On the surface, reports over the weekend that Congress has blocked $200 million in aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA) indicate that long-standing threats from U.S. politicians over the PA's United Nations bid have come to fruition. But there's much more than meets the eye on this issue.
First, Lara Friedman of Americans for Peace Now throws cold water on the piece that first ran in the Independent (UK) and reported that the frozen funds were to have been "dispersed in the US fiscal year that ends today [October 1]." Not so, says Friedman, an expert on Congress' involvement with Israel/Palestine:
U.S. direct assistance to the PA for FY2011, which amounted to $200 million, is already out the door. Congress can't do anything to block funding that has already been spent, although some members of Congress are threatening to cut off this funding in 2012 to punish the Palestinian Authority for going to the UN.
If this aid continues to be frozen, it will certainly harm Palestinians on the ground, as the freeze targets "food aid, health care, and support for efforts to build a functioning state." But the Congressional aid freeze "leaves security aid intact," as Bradley Burston pointed out in Ha'aretz. This is the most important fact about the reported aid freeze.
Although Friedman also reports that Congress is currently "blocking $150 million in funding for security assistance to the PA," it's likely that funding will be restored. Security aid to the PA is the biggest reason why the West Bank has not flared up in revolt against the occupation yet. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu knows that, which is why he has been lobbying Congress to keep that aid flowing.
+972 Magazine's Joseph Dana writes:
By withholding money from PA, the US, presumably with the full knowledge of their Israeli partners, is playing with fire. A severely bankrupt PA unable to pay 100,000 employees could spark outright rebellion against the Palestinian leadership. Growing Palestinian discontent with the PA leadership, easily detected on the streets of Ramallah, could transform into West Bank civil disobedience directed at the PA and, ultimately, the Israeli occupation. But this is not going to happen...
The American move to withhold a small portion of aid shows that no matter the Palestinian efforts to prepare for statehood they are still solely dependent on international aid and the good grace of the Israeli occupation. It is in Israel’s interest to maintain a strong PA which will control growing discontent among Palestinians and stop efforts for widespread civil disobedience. When and if, Israel decides that the PA is no longer operating according to its interests, the money will stop coming.
Congressional objections to continued funding to the PA may translate into actions that harm the Palestinian people. But what it won't do is damage Israeli-PA cooperation on security--cooperation that ensures the PA's survival and the continuity of an cost-free occupation. The recently reported aid-freeze does not damage the existing status quo.
Alex Kane, a freelance journalist based in New York City, blogs on Israel/Palestine at alexbkane.wordpress.com. Follow him on Twitter @alexbkane.
This was expected though – there was never any doubt that the PA would get its loot – and that Joe “Someone else support my family” Walsh and the rest of the Likudniks in Congress knew what they were doing was totally symbolic.
“It is in Israel’s interest to maintain a strong PA which will control growing discontent among Palestinians and stop efforts for widespread civil disobedience.”
they can only keep the lid on the soap opera for so long. Israel promised the Palestinians a state 18 years ago in front of the world.
“It is in Israel’s interest to maintain a strong PA which will control growing discontent among Palestinians and stop efforts for widespread civil disobedience.”
I think this regime will kill the PA off in a heartbeat if it appears that the General Assembly is going to upgrade its status to non-member state. Between recognition of a Palestinian State within the 67 borders and a Hamas-led intifada, it would view the latter as the lesser of two evils. It would try other options first, but do anything in order to derail or postpone the UN bid, i.e. . . .
During a June 12, 2007 meeting with the Ambassador, IDI Director MG Amos Yadlin said Israel would be “happy” if Hamas took over Gaza because the IDF could then deal with Gaza as a hostile state. He dismissed the significance of an Iranian role in a Hamas-controlled Gaza “as long as they don’t have a port.” . . .
link to wikileaks.ch
. . . Jaberi pauses. He spent the night before our interview awake and in hiding, fearful of Israeli air strikes. “You know,” he says, “since the takeover, we’ve been trying to enter the brains of Bush and Rice, to figure out their mentality. We can only conclude that having Hamas in control serves their overall strategy, because their policy was so crazy otherwise.” link to vanityfair.com
I can’t see Hamas starting an intifada. They know the pointlessness of violence against Israel.
I can’t see Hamas starting an intifada. They know the pointlessness of violence against Israel.
I didn’t say they would. I said that given a choice between those two options Israel would choose to kill-off the PA to avoid UN recognition of another State within the 67 borders. They are already risking another regional war over the continued blockade of Gaza and the disputes with Turkey and Lebanon over the off-shore natural gas fields.
Israel is running out of road, Hostage. .
link to ft.com
The book’s title, A Choice of Enemies, captures what Freedman sees as the central dilemma facing US policymakers: there are so many sources of potential trouble in the region that policymakers constantly have to juggle priorities – and choose whom to befriend and whom to confront. Efforts to deal with one problem create another – leading to sudden shifts in policy
It’s even worse for Israel
link to guardian.co.uk
“Amit desperately wanted Israel to escape the straitjacket of regional isolation. To this end he forged ties with potential allies in Africa and Asia such as Kenya, Uganda, Singapore, Iran, India, Turkey and Indonesia. ”
And they all with the exception of Singapore and maybe India hate Israel.
Seafoid: yes, Israel made many promises, and kept few. But, important to note, there was NEVER A PRICE TO PAY for its broken promises. Israel constantly “tests” its parent (USA) to see if a later bedtime can be obtained, and generally it obtains a later bedtime. Palestinian state in FIVE YEARS, starting (whenever). Promises, promises. Doesn’t matter a bit. (International law, UN Charter. Also doesn’t matter a bit.) (Ya gonna make me? Yeah? You and who else?) It’s a tough playground out there.
sabre-rattling is always the first, second, third – hell the only thing zionists ever do, must maintain appearance of strength and threat of aggression because we are the World’s Official Victims
It is a mistake to consider this aid as beneficial to the Palestinians. It may be in some cases, but the major beneficiary is the Israelis themselves.
First, if the money was not flowing in, then the Israel itself would be responsible for feeding and caring for the Palestinian people. Israel is recognized as the occupying power and in international law the occupier is responsible to see that the occupied subjects are provided with sufficient aid to survive.
Second, the Security funds go to the turncoat forces whose role is to suppress Palestinian protests.
Third, most of the most of the funds eventually cycle back into the Israeli economy given that Israel has near total control over the WB economy. No way that they would not control the profits from all imports and exports.
In the short term the Palestinians would surely suffer from a cut-off of all foreign aid, but if justice and equality is their goal, then in the long term they would probably be better off without that aid.
“Israel promised the Palestinians a state 18 years ago in front of the whole world.”
Yes seafoid, but final status issues were kept off the table, as per Israel’s demands, including Palestinian statehood. The White House lawn ceremony kicked off the Oslo talking-about-talk process which didn’t include talking about a Palestinian state, to say nothing about actually establishing one.
…but I’m sure you already know this about the Oslo fiasco
The Arab League has offered to replace the aid: link to haaretz.com
The European Union and the Arab League are making plans to increase their aid. What would this mean for the dynamics of the situation? At the very least, doesn’t this mean this withholding of aide would backfire on the U.S. Congress because it shows the rest of the world the U.S. is not the superpower it claims to be?
link to israelnationalnews.com
ohHEWUpI
“Third, most of the most of the funds eventually cycle back into the Israeli economy” ToivoS
A good point, ToivoS. One example of this is how the Israelis hold up delivery of UN relief at Israeli ports of entry. UN shipping containers have sat for weeks at a time at the Port of Ashdod awaiting Israeli consent for delivery of provisions for the poor Palestinians. Storing those unopened containers costs money. Who do the Israelis bill for that? Also, which Israeli companies are contracted to load up and transport Palestinian relief? What’s their cut? Israelis do profit from relief bound for needy Palestinians whether from USAID, the EU, the UN, etc…
” Israel is recognized as the occupying power and in international law the occupier is responsible to see that the occupied subjects are provided with sufficient aid to survive.”
In some ways I imagine that Israel would welcome the chance to assume this responsibility. They could accelerate their ethnic cleansing campaign by “putting Palestinians on a diet” as they’ve already done in Gaza. If Israelis were responsible for feeding Palestinians we would watch them starve to death or flee the country. Neither the Peace Prize winner nor our congress would lose any sleep over such a tragedy but I would, knowing that my tax dollars contributed to it. We should support continuing aid to Palestinians. Even though Israeli profiteers make money in the exchange, discontinuing the aid would worsen the Palestinian’s lives by a lot. Under the current circumstances thats not what they need.
iirc, Saudis said they would make up the aid if US cut it off… is that correct?
Tanya Reinhart RIP wrote this in 2002 and all Zionists should be forced to read it
link to dissidentvoice.org
THE PENAL COLONIES
> Tanya Reinhart
>
> This is an expanded version of an article in Yediot Aharonot, June 30,
2002.
>
>
> The Gaza strip is a perfect realization of the Israeli vision of
> “separation”. Surrounded with electric fences and army posts, completely
> sealed off the outside world, Gaza has become a huge prison. About
onethird
> of its land was confiscated for the 7,000 Israeli settlers living there
> (and their defense array), while over a million Palestinians are crowded
in
> the remaining areas of the prison. With no work or sources of income,
about
> 80% of its residents depend, for their living, on UNRWA, or contributions
> from Arab states and charity organizations. Now Israel is considering the
> imprisonment there of families of suicide bombers from the West Bank (1).
> As a senior Israeli analyst stated, Gaza can now serve as “the penal
> colony” of Israel its “devils island, Alcatraz”. (Nahum Barnea, Yediot
> Aharonot June 21, 2002).
>
> This is the future that Sharon and the Israeli army designate for the
West
> Bank as well. While the external fence is presently being built, Israel’s
> current military operation is set to be the final step in the
> implementation the IDF plans for reestablishing full military rule (which
> was abolished in large parts of the West Bank during the Oslo process).
> Though Israel describes everything it does as a spontaneous reaction to
> terror, the plan was fully spelled out in the Israeli media already back
in
> March 2001, soon after Sharon entered office. Alex Fishman, military and
> strategic analyst of Yediot Aharonot, explained at the time that since
> Oslo, “the IDF regarded the occupied territories as if they were one
> territorial cell”, and this placed some constraints on the IDF and enabled
> a certain amount of freedom for the PA and the Palestinian population. The
> new plan is a return to the concept of the military administration during
> the preOslo years: the occupied territories will be divided into tens of
> isolated “territorial cells”, each of which will be assigned a special
> military force, “and the local commander will have freedom to use his
> discretion” as to when and who to shoot. (Yediot Ahronot weekend
> supplement, March 9.2001).
>
> The first stage of this plan the destruction of the institutions of the
> Palestinian Authority was completed in the previous ‘Operation Defensive
> Shield’ in April of this year. In practice, from that time on, the towns
> and villages of the West Bank have been completely sealed. Even exit by
> foot, which was possible up to that point, became blocked, and movement
> between the “territorial cells” now requires formal permits from the
> Israeli military authorities. Soldiers and snipers prevent any
> “unauthorized” walking to agricultural fields, to places of work and
study,
> or for medical treatment.
>
>
> However, unlike the preOslo period of Israeli military rule, the army
makes
> it clear that there is no intention to construct any civil administration
> that will take care of the basic daily needs of the two million
> Palestinians, such as food supplies, health services, garbage and sewage.
> For these tasks, some form of a Palestinian Authority will be maintained,
> though in practice it will not be allowed to function.
>
> As a ‘military source’ told Ha’aretz, “Internal conclusions of the
security
> echelons, following operation ‘Defensive Shield’, assessed that the
> functioning of the civil branches of the Palestinian Authority had reached
> an unprecedented nadir, mainly due to the destruction the IDF operation
> left behind in Ramallah (including the systematic destruction of computers
> and databases)… Combined with the severe restrictions on movement, the
> Palestinian population is becoming, as the military source defined it,
> ‘poor, dependent, unemployed, rather hungry, and extreme’… The financial
> reserves of the Palestinian authority are reaching the bottom… In a
> future not far off, the majority of Palestinians will only be able to
> maintain a reasonable life through the help of international aid.”
> (Ha’aretz Hebrew edition, June 23, 2002, Amos Har’el). Thus, the West Bank
> is being driven to the level of poverty of the Gaza strip.
>
> Nevertheless, at the same time that Israel deprives the Palestinians of
> their means of income, it also makes a substantial effort to diminish or
> block international aid, under the pretext that the aid is used to support
> terrorists or their families. At the outset of its new ‘operation’, Israel
> “decided to stop the flow of foodaid and medicine from Iran and Iraq to
> Palestinians in the territories” (Ha’aretz, June 24, 2002, Amos Har’el).
> Iranian and Iraqi aid is an easy target for Israel, as these countries
> belong to the “Axis of Evil”. However, Israel started launching a more
> ambitious campaign: The EU the largest PA donor is under constant
> pressure from Israel to cut its aid, which is used, inter alia to pay the
> salaries of teachers and health workers. The tactics are always the same:
> Israel provides some documents presumably linking the PA to terror. Any
aid
> to the PA is, therefore, aid to terror (2).
>
> UNRWA’s aid is the next target. The U.N. Relief and Works Agency for
> Palestinians in the Near East (UNRWA) has become a major source of food
for
> Palestinians in the besieged territories. Its food supplies are now
> delivered not only to the refugee camps, but also in towns and villages.
> The amount of food UNRWA supplies has increased fourfold in two years (3).
> Recently, “Israel has begun a campaign in the United States and the United
> Nations to urge a reconsideration of the way the UN Relief and Works
> Agency, which runs the Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank and
Gaza,
> operates. Israel charges that UNRWA workers simply ignored the fact that
> Palestinian organizations were turning the camps into terrorist bases and
> it is demanding the agency start reporting all military or terrorist
> actions within the camps to the UN…. Meanwhile, Jewish and proIsraeli
> lobbyists in the U.S. are waging a parallel campaign … American Jewish
> lobbyists are basing their efforts on the fact that the U.S. currently
> contributes some 30 percent of UNRWA’s $400 million a year budget, and is
> therefore in a position to influence the agency: A congressional refusal
to
> approve UNRWA’s funding could seriously disrupt its operations. (Ha’aretz
> June 29, 2002, Nathan Guttman). The campaign is not yet demanding cutting
> UNRWA’s aid and presence altogether, but raising the impossible demand
that
> UNRWA should serve as an active force in “the war against terror”
> (“reporting military or terrorist actions”) is the first step towards such
> a demand.(4)
>
> Since September 11, Sharon has been constructing an analogy between the
> occupied territories and Afghanistan (with the PA as Al Qaeda). He keeps
> declaring that the solution to Palestinian terror, and the required
> ‘reforms’, should be along the lines set in Afghanistan. The analogy is
> frighteningly revealing: As it established the ‘reforms’ in Afghanistan,
> the US forced starvation upon millions of people. This is how Noam Chomsky
> described it: “On Sept. 16, the New York Times reported that ‘Washington
> has also demanded [from Pakistan] a cutoff of fuel supplies…and the
> elimination of truck convoys that provide much of the food and other
> supplies to Afghanistan’s civilian population.’ Astonishingly, that report
> elicited no detectable reaction in the West, a grim reminder of the nature
> of the Western civilization that leaders and elite commentators claim to
> uphold. In the following days, those demands were implemented… ‘The
> country was on a lifeline,’ one evacuated aid worker reports, ‘and we just
> cut the line’ (NY times Magazine, September 30). According to the world’s
> leading newspaper, then, Washington demanded that Pakistan ensures the
> death of enormous numbers of Afghans, millions of them already on the
brink
> of starvation, by cutting off the limited sustenance that was keeping them
> alive.” (Interview with Michael Albert, reprinted in Noam Chomsky, 911,
> Seven Stories, 2002). Arundhati Roy, summarized this at the time:
“Witness
> the infinite justice of the new century. Civilians starving to death while
> they’re waiting to be killed” (Guardian, Sept. 29).
>
> The new stage of Israel’s ‘separation’ can no longer be compared to the
> Apartheid of South Africa. As Ronnie Kasrils, South Africa’s Minister of
> Water Affairs, said in an Interview with Al Ahram Weekly, “the South
> African apartheid regime never engaged in the sort of repression Israel is
> inflicting on the Palestinians” (Issue of March 28 April 3, 2002). We
are
> witnessing the daily invisible killing of the sick and wounded being
> deprived of medical care, the weak who cannot survive in the new poverty
> conditions, and those who are bound to reach starvation.
>
> Nevertheless, the public debate in Israel revolves around questions of
> efficiency: Is it possible to stop terror in such methods. Let us suppose
> even that it is. Is it allowed? Is this what we (Israelis) want to be?
>
> One people stole the ‘Lamb of its poor neighbor’(5): Gaza and the West
Bank
> are 22% of the land of IsraelPalestine, where the Palestinians lived in
the
> past. On this small piece of land, three million people live, with hopes,
> needs and dreams, just like ours. Since Oslo, they have been lured with
> promises that we are about to evacuate the settlements and give them back
> their land, at the very same time that we have been imprisoning them in
> Gaza, stealing more of their land in the West Bank, and leaving them no
> hope whatsoever. The Palestinian people are fighting for their freedom.
The
> crimes of Palestinian terror do not remove our culpability for our own
crimes.
>
> Before Oslo, as well, there was a wave of horrible terror attacks. But at
> that time, after each such attack, the call was heard get out of the
> territories! Then it was still understood that when you leave people no
> hope, there is no way to stop the madness of suicide bombing. It is not
too
> late to get out of the territories.
>
>
> ========
>
>
> (1) In its meeting on Friday, June 21, 2002, the Israeli cabinet “decided
> in principle in favor both of the expulsion of families of suicide
strikers
> from the West Bank to the Gaza Strip… The implementation of this
> expulsion policy depends upon the outcome of a legal review.” (‘IDF set to
> expel bombers’ families’ By Aluf Benn, Amos Harel and Gideon Alon,
Ha’aretz
> June 23, 2002).
>
>
> (2) Here is one example of the pressure on the EU:
> “The documents seized from PA offices in recent months, some of
> which were included in the document compiled by minister without portfolio
> Dan Naveh following Operation Defensive Shield, were presented last week
to
> the EC delegation in Israel and representatives of the International
> Monetary Fund at a meeting with IDF intelligence officers. Naveh claims
the
> documents prove European financial aid has been used to finance terrorism
> and incitement, and has also found its way into the pockets of senior PA
> officials.
>
> The head of the EC’s delegation to Israel, Giancarlo Chevallard,
> told Ha’aretz that at the meeting, the delegation saw evidence that Arafat
> is financing terrorism, but added Israel had not provided evidence that
> European financial aid which is designated to pay the salaries of PA
> employees is being used to finance terrorist attacks. Another senior
> delegation official said he was extremely skeptical Israel had evidence to
> prove European aid is being used by the PA to finance terrorism…
>
> Meanwhile, in the shadow of the Israeli accusations, the European
> Parliament’s budgetary committee last week delayed the transfer of 18.7
> million euros in financial aid to the PA until the EC reports how the
money
> is to be distributed…” (Ha’aretz, June 6, 2002, Yair Ettinger)
> This specific frozen amount was released in the meanwhile, however
Israel’s
> pressure continues.
