mechanisms for holding the congress.

The most important issue on the agenda is that of the ban on the travel of Gaza's members. Asharq Al-Awsat learned that the Central Committee authorized the Revolutionary Council to find the mechanisms for solving the Gaza problem. One of the most discussed proposals is to keep the Strip's quota of six members in the Central Committee and 30 in the Revolutionary Council without election and to have them elected later as conditions permit. This was what the Gaza leadership proposed to the Palestinian president as a compromise after threatening to boycott the congress. Fahmi al-Za'arir, the Fatah spokesman, asserted to Asharq Al-Awsat that the Revolutionary Council would decide this among other issues it would be discussing, among them membership of the congress. Ibrahim Abu-al-Naja, the Fatah leader and member of the Revolutionary Council, returned to the Gaza Strip from Ramallah yesterday in solidarity with the Fatah leaders in the Strip who were prevented by Hamas from taking part in the congress. Abu-al-Naja said he would not participate in the 6th Congress without the participation of 400 Fatah members from the Strip, adding that he was expecting the majority of the movement members from the Strip who are in the West Bank to take the same decision.

 

Hamas had insisted on the release of all political detainees and giving Gaza its share of passports in return for allowing the Gaza members to travel. Abdullah said "they want legitimacy for their coup by giving them passports that are recognized. This will never happen."

Informed sources in Fatah and in the presidency office disclosed to Asharq Al-Awsat" that US Envoy George Mitchell interceded with the Syrians to persuade Hamas to allow the Fatah members to leave following a request from [Palestinian President] Abu-Mazin. The sources said: Mitchell did in fact intercede and the Syrian president responded positively. Khalid Mishal promised the Syrians to allow the Fatah members to travel. We received a message to this effect. But we learned later that Mishal was unable to fulfill his promise because the hard-line Hamas leadership inside [the territories] refused to obey his orders. The sources added: "(Ahmad) Al-Jabari (official in charge of Al-Qassam Brigades) told Khalid Mishal he would shoot the Fatah members as they were leaving and he should not embarrass himself by making promises."

Human Rights Watch vindt Hamas raketten oorlogsmisdaad

 

Beter laat dan nooit, en beter iets dan niets. Net als Amnesty International is Human Rights Watch vooral kritisch naar Israel en legt bij haar de verantwoordelijkheid voor de Gaza Oorlog. Context en aanleiding voor de oorlog werden in een eerder rapport nauwelijks gegeven, en Israel werd beschuldigd van oorlogsmisdaden. De aard en taktiek van Hamas, haar doel om zoveel mogelijk burgers te doden, en haar zwaar antisemitische ideologie kregen nauwelijks aandacht. Ook nu wordt met geen woord gerept van de opruiing tegen Israel en Joden, en de indoctrinatie van kinderen met een ideologie van haat en geweld.

 

RP

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

HRW: Hamas rocket attacks a 'war crime'

Aug. 6, 2009
JPost.com Staff , THE JERUSALEM POST

The international watchdog organization, Human Rights Watch, came out with an unusually scathing attack against Hamas on Thursday, accusing the Islamic group of violating international law and committing war crimes for its indiscriminate rocket fire into Israeli territory.

"None of these rockets can be reliably aimed," the report stated. "Such weapons are inherently indiscriminate when directed towards densely populated areas.

"The absence of Israeli military forces in the areas struck by the rockets, as well as statements from the leaders of Hamas and other armed groups, indicate that many of these attacks are deliberately intended to strike Israeli civilians and civilian structures," the report continued. "Individuals who willfully authorize or carry out deliberate or indiscriminate attacks against civilians are committing war crimes."

The Rights group also targeted Hamas justification for their rocket attacks, saying that such arguments cannot be supported by international law.

"To justify the attacks as appropriate reprisals for Israeli military operations and the ongoing blockade against Gaza, and as a lawful response to the Israeli occupation of Gaza…the "laws of war" do not support these asserted justifications," the report stated.

While previous reports published by the organization have condemned Israeli abuses and "war crimes" against the Palestinians, the group emphasized in the most recent publication that such behavior cannot warrant reciprocal Palestinian action.

"Even assuming the rocket attacks were intended as reprisals for Israeli attacks that killed and injured civilians, they still are unlawful under the laws of war," the group said.

Israel has long placed the responsibility for Palestinian deaths in the Gaza Strip on Hamas, saying that the group's use of the civilian population and residential areas when launching attacks puts non-combatants in harms way. In their latest report, Human Rights Watch seemed to support that claim.

"The rocket attacks have also placed civilians in Gaza at risk," it stated. "They're unreliable, and occasionally fall short of Israel and kill Palestinians.

"Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups have frequently violated the laws of war by firing rockets from within populated areas," the report went on. "In doing so, they failed to take all feasible precautions to avoid placing military targets within densely populated areas […] and protecting civilians from the danger resulting from military operations."

 

This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1249418537852&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull

 

Fatah stelt 14 voorwaarden aan hervatten vredesonderhandelingen met Israel

 

Het belangrijkste dat is gebeurd terwijl we ruim een week met vakantie waren, is het congres van Fatah dat sinds dinsdag in Bethlehem wordt gehouden. Het laat zien dat de vrede in die anderhalve week niet echt dichterbij is gekomen, in tegendeel. Het congres heeft een resolutie aangenomen die liefst 14 voorwaarden stelt om de onderhandelingen met Israel weer te hervatten. Zo moet Israel niet alleen stoppen met het bouwen in nederzettingen, waaronder ook huizenbouw in de Joodse wijk in de oude stad van Jeruzalem valt, maar ook alle gevangenen vrijlaten.

 

RP

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

 

'No talks unless Israel frees prisoners'

Aug. 6, 2009
JPost.com Staff , THE JERUSALEM POST

The Fatah General Assembly on Thursday unanimously adopted a resolution, Israel Radio reported, according to which the negotiations with Jerusalem will not renewed until Israel releases all the Palestinian prisoners held in its jails.

However, citing a Palestinian report, Israel Radio also included a more moderate wording of the decision, according to which an agreement on a timeframe for the release of all Palestinian prisoners is a condition for the renewal of peace talks.

Senior Fatah official Nabil Sha'ath said that the committee in charge of determining the movement's policy approved 14 conditions for the renewal of negotiations with Israel, including lifting the blockade on the Gaza Strip and halting settlement construction.

In an interview with a Web site linked with the Islamic Jihad, Sha'ath added that Fatah had not denounced the armed resistance, though it had not yet lost faith in the negotiations.

The decision came amid mounting tensions between rival camps in the movement at the Bethlehem conference.

On Tuesday, the first day of the conference, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas told delegates that peace talks with Israel should continue "as long as there is still a little bit of hope."

Israel has released some 1,000 Palestinian prisoners in a number of goodwill gestures since the summer of 2007. Some 9,000 Palestinian prisoners are currently in Israeli jails.

 

This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1249418545003&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull