maandag 9 november 2009

De dreiging van het uitroepen van een Palestijnse staat

Een eenzijdige Israelische terugtrekking, waarna de Palestijnen in het betreffende gebied eenzijdig een staat uitroepen, zou kunnen werken, maar wanneer de Palestijnen binnen de 1967 grenzen een staat uitroepen zonder Israels goedkeuring is er een probleem, vooral wanneer een aantal landen deze staat zou erkennen. Door nu al te zeggen zo'n staat te zullen erkennen, torpederen deze landen de onderhandelingen en beinvloeden zij de uitkomst. Immers, de Palestijnen zullen geen enkele concessie doen in Jeruzalem als ze weten dat hun staat, die zij uiteraard ook in geheel Oost-Jeruzalem inclusief de Tempelberg en de oude stad uitroepen, op internationale erkenning kan rekenen. Dan kun je net zo goed gelijk Israel een dictaat opleggen waarin het maximaal twee jaar de tijd krijgt om eenzijdig alle nederzettingen te ontruimen en zich geheel terug te trekken. Net als voor 1967 zullen de Joden niet meer naar de Klaagmuur kunnen en Joodse heilige plaatsen op de Westoever worden waarschijnlijk verwoest. Of Israel het recht krijgt zich tegen vanuit Qalqiliya of Tulkarem afgeschoten raketten op Tel Aviv te verdedigen, is zeer de vraag.

Moet er dan geen Palestijnse staat komen? Jawel, maar wel met stevige veiligheidsgaranties en concessies van Palestijnse kant die alleen te verkrijgen zijn met internationale druk, niet met internationaal knuffelen van de Palestijnen.

-----------

PM heads to U.S. under threat of Palestinian statehood declaration
By Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgovaya

Haaretz / Last update - 12:43 08/11/2009
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1126594.html

Concerns are growing in Israel's government over the possibility of a unilateral Palestinian declaration of independence within the 1967 borders, a move which could potentially be recognized by the United Nations Security Council.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently asked the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama to veto any such proposal, after reports reached Jerusalem of support for such a declaration from major European Union countries, and apparently also certain U.S. officials.

The reports indicated that Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has reached a secret understanding with the Obama administration over U.S. recognition of an independent Palestinian state. Such recognition would likely transform any Israeli presence across the Green Line, even in Jerusalem, into an illegal incursion to which the Palestinians would be entitled to engage in measures of self-defense.

In late August Fayyad presented the international community with a detailed plan for building up Palestinian Authority institutions and set a timetable of up to two years for its implementation. Senior Israeli officials said Fayyad's plan initially met with positive reaction in Jerusalem for its emphasis on institution-building and making security services more efficient.

But some Israeli officials told Haaretz that alongside the clauses reported in the media - which are similar to elements of Netanyahu's call for "economic peace" between Israel and the Palestinians - Fayyad's plan also contains a classified, unreleased portion stipulating a unilateral declaration of independence.

The plan specifies that at the end of a designated period for bolstering national institutions the PA, in conjunction with the Arab League, would file a "claim of sovereignty" to the UN Security Council and General Assembly over the borders of June 4, 1967 (before the outbreak of the Six-Day War, during which Israel took control of the West Bank and Gaza).

Fayyad is also seeking a new Security Council resolution to replace Resolutions 242 and 338 in the hope of winning the international community's support for the borders of a Palestinian state and applying stronger pressure on Israel to withdraw from the West Bank.

Several Israeli officials told Haaretz that Fayyad had spoken to them of positive responses he had received over the plan from prominent EU member states, including the United Kingdom, France, Spain and Sweden. Fayyad added that he presented the proposal to the U.S. administration and did not receive any signal of opposition in response.

Netanyahu's "kitchen cabinet" has held a number of meetings on the matter in recent months. "It's a very dangerous move," said a senior Israeli foreign-policy official. "More and more cabinet ministers understand that diplomatic inaction on Israel's part is likely to bring international support for the Fayyad program."

Israeli sources said Netanyahu discussed the proposal in meetings with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and special Mideast envoy George Mitchell and requested that the U.S. tell Fayyad that it would not support his proposal and would veto it in the Security Council. Netanyahu has yet to receive a clear response from Washington on its stance on Fayyad's plan.

Netanyahu is to arrive in Washington today for a brief visit. He is scheduled to address the United Jewish Communities General Assembly, preceded by Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

On Tuesday Netanyahu is to fly to Paris, where he is scheduled to meet with President Nicolas Sarkozy on Wednesday. The prime minister's Paris visit comes just two days before that of Syrian President Bashar Assad, who will also meet with Sarkozy. Netanyahu has not signaled interest in renewing negotiations with Damascus, but stagnation in talks with the Palestinians may force him to do so.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, a mediator between Israel and Syria during Ehud Olmert's term as prime minister, said Friday in Paris that Turkey seeks to resume its role as an intermediary between the two countries, and that his government can be an "honest broker" in such talks.

Netanyahu has expressed reluctance over Turkish mediation due to ongoing diplomatic tension between Ankara and Jerusalem.

'Nederzettingen even erg als zelfmoordaanslagen', volgens Fatah-leider Dahlan

"What is the difference between blowing up a bus in Tel Aviv and taking over Palestinian land?" Dahlan asked.

De doden zijn niet meer tot leven te wekken, maar een nederzetting kan weer worden ontruimd. Een nederzetting is bovendien niet per definitie schadelijk voor de Palestijnen; dit hangt sterk af van waar hij wordt gebouwd en of land van Palestijnen is geconfisceerd. Veel land op de Westoever is ongebruikt en ligt niet in de weg van (mogelijke) uitbreidingsplannen van Palestijnse steden. Het hangt daarnaast ook af van de mensen die in de nederzetting gaan wonen: zijn dit fanatieke religieuze kolonisten of mensen met gematigde ideeën die graag met hun Palestijnse buren willen samenwerken? Dus terwijl een zelfmoordaanslag per definitie een drama is en onvoorstelbaar leed voor de slachtoffers en hun nabestaanden en vrienden inhoudt, ligt dat bij een nederzetting heel anders. Ook zaaien zelfmoordaanslagen angst en paniek en terreur bij de bevolking, en leiden ze ertoe dat mensen niet meer normaal de straat op durven.

De Palestijnen hebben ontegenzeggelijk te lijden onder het conflict, met name onder de maatregelen die Israel neemt om aanslagen en ander Palestijns geweld te voorkomen. Geweld dat er al was lang voor de bezetting.

The Fatah man also warned that riots in Jerusalem will not subside as long as Israel's prime minister "keeps sending settlers to pray at Al-Aqsa Mosque."

Deze 'kolonisten' zijn Joden wiens heiligste plaatsen op de Tempelberg liggen - daar waar de moslims de Rotskoepel en Al Aqsa Moskee hebben gebouwd. Je zou met net zoveel recht kunnen zeggen dat de Arabieren daar de kolonisten zijn.

Dergelijke opruiiende taal van het 'gematigde' Fatahleiderschap brengt de vrede in elk geval niet dichterbij.

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

'Settlement activity comparable to bus bombings in Tel Aviv'
By Haaretz Service

Last update - 16:33 11/10/2009
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1120210.html

Fatah strongman Mohammed Dahlan on Sunday compared Palestinian suicide bombings to Israel's establishment of settlements on Palestinian land, Israel Radio reported.

"What is the difference between blowing up a bus in Tel Aviv and taking over Palestinian land?" Dahlan asked.

Dahlan warned against a "loss of control" on the Palestinian street, in light of recent clashes between Israeli police and Palestinian rioters in Jerusalem, but added that the Palestinians were not interested in a protracted conflict with Israel.

The Fatah man also warned that riots in Jerusalem will not subside as long as Israel's prime minister "keeps sending settlers to pray at Al-Aqsa Mosque."

Meanwhile Sunday, Israel lifted the restrictions it had imposed on entry to Jerusalem's Temple Mount, following a period of heightened tensions at the holy site, which houses the Jewish Western Wall and the Muslim Al-Aqsa Mosque.

In light of sporadic clashes between Palestinians and Israeli police in the area, and calls by Palestinians and Israeli Arabs to "protect the Al-Aqsa Mosque" in recent days, Israel restricted the entry of Muslim men under the age of 50, and prohibited Jews from entering the mosque compound altogether.

On Saturday, the Palestinian news agency Ma'an reported that Israel had agreed to allow some 400 Muslims, who barricaded themselves inside the Al-Aqsa Mosque during the recent riots, to leave the compound without being arrested.

The compromise between Israel and the Palestinians was brokered by Jordan's ambassador to Israel, the news agency reported.

The Fatah official in the West Bank charged with Jerusalem affairs, Khatem Abed al-Kadr, said that Israeli authorities had provided guarantees that the Palestinians would not be arrested. However, "the danger to the Al-Aqsa Mosque has not passed," he said, calling on Israel's Arabs and the residents of East Jerusalem to maintain a constant presence at the mosque.

On Friday, stone-throwing Arab rioters wounded eleven Border Policemen in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Ra'as al-Amud, as tensions in the capital flared yet again.

Four of the policemen were taken to hospital for treatment and the others were treated at the scene. Officers arrested two Palestinians for hurling stones.

On Thursday, Hamas declared a "day of rage" and called on its supporters to come out and demonstrate at the Al-Aqsa Mosque on Friday.

Leading religious figures in the Muslim world, such as Sheikh Yousuf al-Qaradawi, dubbed Friday "protect Al-Aqsa day." Joining the call to "protect" the mosque were Palestinian politicians and religious figures, who have been trying to convince the lethargic public in Gaza to come out and demonstrate.

Hezbollah bewapent zich voor nieuwe oorlog tegen Israël

Wat onderstaand artikel niet meldt, is dat de bewapening van Hezbollah in strijd is met diverse VN resoluties en akkoorden, waaronder resolutie 1701 die het staakt het vuren tussen Israel en Hezbollah regelt en het mandaat aan UNIFIL, de internationale vredesmacht, verschaft.

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

Hezbollah gears up for new war
Fighters rearm and reinforce positions in valleys amid fears that Israel is about to launch attack on Islamic group

Mitchell Prothero and Peter Beaumont
The Observer, Sunday 8 November 2009
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/08/hezbollah-rearms-against-israel

Hezbollah is rapidly rearming in preparation for a new conflict with Israel, fearing that Benjamin Netanyahu's government will attack Lebanon again prior to any assault on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Last week, Israeli commandos seized a ship in the Mediterranean loaded with almost 400 tonnes of rockets and small arms - which Israel claimed was being sent from Iran to its Hezbollah allies. In dramatic further evidence of growing tensions, the Observer has learned that Hezbollah fighters have been busy reinforcing fixed defence positions north of the Litani river.

Having lost many of its bunkers in the south, Hezbollah is preparing a new strategy to defend villages there.

Although the organisation denied last week that the weapons were intended for its use, senior commanders have done little to disguise the scale of rearmament. "Sure, we are rearming, we have even said that we have far more rockets and missiles than we did in 2006," said a Hezbollah commander, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel began after an ill-advised operation by to kidnap two Israeli soldiers, prompting a massive Israeli response that lasted 34 days and killed more than 1,000 people.

"We had to blow up or leave some of our bunkers and fighting positions, but we still have plenty of capabilities in the south. We expect the Israelis to come soon, if not this winter, then they will wait until spring, when the ground isn't too soft for their tanks."

It was expected that the ceasefire would neutralise Hezbollah military efforts along the Lebanon-Israel border, as a newly bolstered United Nations peacekeeping force and the Lebanese army took up positions. Instead, based on dozens of interviews and multiple trips into the country's south, it is clear that Hezbollah believes it would face different challenges.

It has been forced to abandon the line of deeply entrenched static positions on the border with Israel and withdraw most of its men and weaponry to clusters of Shia villages.

"It's clear that Hezbollah no longer controls the border, due to the presence of Unifil [United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon] troops," said Andrew Exum, a military expert on Hezbollah at the Centre for New American Security. "They appear to be hardening the villages for this next round of fighting, while pushing their fixed positions north away from Unifil to protect the approaches to Beirut and the Bekaa Valley."

Israel and the United States have long assumed that any military action against Iran's nuclear programme would draw a muscular response from its close allies in Hezbollah. According to Israeli military and intelligence analysts, any move against Iran would require a move first against Hezbollah's capability to disrupt life in northern Israel with its rockets.

Tel Aviv seems unlikely to commit the same mistakes it did in 2006, when the plan was for air strikes to disrupt and confuse Hezbollah's military command, while minimising the use of ground troops. Israeli military sources have said that they are preparing for a potential new conflict.

Cruising through the serene green wadis that connect south Lebanon to the Litani river to the north, the commander explains what happened at the end of the last war. "We knocked out three of their tanks on the first day, as they tried to enter," he explained at a turn-off by the village of al-Qantara. "But after they entered the wadi, we knew they were going for the river and had to be stopped. So we called out to all the special forces anti-tank teams in the area. And they all swarmed the wadi. Boys would set up and wait for the tanks, fire off their rounds and then pull back. Then they would pull back a kilometre or so down the wadi and wait for them again."

According to Israeli military reports, after the first and last tanks were hit by rocket fire or mines, killing the company commander, the 24 tanks were essentially trapped inside a valley, surrounded on all sides and pinned down by mortars, rockets and mines. Eleven tanks were destroyed and the rest partially damaged and Israel lost at least 12 soldiers.

As unlikely as the Israelis might be to repeat these mistakes, they must figure out how to get their heavy armour past the Hezbollah teams that still lurk in the hills and valleys in the next round of fighting, if and when it comes.

Israelische Arabieren studeren aan Jordaanse universiteiten vanwege leeftijdsgrens in Israel

Vreemd genoeg legt onderstaand artikel nergens uit waarom die minimumleeftijd er is, en waarom juist Arabieren er zoveel hinder van ondervinden en ertegen protesteren. Het beste zou zijn wanneer Arabieren ook in het leger zouden dienen of anders een sociaal dienstjaar vervullen, maar daartegen wordt vanuit het Israelisch-Arabische leiderschap juist fel actie gevoerd omdat het de integratie zou bevorderen en hun eigen Arabische identiteit zou bedreigen.

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

Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA: Israeli universities apply an entrance age requirement so that those who don't serve in the army or do national service aren't rewarded with being able to attend university while others are in national service. It still doesn't level the playing field since they can spend this time studying and retaking the Israeli matriculation and "psychometric" (an equivalent of the American SAT) tests to improve their scores [entrance to almost all programs at Israeli universities are based purely on these scores] while those serving the country find themselves taking or re-taking these critical tests after not having been in a classroom for years. This while the testing schedule for the matriculation exams [which in some cases is only once a year with the results available too late for application for the academic year] can mean losing another year after completion of national service .
______________________________________________________

Increasing numbers of Israeli Arabs studying at Jordanian universities
By Ofri Ilani Haaretz

Last update - 04:40 01/11/2009
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1124913.html

Increasing numbers of Israeli Arab high school graduates are leaving the country to study at Jordanian universities, according to a recent survey. A decade ago fewer than 100 Arab Israelis were studying at Jordanian institutions of higher learning, but last year this swelled to about 5,000.

According to the study, sponsored by Dirsat: The Arab Center for Law and Policy, a major reason for the phenomenon is age requirements in many departments at Israeli universities, as well as the language barrier.

hen Maria Shalash of the largely Arab city of Nazareth graduated from high school two years ago, she wanted to study occupational therapy and communication disorders. "The field interested me, and people also told me that there were jobs [in the field]," she said.

Shalash tried to gain a place at the University of Haifa and was invited for an interview. But the university later discovered she was under 20, which disqualified her. She is now studying law, where there is no minimum-age requirement.

De facto discrimination

Shalash is not alone. Thousands of young high school graduates who want to study nursing or occupational or physical therapy have to wait until their 20th birthdays because of limitations by universities. Organizations representing the Arab community are seeking to change the situation, saying that it constitutes de facto discrimination against Israeli Arabs.

Though similar age requirements are not generally imposed by universities abroad, Israeli universities say the policy is necessary to ensure that students are emotionally mature. On the other hand, the Israel Defense Forces allows recruits, most of whom are Jewish, to defer their military service and enter university at age 18.

In recent years, Israel Arab civil rights organizations have sought to fight the universities' minimum-age requirements. "This discrimination actually harms [students seeking to study] in the fields that are most needed by the Arab public," said Dirsat director Yusuf Jabarin. "Even if it was originally not designed to harm Arab students, it is appropriate to consider abolishing [the restrictions]."

A lawsuit filed by the Nazareth-based Karameh human rights organization seeking to abolish the age provisions is currently pending in Tel Aviv District Court.

"I finished high school with good grades and I wanted to do paramedical studies," said Fadel Sa'adi, who hails from an Arab village in the north. "Ultimately I decided to study nursing, but I couldn't because I wasn't 20. I didn't have anything to do so I worked in construction."

A spokesman for the University of Haifa declined to comment on the matter because it was the subject of legal proceedings. Ben-Gurion University of the Negev said that age is a "criterion that is a predictor of success relating to the need to deal with practical experiences." He said that "the university has an interest in maximizing the success rate [of its students]."

The university noted that there are other areas such as the granting of firearms licenses or a bus or taxi driver's license where the applicant needs to be over 18. Regarding the army's program that allows 18-year-olds to enter university, a spokesman said that "the university fulfills the dictates of the Israel Defense Forces ... on the understanding that it involves an important national need."

Ban Ki-Moon wil Goldstone rapport zo snel mogelijk naar Veiligheidsraad sturen

Het is goed dat Nederland tegen de resolutie stemde, want het Goldstone rapport draagt niet bij aan vrede en is het zoveelste bewijs voor Israel dat zij geen recht hoeft te verwachten van de VN.

Zie ook op IMO Blog: Goldstone Rapport brengt recht noch vrede

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

Ban to send Goldstone to UNSC 'ASAP'

Nov. 8, 2009
E.B. SOLOMONT and tovah lazaroff , THE JERUSALEM POST

NEW YORK - Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Friday he will send the Goldstone Report, which calls for Israel and the Palestinians to investigate alleged war crimes during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza to the UN Security Council "as soon as possible."

The 15 council members have already received copies of the 575-page report, by the panel chaired by South African Judge Richard Goldstone. The General Assembly, in a resolution adopted Thursday, asked the secretary-general to transmit it, which will make the report an official Security Council document.

It's possible the Goldstone Report could come before the Security Council on Wednesday, during its open debate on the protection of civilians in armed conflict.

Following a two-day debate in the UN General Assembly, 114 countries voted for the resolution and 18 voted against it, including Israel, the US, Germany, the Netherlands, Canada, Australia and several Eastern European nations. Another 44 abstained, including most of the EU countries that had sought unsuccessfully to soften the resolution's language prior to the vote.

Switzerland was the only European country to endorse the report. Russia, which does not often side with Israel in these matters, abstained.

In anticipation of defeat on Thursday, Israel had focused its energies on a "moral victory" and had called on democratic and Western countries to reject the report, which it said undermined the right of moderate countries to defend themselves against terrorism.

"We are satisfied that 18 countries, which constitute a moral majority, supported Israel's stance and that 44 abstained and did not vote with the automatic majority," Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman told the media on Friday.

"It's not a trivial thing that 18 countries, including those from the Western, democratic world, would vote against the resolution," he said.

"The automatic majority of countries like Saudi Arabia and Somalia at the UN is, unfortunately, a given situation. These are not countries which will teach us about morals. Once again it has been proven that the UN is not an arena we can fight in," Lieberman said.

"The results of the vote, and the large number of countries who voted against or abstained, clearly show that the assembly's resolution does not enjoy the support of the moral majority," the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem said, in a statement after the vote. The statement stressed that the resolution had no connection to "the reality Israel faces."

"During Operation Cast Lead the IDF exhibited higher standards of combat and morals than those held by the all the initiators of the resolution," the statement continued. "Israel will continue to act to defend itself from international terrorism, as any democratic country would."

Palestinians are pushing the Security Council to refer the report to the International Criminal Court at The Hague in hopes that it would then prosecute individual Israelis of war crimes.

The Security Council, however, is highly unlikely to take any action. The United States, which has veto power on the council, has repeatedly said the report belonged in the Geneva-based Human Rights Council, which appointed the Goldstone panel.

Diplomats said Russia, which also has veto power on the council, does not want the Security Council dealing with human rights issues.

State Department spokesman Ian Kelly told reporters in Washington on Friday, "We don't support raising this issue in the Security Council. We are committed to the resumption of talks between the two sides, and we do not want to take any steps that would, in any way, jeopardize the resumption of those talks. We also believe that these kinds of issues are best raised and best dealt with through domestic institutions. And we call on Israel to set up the kind of mechanisms to investigate these - some of these allegations."

Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian UN observer, called Thursday's General Assembly's endorsement of the report, "an important night in the history of the General Assembly and the history of fighting against impunity and seeking accountability."

The General Assembly resolution also called on Switzerland to reconvene a meeting of the parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention, which spells out the obligations of an occupying power, and Mansour said the Palestinians will start preparing for this.

Israeli Ambassador Gabriela Shalev boycotted Thursday's vote, sending Deputy Representative Danny Carmon in her place.

Carmon said the resolution "endorses and legitimizes a deeply flawed, one-sided and prejudiced report."

He said the General Assembly ignores facts on the ground related to Israel's security, and cited the recent interception of a large arms shipment from Iran destined for Hizbullah.

Indeed, prior to Thursday's vote, Israel filed a letter of complaint with Ban, urging him to press the Security Council to act against Iran.

The dispatch by Iran of 36 shipping containers of weapons on the cargo vessel Francop violates several Security Council resolutions, namely 1747, 1701 and 1373, Shalev wrote in the letter.

"The aforementioned shipment from Iran to Syria, or to any other country or entity, in particular to any terrorist entity, constitutes a severe violation of this and other resolutions," she wrote.

Listing other violations, Shalev implicated Iran's national shipping company, saying it has "repeatedly" been "found to be involved in transporting weapons and other banned items in violation of UN Security Council resolutions."

Following the Goldstone vote, which US Ambassador Susan Rice did not attend, the US mission circulated an "explanation of vote" by Deputy Permanent Representative Alejandro Wolff, who voted in Rice's place.

"As the United States made clear in Geneva, we believe that the Goldstone Report is deeply flawed," Wolff said, citing an unbalanced focus on Israel, sweeping legal conclusions and overreaching recommendations, and a failure to adequately assign responsibility to Hamas for basing its operations in civilian-populated areas.

He stressed that the matter should be handled at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva alone, saying discussion in the Security Council would be "unconstructive."

Stating that the US "strongly supports accountability" for human rights and humanitarian law violations, Wolff said the best way to end human suffering is to bring comprehensive peace to the region, including a two-state solution.

"As we urge the parties to restart permanent-status negotiations leading to the creation of a Palestinian state, we should all be seeking to advance the cause of peace - and doing nothing to hinder it," he said.

The UN resolution was passed two days after the US House of Representatives passed a non-binding resolution calling the Goldstone Report "irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy."

US Jewish groups - from B'nai B'rith to the American Jewish Committee to the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations - criticized the UN vote.

"In the event that this matter is referred to the UN Security Council," said AJC Executive Director David Harris, "we urge member states to dismiss the recommendations of the Goldstone Commission, which was grossly prejudiced against Israel from its inception."

On Monday, Lieberman and Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon will head to Denmark and the Netherlands where they will speak with European and Israeli diplomats about both the Goldstone Report and the shipment of Iranian arms which Israel confiscated last week. Israel has argued that the UN should condemn Iran's actions rather than Israel's. Lieberman plans to thank the Netherlands for its stance on the Goldstone Report.

The two officials will also discuss an upgrade of European Union relations with Israel.

In related news, the Anti-Defamation League said the Goldstone Report has become "a cause celebre in the Arab press," which has published anti-Israel cartoons in response to the document.

Among the examples cited by the ADL is a cartoon published in Alraya in Qatar on October 17 that portrays a Jew putting the Goldstone Report into a shredder.

AP contributed to this report.

This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1257455203774&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull

Dialoog zonder Israëli's levert geen vrede op maar wel EU-subsidie via Cordaid

Het feit dat bij de huiskamerconcerten die de Nederlandse componist Merlijn Twaalfhoven in Jeruzalem organiseerde, geen Israëli's welkom zijn is in de Nederlandse media onder de pet gehouden, vooral in het NOS journaal.

Twaalfhoven then added, "The local people told me months ago that Israelis cannot go. Our team [of 12 Dutch activists and eight artists] had to promise that we would not allow peaceful Israelis to come."

Apologetic over what had happened, he then spilled the beans. The €50,000 project was funded by the European Union through the Dutch charity Cordaid and the Alexandria-based Anna Lindh Euro-Mediterranean Foundation for the Dialogue between Cultures. To have said no to racism would have meant to scuttle the budget.

Dat kan onmogelijk de reden zijn dat Nederlandse media hier niet open over zijn. Het is ronduit schandalig dat dit project als dialoog bevorderend wordt neergezet en als zodanig subsidie ontvangt uit Nederland terwijl men in feite een discriminerend beleid voert door mensen op grond van hun nationaliteit de toegang te weigeren. Als de informatie in dit artikel wordt doodgezwegen, falen de media in hun meest basale taak om goede en onafhankelijke informatie te geven.

-----------

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1257455208093&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Peace without dialogue? Impossible

By GIL ZOHAR

There aren't too many English-language journalists who have covered Arab Jerusalem as I have for In Jerusalem in recent years - reporting on everything from a home in Anata built and demolished four times and now facing a fifth demolition order, to the first shopping mall along east Jerusalem's main drag Salah a-Din Street, which received a building permit after 42 years of bureaucracy; from the al-Mamal Foundation for Contemporary Art inside the New Gate, to a conference on Palestinian refugees at al-Quds University in Abu Dis. These are all stories I have reported in an objective manner.

