Total number of comments: 68 (since 2010-06-30 23:18:48)
Website: http://fosna.org
-
-
- Israeli report on al-Dura case is vengeful and ‘surreal,’ says … 30
- Mohammed Assaf, singing sensation out of Gaza refugee camp, torches … 11
- Activists call for a SodaStream boycott at the 2013 Cannes … 3
- Video: Palestinian demonstrators break a hole in the wall during … 3
- Kennedy’s insistence on right of return prompted Ben-Gurion to rewrite … 35
- Palestinian-American Raed Zidan plants flag on top of Everest, dedicates … 3
- Exile and the Prophetic: Disappearing Massad, disappearing Palestine 8
- Lapid says ‘Israelis want peace and security and Palestinians want … 16
-
- Israeli airport sorts passengers with ‘Jewish stickers’ and ‘Arab stickers’ 784
- ‘Newseum’ folds under pressure, will not include Gaza cameramen in … 314
- In photos: Gaza marches and rallies mark 65 years of … 149
- Glenn Greenwald brings facts and reason to ‘Real Time’, ruins … 145
- San Francisco bus ads condemn Israeli apartheid: backlash begins 121
- Washington Post’s racism map omits Israel 106
- Washington state bus-ad campaign dares to state: ‘Equal rights for … 100
- Barbara Boxer’s visa bill for Israel comes under concerted attack 91
-
- International Criminal Court opens preliminary investigation into attack on Mavi … 96
- Glenn Greenwald brings facts and reason to ‘Real Time’, ruins … 88
- Barbara Boxer’s visa bill for Israel comes under concerted attack 79
- Washington Post’s racism map omits Israel 72
- Israeli airport sorts passengers with ‘Jewish stickers’ and ‘Arab stickers’ 69
- ‘Newseum’ folds under pressure, will not include Gaza cameramen in … 62
- Uncompromising hope inspired by Ghassan Kanafani 62
- More on the Church of Scotland’s controversial report on occupation 60
-
- RT @MhmdGaza: @anniefofani Just read your article at Mondoweiss abt Wala's visit to Jerusalem. same here,I should be in Jerusalem in July :…, 17 hours ago
- Activists call for a SodaStream boycott at the 2013 Cannes Film Festival http://t.co/7Dc8qlw7um, 17 hours ago
- Kennedy’s insistence on right of return prompted Ben-Gurion to rewrite history: They fled ‘of their own free will’ http://t.co/IiL1P0hW5p, 18 hours ago
- Video: Palestinian demonstrators break a hole in the wall during protest commemorating the Nakba http://t.co/cWsoOsAoFy, 18 hours ago
- Lapid says ‘Israelis want peace and security and Palestinians want peace and justice’ http://t.co/rGAQJVloa8, 18 hours ago
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Kennedy’s insistence on right of return prompted Ben-Gurion to rewrite history: They fled ‘of their own free will’ (35)
- Israeli report on al-Dura case is vengeful and ‘surreal,’ says Haaretz — but ‘NYT’ treats it as gospel (30)
- Taxi: Looking down at the corpse of a murdered boy and spitting and calling him a liar. Real classy move ziobots!...
- seafoid: That is in the bot view, Shmuel. Check out the wiki entry for mohamed al dura http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
- Peter in SF: James Fallows had an article about this incident in the June 2003 Atlantic Monthly, and his last...
- Mohammed Assaf, singing sensation out of Gaza refugee camp, torches Arab Idol competition (11)
- Exile and the prophetic: The Jewish Identity Network (9)
- yourstruly: the jewish establishment consists of aipac and all the major jewish organizations that support...
- Abulhawa declines to ‘balance out’ several Israelis in ‘Al Jazeera’ forum on Nakba (64)
- MRW: p.s. wondering what will happen to the mondo blog gems in a hundred years? Once a year the entire...
Our Writers
More WritersBlogroll
The "complication" is that, so far, Am Yisrael Chai entails Nakba.
Can that be repaired?
I hope you continue to seek out what-is, every difficult bit of it, and to work for justice.
I wish you every strength (and joy) as you continue on your way.
High Noon! ... Yep…
I'm counting on Obama (and the rest of us) to stay as cool as Gary Cooper. Lord knows, it's a big moment.... A real opportunity to change attitudes, and inform.
Netanyahu's playing a weak hand, and playing it badly. Call me naive (and you won't be the first), but seems to me that he's vastly overestimated his ability to influence US politics, at this juncture and on this issue. No American President can be seen as being dictated to by a foreign leader in matters of war & peace, especially in the wake of Iraq and Afghanistan. So I think the issue will blow up in Romney face if he appears to sanction his old friend's behavior. As far as Israel using nukes in Iran, I can't help but believe that Israel's security elite knows such a strike would be the ultimate "delegitimizer" of the Jewish state, with no "victory", ie no increased security, to show for it.
Yes....
Israel has been pursuing a full-court press of detentions, demolitions, displacements, & confiscation which we can expect to continue under cover of any distractions at all.
"All of which argues for these matters to be politicized; for Americans to openly debate the power of the lobby inside our politics."
I think that's it, exactly, and something Obama has told us repeatedly since before his inauguration: That he can't act effectively unless we force him to; that it really depends on us.
One story being told in my circles goes something like this: A Palestinian American approached Obama and demanded why he didn't "stand up" to Israel. Obama replies by cocking his ear. "I can't hear you," he says. The person speaks louder. Obama repeats, "I can't hear you."