>
> (3) Amos Har’el, ‘The IDF neutralizes the Palestinian Authority, and
> humanitarian organizations try to replace it’, Ha’aretz Hebrew edition,
> June 23, 2002. (Quoted before).
>
> (4). The campaign against UNRWA started earlier: “In letters written to
> Annan in May, Republican U.S. Senator Arlen Specter and Democratic U.S.
> Representative Tom Lantos accused the U.N. agency of allowing and
promoting
> terrorist activity in the camps. Specter said UNRWA schools promoted
> antiIsraeli and anti Semitic sentiments and Lantos said the agency allowed
> terrorists to organize in the camps.”(Inter Press Service, June 24, 2002)
>
>
> (5) Bible, Samuel II, 12:11: “12:1The LORD sent Natan to David. He came
to
> him, and said to him, “There were two men in one city; the one rich, and
> the other poor. 12:2The rich man had very many flocks and herds, 12:3but
> the poor man had nothing, except one little ewe lamb, which he had bought
> and raised. It grew up together with him, and with his children. It ate of
> his own food, drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was to him
> like a daughter. 12:4A traveler came to the rich man, and he spared to
take
> of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man who
> had come to him, but took the poor man’s lamb, and dressed it for the man
> who had come to him.” (link to ebible.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> link to tau.ac.il
Written in 2002:
> Nevertheless, the public debate in Israel revolves around questions of
> efficiency: Is it possible to stop terror in such methods. Let us suppose
> even that it is. Is it allowed? Is this what we (Israelis) want to be?
>
It is safe to say that yes, terror was stopped with “such methods” and yes, “this is what Israelis want to be”. And, according to opinion polls, this is where Americans want to be, hence indefatigable efforts of our elective representatives to make our foreign policy as idiotic as the people whom they serve, the American public, want it to be.
Support of Israel is a paramount goal: if 63% of the public agrees, why not? Then it becomes more interesting. Supporters of Israel are divided into two classes: the full idiots, and those are the blessed ones, and those who try to make some sense, and those are cursed. In political science it is called “a wedge issue”.
Of course, “full idiot” position are not called “wedge” for nothing: the create enthusiasm in some and are revolting to others. So far, in USA there seem to be some balance across “wedges” that are deployed, except for Israel. Of course, in Israel the balance is [mostly] gone. Consequences of proceeding “full idiot” can be dire, if we crush PA financially or attack Iran, directly or via Israel proxy. Hence the “adults in charge” will not do it, so “full idiots” can safely demand it and heap the curses. Thus as politics, it is quite smart.
And revolting. This is the nature of wedge politics. Consider the “torture debate”. The “full idiots” basically demanded that our government utilizes all tools at its disposal to defend the citizenry. If a father can be induced to divulge horrible terrorist secrets by crushing testicles of his son, so be it. The revolted ones staked a moderate position: indefinite detentions should have some “justice” cover, we should not torture etc. The “edge of the wedge” was water boarding: intolerable, or a noble effort to defend our freedom? Would moderates accept water boarding, the debate would shift to some other sub-issues, like is it OK to inflict passing damage, say by kicking and smacking in the face.
The overall effect of wedge issues is that the “full idiots” are “intellectually consistent”, get donations and votes, “moderates” are quite compromised, although make more sense over all, and on that account they get some donations and votes, and a clear perspective on the issue makes you an outcast or a tolerated radical (always introduced in the polite society with a warning).
“Recognition of Israel as a Jewish state” is a typical wedge. Because PA recognized “the right to exist”, the shiboleth had to shift a bit. Would Abu Mazen accept that, the next issue would be “recognizing Israel as the eternal and most Jewish state and beacon of light” or some such. E.g. he prays five times a day, is it too little to ask that he renounces terrorism against Jewish people in Arabic and English five times a day? Shouldn’t it be part of school curriculum in the territories (nay, in all Muslim countries)? There are many think tank that do little else by hone wedge issues.