Thus it was that last weekend I duly RSVP'd to a guests-only invitation to the Al-Quds Underground, touted as an unconventional festival with more than 150 small shows in private spaces in the Old City. Performances included music, storytelling, dancing, short acts and food. Locations were living rooms, a library, courtyards, gardens and more unique places. My expectation of a celebration of Jerusalem's diversity was dashed, however, when I arrived late Saturday afternoon at the Damascus Gate meeting point. Politely asked in English by Jamal Goseh, the director of the a-Nuzha Hakawati Theater near the American Colony Hotel, "Where do you live?" I responded in Arabic that I live in Jerusalem. From my accent and appearance, he discerned that I am an Israeli.

Al-Quds Underground's artistic director Merlijn Twaalfhoven of Amsterdam then told me, along with some Israeli peace activists who had arrived, that we were not welcome. My reply that I had been invited was to no avail, nor was my guarded threat to pen an expose of their racism.

And so here it is.

For the sake of fairness, I met Twaalfhoven the next day to allow him an opportunity to explain… or dig himself a deeper hole. (Goseh declined my request for an interview.) "We want to bring art to the world," he began. "I sometimes break through the boundaries between art and life. That is the core of my work."

A visionary creator of art happenings such as a dance performance at the Jalazoun refugee camp near Ramallah and the Long Distance Call concert on the rooftops of the Turkish half of the divided Cypriot city of Nicosia, Twaalfhoven said he had vaguely heard that the Arab League had chosen Jerusalem as Al-Quds 2009 Capital of Arab Culture and that the Israeli government had banned the festival as a political event forbidden under the Oslo Accords. "I don't know the details. I thought it was a good idea to bring people together."

Al-Quds Underground's no-Israelis rule is part of a larger policy set by the Palestinian Boycott Divestment and Sanctions National Committee. This BDS movement, founded in 2005, can take credit for the cancellation of Leonard Cohen's September concert at the Ramallah Cultural Palace.

Similarly in 2007, BDS activists succeeded in getting Canadian rock 'n' roll star Bryan Adams to pull the plug on back-to-back concerts in Jericho and Tel Aviv. Organized by the New York-based One Million Voices, the concerts were intended to promote a two-state solution to resolve the festering Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

BDS activists in Europe and elsewhere aim to isolate and discomfit Israel just as South Africa's apartheid regime was targeted in the 1980s. This rejection of normalization of relations is a historic and strategic mistake based on the false analogy between apartheid and Zionism.

Never mind the snub I received Saturday. On a broader level, the BDS movement is missing the point that peace is best promoted at a grassroots level, person to person, Jew to Arab, and Arab to Jew.

Those who think Israel can be pressured into coexistence are mistaken. Two states for two peoples will be embraced when enough people demand it. BDS fosters the illusion that Palestinians can achieve their goal of statehood without ever accepting Israel and Israelis.

Boycott, divest and sanction? I respond, Embrace, invest and encourage. Peace starts among people. Anyone unprepared for honest dialogue with the other is suffering from acute xenophobia. As Black Panther activist Eldridge Cleaver once remarked, "You're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem."

zondag 8 november 2009

Wereld dringt bij Abbas aan om zich toch weer kandidaat te stellen

Ondanks de vele kritiek die ik op hem heb, is het de vraag of Abbas' vertrek het vredesproces vooruit helpt. Abbas was in zijn 'dubblespeak' in ieder geval minder extreem dan Arafat, en 'martelaren' krijgen voor zover ik weet onder zijn bestuur alleen morele, en geen financiële of materiale steun. Een president die de Palestijnse gewapende strijd en de ideologie van martelarenschap ook moreel veroordeelt is zijn leven niet zeker, en wacht waarschijnlijk eenzelfde lot als Rabin. Toch had Abbas naar mijn idee veel meer kunnen doen om de Palestijnen voor te bereiden op vrede en op acceptatie en erkenning van een Joodse staat op een deel van wat vroeger Palestina was.

-----------

JPost - The Jerusalem Post
Nov 6, 2009 22:17 | Updated Nov 7, 2009 8:45
World urges Abbas to rethink decision
By AP AND JPOST.COM STAFF
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1257455200379&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner asserted on Friday that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's decision not to run for a second term in the January 2010 elections was a "threat to peace" in the Middle East.

France's foreign minister said Abbas's generation was the best hope for settling the Mideast conflict, adding that Abbas's decision was a threat not only to peace, but "for us also."

Kouchner stated that French officials would discuss peace efforts with Syrian President Bashar Assad, as well as with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, when both leaders visit Paris next week in order to conduct separate meetings with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu said he hoped "the decision by Mr. Abbas is not his final decision."

Kouchner and Davutoglu held talks in Paris on Friday.

The Moroccan Foreign Ministry also added its voice to those expressing concern over Abbas's decision, imploring him to run in the upcoming elections and praising his "proven leadership" and ability to renew peace talks, Israel Radio reported later on Friday.

Abbas announced Thursday he was not inclined to run once again for office in the 2010 elections he himself had announced, citing the stalemate in peace talks and "Israel's policy" as a major contributing factor to his decision.

On Thursday evening, after Abbas declared his intention to withdraw his candidacy from the January 24 presidential elections, Defense Minister Ehud Barak issued a statement in which he expressed hope that despite Abbas's declaration, the efforts to commence negotiations and reach a peace deal were essential to Israel's safety and the future of the entire area would not be hampered.

Barak stressed the importance of both sides' continued adherence to the principle of promoting negotiations toward an arrangement. The defense minister reiterated his support of exhausting every effort in order to reach a two-state solution, while safeguarding Israel's security interests.

Also commenting on Abbas's announcement was White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs, who told reporters Thursday that whatever Abbas decided, the US would "look forward to continuing to work with him and to continue in that collaboration to make the lives of Palestinians better."

Gibbs also stressed that "we have tremendous respect for President Abbas. He has been an important and historic leader for the Palestinian people and a true partner for the United States."

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reacted to Abbas's speech by praising his leadership in working toward the creation of a Palestinian state next to Israel.

She seemingly ignored a question about whether she would try to persuade Abbas to stay on and said: "I look forward to working with President Abbas in any new capacity to help achieve this goal."

Iran weigert uranium deal met Westen

Het is duidelijk dat Iran ieder compromis afwijst en zich van niemand iets aantrekt. Om het met Dries van Agt te zeggen: Iran in al haar arrogantie lapt het internationale recht aan haar laars en weigert iedere dialoog en compromis. Wie niet horen wil, moet maar voelen. Oeps, Van Agt zei dit niet over Iran, maar over een land dat Iran meermaals heeft gedreigd van de kaart te vegen.

----------

Report: Iran won't trade enriched uraniuml - refuses main part of draft agreement

http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2009/11/report-iran-wont-trade-enriched.html

Last update - 12:08 07/11/2009

Iran will not exchange uranium with the West, top official says

By Haaretz Service

Iran will not exchange its domestically low-enriched uranium with the West to supply Tehran's reactor fuel, the Chief of Iran's Parliament National Security and Foreign Policy Commission said on Saturday, in what seems as a direct rebuff of a UN-drafted deal.

"Iran is not to give any of its 1200 kilograms fuel to the other party to receive 20 percent [enriched] fuel and whether gradually or at once, this will not be done and is called off," Alaeddin Boroujerdi told the ISNA news agency.

The Iranian official was referring to a recently drafted UN proposal according to Iran would transfer 1.2 tons of low-enriched uranium produced in its nuclear site Natanz to Russia, where it would be enriched to 20 percent, then to be transferred to France for industrial processing, after which it would be returned to the Tehran Research Reactor, which produces medical isotopes.

Boroujerdi also stated that Iran and fuel supplier countries must find a new way to provide Tehran's reactor fuel.

"Presently, Mr. Soltanieh is in talks to find an approach for the issue," Boroujerdi added, referring to Tehran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Ali Asghar Soltanieh.

"Referring tp remarks by some western officials that Iran must respond to the IAEA brokered deal regarding purchase of fuel in two days, Boroujerdi said, "The west cannot see a deadline and we are not committed to their remarks."

On Friday, a hardline Iranian cleric told worshippers that the The United Nations nuclear watchdog is legally obliged to provide Iran with nuclear fuel for its research reactor without setting any conditions.

Ahmad Khatami, a member of a powerful clerical body that can appoint or dismiss Iran's supreme leader, said in a sermon broadcast on state radio that Iran was prepared to produce fuel for its Tehran reactor if world powers insisted on the deal.

"The International Atomic Energy Agency is legally obliged to provide fuel ... if you want to play games with us then I can assure you that we will produce it by ourselves," Khatami told worshippers at Tehran University. "The Iranian nation is wise and will not be deceived by the nuclear deal."

"Why should we send our low enriched uranium abroad? ... who can guarantee that you will then provide us with the needed fuel?" said Khatami.

The United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China have tried for years to persuade Iran to suspend uranium enrichment activities in return for economic and political incentives.

Tehran has so far refused to halt its enrichment.

Katami said Iran had no intention of yielding to the West's pressure over its nuclear program.

"No one has traded over the Iranian nation's legitimate nuclear right," said the cleric in the sermon, which was broadcast live.

The West's priority is to reduce Iran's LEU stockpile to prevent any danger that the Islamic Republic might turn it into the highly enriched uranium needed for a nuclear bomb.

Iran testte ontwerpen voor kleine kernkoppen op raketten

Dit is zeer verontrustend, maar uiteraard geen reden om de druk op Iran verder op te voeren, een handelsboycot af te kondigen of anderszins maatregelen te nemen. Vooral links, vroeger altijd zo voor boycots en tegen militarisme, heeft met Iran en haar nucleaire programma om een of andere reden geen moeite.

---------

Boom!: Iran tested advanced nuclear warhead design – secret report

http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2009/11/boom-iran-tested-advanced-nuclear.html

Iran has evidently been experimenting with nuclear warheads. They will explain that the warheads are intended to produce electricity. Juan Cole will explain that it is an error in the translation, and J Street will insist on more dialogue. The USA National Intelligence estimate will determine that there is a high probability that there is a medium probability that they haven't the foggiest notion what is going on, and a medium probability that there is a high probability that they understand all too well what is going on but do not want to admit it.

Ami Isseroff

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

Iran tested advanced nuclear warhead design – secret report

Exclusive: Watchdog fears Tehran has key component to put bombs in missiles

Julian Borger, diplomatic editor
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 5 November 2009 20.45 GMT

The UN's nuclear watchdog has asked Iran to explain evidence suggesting that Iranian scientists have experimented with an advanced nuclear warhead design, the Guardian has learned.

The very existence of the technology, known as a "two-point implosion" device, is officially secret in both the US and Britain, but according to previously unpublished documentation in a dossier compiled by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iranian scientists may have tested high-explosive components of the design. The development was today described by nuclear experts as "breathtaking" and has added urgency to the effort to find a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis.

The sophisticated technology, once mastered, allows for the production of smaller and simpler warheads than older models. It reduces the diameter of a warhead and makes it easier to put a nuclear warhead on a missile.

Documentation referring to experiments testing a two-point detonation design are part of the evidence of nuclear weaponisation gathered by the IAEA and presented to Iran for its response.

The dossier, titled "Possible Military Dimensions of Iran's Nuclear Program", is drawn in part from reports submitted to it by western intelligence agencies.

The agency has in the past treated such reports with scepticism, particularly after the Iraq war. But its director general, Mohamed ElBaradei, has said the evidence of Iranian weaponisation "appears to have been derived from multiple sources over different periods of time, appears to be generally consistent, and is sufficiently comprehensive and detailed that it needs to be addressed by Iran".

Extracts from the dossier have been published previously, but it was not previously known that it included documentation on such an advanced warhead. "It is breathtaking that Iran could be working on this sort of material," said a European government adviser on nuclear issues.

James Acton, a British nuclear weapons expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said: "It's remarkable that, before perfecting step one, they are going straight to step four or five ... To start with more sophisticated designs speaks of level of technical ambition that is surprising."

Another western specialist with extensive knowledge of the Iranian programme said: "It raises the question of who supplied this to them. Did AQ Khan [a Pakistani scientist who confessed in 2004 to running a nuclear smuggling ring] have access to this, or is it another player?"

The revelation of the documents comes at a time of growing tension. Tehran has so far rejected a deal that would remove most of its enriched uranium stockpile for a year and replace it with nuclear fuel rods which would be much harder to turn into weapons. The Iranian government has also balked at negotiations, which were due to begin last week, over its continued enrichment of uranium, in defiance of UN security council resolutions.

There are fears in Washington and London that if no deal is reached to at least temporarily defuse tensions by the end of December, Israel could set in motion plans to take military action aimed at setting back the Iranian programme by force, with incalculable consequences for the Middle East.

Iran has rejected most of the IAEA material on weaponisation as forgeries, but has admitted carrying out tests on multiple high-explosive detonations synchronised to within a microsecond. Tehran has told the agency that there is a civilian application for such tests, but has so far not provided any evidence for them.

Western weapons experts say there are no such civilian applications, but the use of co-ordinated detonations in nuclear warheads is well known. They compress the fissile core, or pit, of the warhead until it reaches critical mass.

A US national intelligence estimate two years ago said that Iran had explored nuclear warhead design for several years but had probably stopped in 2003. British, French and German officials have said they believe weaponisation continued after that date and may still be continuing.

In September, a German court found a German-Iranian businessman, Mohsen Vanaki, guilty of brokering the sale of dual-use equipment with possible applications in developing nuclear weapons. The equipment included specialised high-speed cameras, of the sort used to develop implosion devices, as well as radiation detectors. According to a report by the Institute for Science and International Security, the German foreign intelligence service, the Bundesnachrichtendienst, testified at the trial that there was evidence that Iran's weapons development was continuing.

The IAEA is seeking to find out what the scientists and the institutions involved in the experiments are doing now, but has so far not been given a response. The agency's repeated requests to interview Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, whose name features heavily in the IAEA's documentation and who is widely seen as the father of the Iranian nuclear programme, have been turned down.

The agency has also asked Iran to explain evidence that a Russian weapons expert helped Iranian technicians to master synchronised high-explosive detonations.

The first implosion devices, like the "Fat Man" bomb dropped on Nagasaki on 9 August 1945, used 32 high-explosive hexagons and pentagons arrayed around a plutonium core like the panels of a football. The IAEA has a five-page document describing experimentation on such a hemispherical array of explosives.

According to a diplomat familiar with the IAEA documentation, the evidence also points to experiments with a two-point detonation system that represents "a more elegant solution" to the challenges of making a nuclear warhead, but it is much harder to achieve. It is used in conjunction with a non-spherical pit, in the shape of a rugby ball, or explosives in that shape wrapped around a spherical pit, and it works by compressing the pit from both ends.The IAEA has expressed "serious concern" about Iran's failure to give an account of the research its scientists have carried out.

Descriptions of "two-point implosion" warheads designs have occasionally appeared in the public domain (there are extensive descriptions on Wikipedia) and they were first developed by US scientists in the 1950s, but it remains an offence for American officials or even non-governmental nuclear experts with security clearance to discuss them.

Israel en Europese Unie tekenen landbouw handelsverdrag

Eindelijk weer eens positief nieuws. Hopelijk wordt ook die andere overeenkomst binnenkort getekend.

Approximately one billion USD of Israeli agricultural and processed food products are exported to the EU each year. Europe is Israel's most important trading partner in the agricultural field, with more than 25% of Israel's agricultural product and more than 75% of its total fresh agricultural products exported to Europe. The Ministry of Agriculture predicts that the new agreement will serve to expand agricultural exports, an important development given that more than 60% of exports to Europe come from the Arava and Negev regions.

----------

Israel and European Union sign agricultural agreement
(Communicated by the MFA Spokesperson)
4 Nov 2009

On Wednesday, November 4, 2009, a new agricultural agreement was signed in Brussels between Israel and the European Union. The new agreement, which updates the original agricultural agreement signed in the 1970's, is the result of lengthy negotiations led by Israel's Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Labor. Since the original signing, the agreement has been updated several times in order to reflect the significant changes in the needs of both parties.

Access to the markets of both sides has been greatly improved under the new agreement. In the processed agricultural products sector, over 95% of the products will be exempt from all taxes or levies. Considerable liberalization was undertaken in regards to all areas of fresh produce and approximately 80% will be exempt from all customs restrictions.

Israel's Ambassador to the European Union, Ran Curiel, signed the agreement for Israel, while Christian Danielsson, Ambassador of Sweden, the current president of the EU, signed in the name of the Europeans.

The agricultural agreement constitutes one element in the wide range of existing agreements between Israel and the EU, which include the Israel-EU Association Agreement, the Israeli-EU Action Plan as part of the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), the Euro-Mediterranean partnership, as well as Israel's participation in a score of European programs and agencies, such as the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development.

Approximately one billion USD of Israeli agricultural and processed food products are exported to the EU each year. Europe is Israel's most important trading partner in the agricultural field, with more than 25% of Israel's agricultural product and more than 75% of its total fresh agricultural products exported to Europe. The Ministry of Agriculture predicts that the new agreement will serve to expand agricultural exports, an important development given that more than 60% of exports to Europe come from the Arava and Negev regions.

Israel uses the world's leading technologies in the intensive production of fruits, vegetables and flowers. Most of Israel's agricultural activities are conducted in periphery and desert areas. Both Israel and the EU view the existence of active and modern rural areas as essential as they are used to preserve open spaces and prevent rapid urbanization processes.

Hamas leider Khaled Meshaal roept Abbas op vredesonderhandelingen te stoppen

Palestina sympathisanten, alsmede de meeste journalisten, zullen in onderstaande een gematigde verklaring lezen dat Hamas een Palestijnse staat binnen 1967 grenzen accepteert en dus bereid is Israel te erkennen. Zijn handreiking aan Abbas is altemeer bewijs van de verandering ten goede bij Hamas. Met 'verzet' wordt uiteraard alleen vreedzaam verzet bedoeld en heilige strijd verwijst uiteraard naar innerlijke strijd en heeft eveneens niks met geweld te maken.

"Any leader who insists on the right of return for the Palestinian refugees and on restoring the land, even to the 1967 borders ... must know that the way to do this is not through negotiations or betting on the Americans but through holy struggle, resistance and national unity," Meshaal said.

Ik lees bovenstaande als dat men het hele land wil bevrijden van de rivier tot de zee, en dat dat alleen mogelijk is d.m.v. strijd en verzet, maar dat zelfs de 'bevrijding' van alleen de bezette gebieden niet mogelijk zou zijn door middel van onderhandelingen. De verwijzing naar het 'recht op terugkeer' maakt de hele discussie over of men wel of geen '67 grenzen zou accepteren natuurlijk per definitie betekenisloos.

--------

Stick to resistance path, stop negotiations
07-11-2009,08:53
www. qassam.ps/news-2018-Stick_to_resistance_path_stop_negotiations.html

Al Qassam Website/Agencies - Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal urged Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Friday to stop seeking compromise with Israel but offered him an olive branch, saying Palestinians must end their divisions.

Mashaal said that Hamas "stretches its hand" to Abbas's Fatah faction to end divisions between the two sides undermining the Palestinian cause.

"Courage dictates that we, as leaders of the Palestinians, be frank with our people and evaluate what compromise has brought us, decide together to suspend or freeze the political settlement process and pursue our real national options," Meshaal told a rally in the Syrian capital.

He said compromise with Israel, starting with the 1993 Oslo Accords, had failed to stop Israeli settlement expansion and brought Palestinians no closer to establishing an independent state in the land Israel has occupied since the 1967 Middle East War.

Abbas suspended talks with Israel during the Israeli invasion of Gaza in December and U.S. efforts to re-start them have since failed. Hamas has opposed the talks and rejected Western demands to recognize Israel.

"Any leader who insists on the right of return for the Palestinian refugees and on restoring the land, even to the 1967 borders ... must know that the way to do this is not through negotiations or betting on the Americans but through holy struggle, resistance and national unity," Meshaal said.

"Our hand is stretched out to reconcile with our brothers in Fatah and the Palestinian presidency to achieve our national project," he said.

vrijdag 6 november 2009

Algemene Vergadering VN neemt Goldstone rapport Gaza Oorlog aan

Nederland stemde eerder in de Mensenrechtenraad tegen aanname van het rapport, en zal dat nu waarschijnlijk ook hebben gedaan, maar vreemd genoeg is dat niet te vinden in de online Nederlandse kranten. Vindt men dat niet vermeldenswaard?

Voor meer over het Goldstone rapport: http://www.goldstonereport.org

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

General Assembly adopts resolution urging Israel and Palestinians to investigate Gaza crimes

By: EDITH M. LEDERER

Associated Press - 11/05/09 4:10 PM PST

http://www.sfexaminer.com/world/general-assembly-adopts-resolution-urging-israel-and-palestinians-to-investigate-gaza-crimes-69318327.html

UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. General Assembly urged Israel and the Palestinians Thursday to investigate alleged war crimes during last winter's conflict in Gaza and raised the possibility of Security Council action if they don't.

The 192-member world body approved an Arab-drafted resolution by a vote of 114-18, with 44 abstentions and 16 countries not voting.

Supporters insisted there must be accountability — especially from Israel — for the alleged violations of international law during the Gaza conflict in which 13 Israelis and almost 1,400 Palestinians were killed, including many civilians.

Israel rejected the resolution as "deeply flawed, one-sided and prejudiced" while the United States called it "unbalanced and biased" and warned that it will hurt prospects for achieving Mideast peace. Others voting "no" included Australia, Canada, Germany, Italy, Panama and a number of other European and Pacific island states.

Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian U.N. observer called it "an important night in the history of the General Assembly and the history of fighting against impunity and seeking accountability."

The resolution "endorses" a report by an expert panel chaired by South African Judge Richard Goldstone which concluded that both Israel and Palestinian militants committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during the Gaza war.

The report concluded that Israel used disproportionate force, deliberately targeting civilians, using Palestinians as human shields, and destroying civilian infrastructure during the incursion to root out Palestinian rocket squads targeting southern Israel.

It accused Palestinian armed groups of deliberately targeting civilians and trying to spread terror through its rocket attacks on southern Israel. Hamas, the main rival to the Palestinian Authority which Mansour represents, controls Gaza and most armed groups in the territory.

Many Western nations that voted against the resolution or abstained said they did not endorse all the recommendations in the 575-page Goldstone report, and opposed the possibility of Security Council action.

The resolution urges Israel and "the Palestinian side" to conduct "independent, credible" investigations within three months.

It asks Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to report to the General Assembly, within three months, on implementation by both sides "with a view to considering further action, if necessary, by the relevant United Nations organs and bodies, including the Security Council."

Unlike Security Council resolutions, General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding but they do reflect the views of the broader U.N. membership.

Mansour said the Palestinians will return to the General Assembly in three months to consider the secretary-general's report "with a view for further action."

He said at the start of the assembly's two-day debate on Wednesday that the Palestinians will pursue justice for Palestinian victims in the Security Council and at the International Criminal Court, the world's permanent war crimes tribunal.

"We started the journey today ... and we will continue this process until we make sure that the Israeli criminals who have committed war crimes against the Palestinian civilians face justice and get the punishment they deserve," Mansour said.

The resolution also calls on Switzerland to reconvene a meeting of the parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention, which spells out the obligations of an occupying power, and Mansour said the Palestinians will start preparing for this.

Before the vote, Israel's deputy U.N. ambassador Daniel Carmon demanded to know who would conduct a Palestinian investigation — the Palestinian Authority "that was ousted from Gaza in a violent coup" or "the Hamas terrorist organization ... which rejects the recognition of Israel."

Egypt's U.N. Ambassador Maged Abdelaziz, who introduced the resolution, replied that "the Palestinian Authority itself declared that they are going to conduct their own investigation" and Hamas has "already expressed the willingness to cooperate and to investigate and to prosecute those that are going to be responsible for these crimes."

Abdelaziz then asked Carmon if Israel will conduct a similar independent investigation, adding: "I think that this will be very happy news to the General Assembly."

Carmon replied that "Israel has been conducting professional, credible and thorough investigations as part of its standard operating procedures, and irrespective of any U.N. report" and went on to denounce the resolution.

"It disregards Israel's inherent right to defend its citizens in the face of ongoing terrorist attacks," he said. "It represents yet another pretext to bash Israel at the U.N. and is detrimental to any positive diplomatic engagement in the region."

U.S. deputy ambassador Alejandro Wolff told the assembly that "the United States strongly supports accountability for human rights and humanitarian law violations in relation to the Gaza conflict" and will continue to call for all parties to pursue credible domestic investigations.

But he strongly criticized the Goldstone report for "its unbalanced focus on Israel" and its "failure to assign appropriate responsibility to Hamas for its decision to base itself and its operations in heavily civilian-populated urban areas." He reiterated that the U.S. believes the report should remain in the Geneva-based Human Rights Council, which commissioned it.

The General Assembly action came two days after the U.S. House of Representatives passed a nonbinding resolution by a vote of 344-36 condemning the Goldstone report as "irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy." Goldstone sent the House Foreign Affairs Committee a 16-point rebuttal of what he said were incorrect or unfair readings of his report in the resolution.

Hussein Ibish over de fictie van een eenstatenoplossing

Hussein Ibish van de American Task Force on Palestine, een gematigde pro-Palestijnse organisatie, over proponenten van een eenstatenoplossing (in Nederland is Anja Meulenbelt een bekend voorbeeld):

But instead of trying to do that, they engage in the most hyperbolic discourse about the badness of Zionism, the badness of Jewish Israelis, the rightness and primacy of not just a Palestinian narrative, but the most strident traditional Palestinian narrative, and the most tendentious Palestinian narrative, the one that places lame for the conflict entirely on the side of the Israelis, that casts Israel as the usurper and what they call in one-state circles now the "temporary racist usurping entity." These are the ones, by the way, who won't talk about my book. There's a refusal to acknowledge or read my book. I've nicknamed my book "the temporary racist usurping book."

Ibish over praten met Hamas:

Now with regard to Hamas, I definitely don't think it would be wise for the West to open up dialogue with Hamas under the present circumstances. I think that would simply reward them and it would benefit them in their competition with the PLO and there's a stark choice that Palestinians are facing between two strategies: an Islamist violent strategy and a secular nationalist negotiation strategy. I think it's very important to bolster the second and to make the first appear what it actually is: Non-functional.

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

Hussein Ibish on the Fantasy World of One-Staters

http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/11/hussein_ibish_on_the_fantasy_w.php

The Atlantic - Jeffrey Goldberg
November 3, 2009 - 12:00am

Hussein Ibish, a senior fellow at the American Task Force on Palestine, which is the leading American group advocating for an independent Palestine alongside Israel, has a new book out, "What's Wrong With the One-State Agenda?" which does a comprehensive job of demolishing the arguments made by those who think that Israel should be eliminated and replaced by a single state of Jews and Palestinians. He has performed an important service with this book by noting one overwhelming truth about this debate: Virtually no one in Israel wants a single-state between the river and the sea. It's useful to remember this salient fact when listening to the ostensibly reality-based arguments of the one-staters.

I spoke to Ibish about his arguments last week, shortly after he spoke at the J Street conference. Here is an edited version of our conversation:

Jeffrey Goldberg: What were your impressions of the conference?

Hussein Ibish: It was impressive as a first step. My impression is that there's still quite a bit of message-cohesion and message-formulation to be done. It seemed to me to be an insufficiently coherent group of people. The range of people was so large.

JG: You mean on the Zionist spectrum?

HI: I mean people ranging from the sort of centrist-center left, all the way to post-Zionists, anti-Zionists, who were there, too. It's not ultimately a group that's going to form, I think, a functional coalition. Right now, they're finding their feet. This is normal, it's inevitable -- but at a certain point, I think they have to clarify what they are, who their constituency is, what they stand for, who they are, who they're not. They've been more successful in creating a space for themselves as a new voice that is compelling, but at other moments it's looked like where they were simply positioning themselves as the alternative to AIPAC. And my sense of things is that, initially, that they would look too much to their rivals. But sooner rather than later, they're going to have to just move on and start to define themselves in a much more coherent and pro-active way, not just in contrast to the traditional Jewish organizations but also to distinguish themselves from people in the Jewish community whose criticism of Israel makes them anathema to the mainstream of the community. They can't go there and I think they've tried not to go there.

JG: You can't be Zionist and non-Zionist at the same time, in other words.

HI: Exactly. I think it's essential for them. For us, it's not important.

JG: Well, isn't it important to have a pro-Israel, pro-two-state organization in Washington that's credibly Jewish?

HI: It is. But I believe that all of the mainstream organizations are moving in that direction. I think begrudgingly, without enthusiasm, I think they're all getting there, because I think ultimately the only organization that I can think of that is absolutely opposed to a two-state agreement are on the far right, the Zionist Organization of America, which is in favor of the occupation without reservations and, on the left, Jewish Voices for Peace, which is a one-state group all the way and without reservation. It seems to me everybody else occupies some space in the middle without being one-staters and without being flag-waving pro-settlers.

Now, the question is, from our point of view, what's really important is that the Jewish community have a range of dynamic organizations that are effective in advocating for peace based on two states, number one. And number two, that we can work with everybody who is in favor of a two-state solution without any other preconditions. I mean, we don't want to get involved in intra-Jewish rivalries. We want to work with everyone who wants peace based on two states. It's as simple as that. We don't have a huge stake in where J Street ultimately positions itself, but I will say this: The more mainstream it can become, the more powerful and important it will be. I think they should be as mainstream as possible, they should avoid the impression they sometimes give that they're perhaps not being sensitive to fears about Israel's security. There's a real appetite for a more robust, more aggressively pro-peace organization in the Jewish community. But from our perspective, the only people we don't want to talk to are the one-staters and the pro-occupation groups.

JG: But the one-staters are a very marginal group. I think one of the interesting things you do in your book is show very coolly, calmly, the essential ridiculousness of one-state advocacy based on the simple fact that in order to have a successful one-state plan, you need Israeli Jews to want it, and today, not even one percent of Israeli Jews want it.

HI: You could put all of them in a small auditorium.

JG: I don't think you need an auditorium. Talk about these guys, the Tony Judts --

HI: I don't want to be too hard on Judt. Judt put out this argument and then he immediately admitted that it was utopian, that it wasn't serious and he was just doing a thought experiment. And since then, he basically has more or less withdrawn from the conversation Judt has not been a person who suggests that this is a realistic plan and a serious proposal for the future.

There are two fundamental flaws with pro-Palestinian strategic thinking that focuses on the idea of abandoning two states and going for a single state. The first is the question of feasibility, and it's hard to argue with that. Obviously anyone who is familiar with this sees the difficulty, and I would be the first to say that success is not assured by any means. Even a two-state agreement looks, at the moment, like something of a long shot. The difference between the two-state solution and everything else is that yes, it's a long shot, but it would work. And if we could conceivably get it, if we did get it, it would solve the conflict.

The fundamental argument that the one-staters seem to be making, which is that we can't possibly get Israel to end the occupation and relinquish their control of the 22 percent of Palestine (the West Bank and Gaza) but we will inevitably succeed in getting them to relinquish one hundred percent of the territory under their control. This is a problem of logic. The second thing is that once you've realized this, obviously what you've done is set yourself the task of convincing Jewish Israelis to voluntarily do this. The idea of coercing the Israelis into this through military force is absurd, and it could only really be done through voluntary persuasion. What the one-staters argue, actually, is that they don't have to do that. What they're going to do, they say, is bring the Israelis to their knees.

JG: South Africa style?

HI: Well, South Africa style, except we don't have a South Africa equation here.

JG: But they believe they do.

HI: They believe that through the application of what they call BDS - Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions - globally that they can crush the will of the Israelis and break the Zionist movement. To me, even if you believe that boycotts were plausible, which I don't, certainly I don't think the American government and institutions and corporations would participate.

JG: You have to move from the American consensus that supports supplying Israel with the best weaponry to not just a military cutoff but a complete cutoff and boycott. It's very hard to picture.

HI: Anyone who thinks that is plausible in the foreseeable future doesn't understand the nature of the American relationship with Israel. The commitment of the U.S., not just the government but American society, is to the survival and security of the Israeli state. And then there's another aspect, which is the extent to which Israeli institutions, organizations and corporations are interwoven at a very fundamental level with many of those in the U.S.

JG: Right, Intel and Google --

HI: I'm talking about corporate, governmental, intelligence, military, industrial, scientific ties. The point is that you can only take talk of boycott and sanctions seriously if you really don't understand any of this. And if you don't understand any of this, then you're living in a fantasy world. So here's the thing: Obviously the only real task for one-staters is to convince Jewish Israelis to agree to their solution. But instead of trying to do that, they engage in the most hyperbolic discourse about the badness of Zionism, the badness of Jewish Israelis, the rightness and primacy of not just a Palestinian narrative, but the most strident traditional Palestinian narrative, and the most tendentious Palestinian narrative, the one that places lame for the conflict entirely on the side of the Israelis, that casts Israel as the usurper and what they call in one-state circles now the "temporary racist usurping entity." These are the ones, by the way, who won't talk about my book. There's a refusal to acknowledge or read my book. I've nicknamed my book "the temporary racist usurping book."

These people are trapped in the language of the Fifties and Sixties. You're talking about a worldview is anachronistic in the most fundamental sense. It doesn't recognize any of the changes that have taken place since then. For example, the strategic situation that's emerged in the Middle East, where the Arab states and the Arabs generally have a lot of other things to worry about other than Israel. This is a world in which a lot of Gulf states are extremely concerned about Iraq, and where there are Arab states -- Jordan and Egypt -- that have treaties with Israel, where Syria has a motive to be civil with Israel that is unpleasant but completely stable, and where it's a very different environment than simply the Arabs and Israelis are enemies. The other thing that they've missed completely, and this is sort of the amazing thing, is the total transformation in American official policy toward the Palestinians over the past 20 years. Twenty-one years ago, there was no contact ever between the U.S. and the PLO. No contact, zero, and no Palestinian statehood is the consensus American foreign policy and it is a national security priority under Obama. People in the House, key positions like the chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Howard Berman, chair of the Subcommittee on the Middle East, Gary Ackerman, Nita Lowey on Appropriations - all of them Jewish American members of Congress, stalwart supporters of Israel, and all of them committed to peace based on two states. And all of them, by the way, who were on the host committee of the American Task Force on Palestine gala last week.

JG: You've reached the Promised Land.

HI: Except that we haven't achieved the results.

JG: Yes, there's that. But you're on the road.

HI: Exactly. The transformation in American attitudes is almost mind-boggling, an official American attitude on ending the occupation, which has been the traditional goal of the Palestinians. And at this very moment, a group of Palestinians turns around and says, 'Sorry, not good enough, we want it all. Not only is a single Palestinian state not achievable, it's not desirable, it's not acceptable, it's not enough, we want it all.'

JG: Who are the leaders of the movement?

HI: People like Ali Abunimah, Joseph Massad, Ghada Karmi, Omar Barghouti.

JG: And you think they're succumbing to fantastic dreams. This is the traditional criticism of Palestinian politics over the past sixty years, that it's very hard to separate out the dreams from--

HI: It goes back further than sixty years. It's an article of Palestinian nationalist faith that is almost one hundred years old, which is that demography is destiny, demography is power. This notion that if we just sit here, on the land, have children, are steadfast and don't agree to anything, then political power ultimately will flow to us. In the twenties, they believed if we do that, then, just by virtue of our presence in the land, our numbers, our demography, Israel will never be established. After Israel was established, it was just, "Well if we're steadfast and we don't agree, then Israel will be reversed." Then it was, "Well if we just do this, then independence will come in the occupied territories." Now the latest version is if we're just steadfast, we can create a South Africa-like model and we will reverse the war of 1948 at the ballot.

JG: But I have to tell you that for people like me, this is a real worry. This goes with the argument that the settlements are the vanguard of one-statism.

HI: Now there is some truth to this. I think it's useful for people like (Ehud) Olmert or people like yourself to point out that with the occupation going the way it is, there won't be a Palestinian state, and then Israel will be in a situation where it is neither meaningfully Jewish nor meaningfully democratic. I think you could claim that already, if you talk about the de facto Israeli state rather than Israel in its normally perceived borders, that is already the case and it will be increasingly so. Now here's the thing: The alternative, though, is not going to be a single state in the foreseeable future. It's possible we could get there, but it won't be a solution, it will be an outcome. There's a big difference. An outcome of a horrible, brutal, bloody civil conflict that drags on for generations, because even though this demographic issue and the legitimacy issues are crises for Israel, I don't think they result in the dissolution of the Israeli state

JG: In other words, most Israeli Jews would rather have a Jewish state than a democratic state.

HI: Yes, it's obvious. And I think that what you would get is a protracted civil war that is essentially an intensification of the civil war we've had. So I do say the single state is a potential eventuality, but it would be the outcome of a horrible scenario. Look, the idea that if the current round of talks breaks down and Obama gives up and the U.S. gives up and we all give up, then the alternative is a Gandhian non-violent struggle of sanctions and boycotts that will somehow bring Israel to its knees, that is not the way it's going to go. We know the way it's going to go.

JG: Each intifada is more violent than the last.

HI: And more religious. You'll end up with two sets of bearded fanatics on both sides fighting over holy places and God. It will be a complete disaster. And I think the Israelis will end up ultimately dealing with forces not only beyond its borders, but beyond its comprehension in the long run. This has the possibility of turning into not an ethno-national war but a religious war between the Muslims and the Jews over the holy places with the whole concept of Palestine gone and the Jewish population of Israel in a very unenviable situation, protected in the end only by its nuclear weapons. It's a nightmare.

JG: So you have three scenarios. One, the one-state solution: Somehow the Jews and the Arabs decide, even though their narratives completely contradict each other, that we'll be like Belgium, where we don't have to really like each other but we'll be fine. The second alternative is the one you described of basically endless war. The third is the two-state solution. But, sorry to say it, we don't seem that close right now. You have an Israeli government who seems extremely hesitant to pull down any settlements, you have a Hamas government in Gaza, just for starters.

HI: What you do with Hamas, in my view, is you make the situation such that Hamas has to choose, and you do this by creating progress and by creating momentum - and there are two ways of creating momentum. One is diplomatically, which right now, seems difficult. The other is through the Fayyad plan, which is state building in the occupied territories. That would have a very powerful effect. It is extremely important that we use that idea as a means of gaining momentum, that the Israelis do not block it, that the U.S. protect it politically, and that the Arabs, Europeans and the Israelis support it technically and financially. This is a way of really moving forward in a manner that is complimentary and not contradictory to the diplomatic process, and I think people who suggest that this is some kind of capitulation or some kind of collaboration are dead wrong. This is a very powerful way of effectively resisting the occupation without doing anything violent. Israelis may fool themselves into thinking that this is just economic peace, but it's not; it's Palestinians preparing for independence.

Abbas geen kandidaat meer voor Palestijnse presidentsverkiezingen

Zou dit een manier zijn om extra druk op de internationale gemeenschap uit te oefenen om de Palestijnen hun zin te geven? Abbas zegt immers:

Abbas said the Palestinians were optimistic over what appeared to be US President Barack Obama's efforts to hold Israel accountable, but were ultimately left disappointed.

His announcement came days after the PLO was left stunned when US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praised as unprecedented Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's offer to limit temporary construction in West Bank settlements to 3,000 additional housing units.

Overigens heeft Clinton deze opmerking alweer afgezwakt, maar de verschuiving van de VS naar een wat kritischer houding tegenover de Palestijnen was Abbas blijkbaar teveel. Het kan natuurlijk ook zijn dat hij sowieso van plan was te stoppen, en alleen even een geschikte aanleiding afwachtte, of dat het mislukken van de eenheidsbesprekingen met Hamas de belangrijkste reden is. Immers, vrede lijkt minstens zozeer door de Hamas overname van de Gazastrook te worden belemmerd als door de voortgaande bouw in de nederzettingen, zo niet meer.

Onderhandelaar Saeb Erekat zegt:

"Palestinians should "refocus their attention on the one-state solution where Muslims, Christians and Jews can live as equals," Erekat said. "It is very serious. This is the moment of truth for us "

Natuurlijk kunnen moslims, christenen en Joden in zo'n staat niet als gelijken leven. Joden en moslims zullen om de macht strijden en de verliezer zal in het beste geval een minderheidspositie hebben zoals de Arabieren nu in Israel, maar voor de Joden zou dat waarschijnlijk niet zijn weggelegd. Er is geen enkele Arabische staat waar de positie van Joden gelijkwaardig is. Erekat weet dat waarschijnlijk best, en zegt dit voor propaganda redenen. Een dergelijke opmerking zal het vertrouwen in Israel niet vergroten en de vrede niet dichterbij brengen.

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

Abbas: I will not seek second term

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=237713

Published today (updated) 05/11/2009 21:41

Bethlehem - Ma'an - President Mahmoud Abbas announced in Ramallah on Thursday that he would not be seeking a second term.

Confirming rumors about his impending retirement, Abbas said the decision came amid Israel's intransigence on settlements and the international community's indifference.

"I have informed the Fatah Central Committee and the Palestine Liberation Organization's Executive Committee that I will not seek a second term during the upcoming elections," he said in a televised address. "I hope they understand my position."

Abbas said the Palestinians were optimistic over what appeared to be US President Barack Obama's efforts to hold Israel accountable, but were ultimately left disappointed.

His announcement came days after the PLO was left stunned when US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praised as unprecedented Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's offer to limit temporary construction in West Bank settlements to 3,000 additional housing units.

The continued expansion of Israeli settlements could force Palestinians to abandon the notion of a state in the West Bank and Gaza, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said a day before Abbas' remarks. It may be time for Abbas to "tell his people the truth, that with the continuation of settlement activities, the two-state solution is no longer an option," he said.

Israel has refused to comply with previous obligations to dismantle settlements on Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank, and rejected calls from its close ally the US for a temporary freeze as a step toward relaunching peace negotiations.

Palestinians should "refocus their attention on the one-state solution where Muslims, Christians and Jews can live as equals," Erekat said. "It is very serious. This is the moment of truth for us."

Israel & Palestijnen Blog

maandag 9 november 2009

De dreiging van het uitroepen van een Palestijnse staat

'Nederzettingen even erg als zelfmoordaanslagen', volgens Fatah-leider Dahlan

Hezbollah bewapent zich voor nieuwe oorlog tegen Israël

Israelische Arabieren studeren aan Jordaanse universiteiten vanwege leeftijdsgrens in Israel

Ban Ki-Moon wil Goldstone rapport zo snel mogelijk naar Veiligheidsraad sturen

Dialoog zonder Israëli's levert geen vrede op maar wel EU-subsidie via Cordaid

Peace without dialogue? Impossible

zondag 8 november 2009

Wereld dringt bij Abbas aan om zich toch weer kandidaat te stellen

Iran weigert uranium deal met Westen

Iran testte ontwerpen voor kleine kernkoppen op raketten

Israel en Europese Unie tekenen landbouw handelsverdrag

Hamas leider Khaled Meshaal roept Abbas op vredesonderhandelingen te stoppen

vrijdag 6 november 2009

Algemene Vergadering VN neemt Goldstone rapport Gaza Oorlog aan

Hussein Ibish over de fictie van een eenstatenoplossing

Abbas geen kandidaat meer voor Palestijnse presidentsverkiezingen

Volg deze blog op Twitter

Zoeken met Google

IPI Actueel op website

Israel-Palestina.Info

Geposte artikelen

Achtergrondartikelen

Labels (tot 2012)

Link Lijst

Background articles

IMO Blog - Israel & Midden-Oosten

ZioNation - Progressive Zionism and Israel Web Log

Medewerkers

FeedBlitz