One big difference I see between Obama & Romney is that Obama knows that real change comes from the bottom up, the result of people organizing themselves to demand it.
"but the uniformed military is another matter entirely."
Yep, that's a crucial point. And one major reason Netanyahu looks to me like he's bluffing. So how is he going to "back off", "save face"?
Recent NYT reports of naval build-up in the name of "regional defense" seem to me to be the limit of what the US is prepared to (publically) offer at this time. Will Netanyahu take the opportunity to say "That's an effective deterrent for now"? So far he seems entirely uninterested in that approach.
So how will Netanyahu behave when he visits New York (UN) in a few weeks? How will he start climbing down from the tree he's got himself stuck in? Can he up the ante without sawing off the limb he's perched on?
I believe Wolman seriously miscalculates the Obama administration's strategic smarts when he writes that Obama is a mere "campaign machine".
In fact, one could argue that it's Netanyahu's strategic position within the spectrum of US public opinion that's at risk, not the President's. Given that everyone knows a solo attack would produce no benefit, substantively or strategically, why do it? Especially as it would put the Israeli government's influence on US public opinion at mortal risk?
The danger, of course, is that all sides (including Iran) fundamentally miscalculate not only their own, but the other players' military & political capacity. -Lea
Edit 2:
Rami shrugged. "Anything's possible."
He shifted his legs, which dangled over the lip of the seat of his motorized chair. The world said the Israeli Army had shot him with live-fire, but the Israeli Army said the boy he'd once been had been crippled by a dormant shell other Palestinians had left in the dirt.
Edit:
Now it was Toma’s turn to frown. “When will they ever really rest… enough to feel ashamed?”
Means of Suppressing Occupations
SHOCK
Rami, the Mayor, had never stopped feeling his own body. Even after his legs were gone. He stretched out his arms to hold the wide page far out in front of him.
"Oh," he said. A family murdered.
"The boys didn't do it," Toma said. "Thai did it, or one of their own. They never look under their own beds."
Rami shrugged. He shifted his stumps, which protruded over the lip of the seat of his motorized chair. The world said the Israeli Army had done it with live-fire, but the Israeli Army said the boy had been crippled by a dormant shell Palestinians had left in the dirt.
Rami slapped his lap and looked up at his cousin: He was fifty now, ten years older than Toma.
"It's just that I can feel them all of a sudden," he said.
"Again?"
"Every time the Army's near."
TEAR GAS
The story that was in the paper Toma brought over the next night was about a Haredi girl who'd been killed by her father.
"Sex", said Toma.
Rami frowned and changed the subject. "The soldiers slept in their trucks last night, right next to the Mosque, can you believe it?"
"We kept everything quiet all night, hooded the roosters."
"Don't serve them tea unless they ask."
Now it was Toma's turn to frown. "When will they ever get enough rest to feel ashamed?"
RUBBER
The picture in the newspaper Toma brought the next night was of a bird washed up on the beach at Acre. He and Rami were out on the porch. The night sky was clear, the moon was full. No starlight.
"We just want this one thing, and you can give it to us".
Rami gestured at his legs, which weren't there. "May we offer you tea instead?"
LIVE FIRE
Live fire is not a means of suppressing occupations, and the Officer, Lea, knew that the cooperative villagers knew this– they knew all the rules– and so she knew that they would never fire. That's why they'd felt secured enough to park their trucks on the street in the center of the village beside the Mosque, and go right to sleep.
"Please, shoot us," one of the soldier had said, in Hebrew, before turning in. Their guns still slung across their shoulders, he and four buddies had lined up side-by-side, held their arms out wide, grinned lopsidedly. The boys gathered across the street– not one of them over 12– averted their eyes, embarrassed by the overture, which they understood well enough.
Through the eyes of a stranger looking out from the light of a very distant house, they could have been executioners.
Does Beinart really believe that Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem, and its policy of systematic displacement of Palestinians there, is somehow more legitimate than similar behavior in the rest of the West Bank? (I have to say, the phrase I find particularly galling is… "even if they are not granted it by birth"... in their native land!)
These responses pretty much dispose of NF's arguments against BDS, and without the arrogant impatience (noted by Samel) with which he treated his interviewer.
"Picking up his argument" would be pretty tough, I think, for the simple reason that it's indefensible. Maybe we should be asking instead why Finkelstein proposed it in the first place, and with the anger (and yes, fear) that seems so evident.
My guess is that as demands for universal rights inevitably lead to a re- examination of the very idea of ethnocracy, we're going to be forced to reexamine what really makes us safe, and that's a big challenge. The idea that a racist state especially designed to privilege the victims of racism is any sort of "existential" protection for those victims is monstrous. But are we really prepared to argue that justice is our surest shield? I think we have to be. But it's a tough sell to people who have suffered so much in a world where the powerful deny their crimes (and tend to repeat them) as a matter of course.
See Chris Hayes' Postcard from Palestine in The Nation (Nov 2010).
Looks like the Adelson-Gingrich alliance has given him a gigantic opening to take this to a wider audience. Now if MSNBC's Rachel Maddow will just interview him on the subject! :)
I think the village is still trying to arrange a meeting with General Almoz. (And then there's a lower level official, one man who has been delivering demolition notices to the village for over 10 years.) Is Phil still in the area and able to report about that?
And please, publish Hani Hassan's article if you can! Getting these voices heard is what MW is all about. So grateful for your work.
Al Aqaba has a comprehensive plan to rebuild and TODAY they're crowd-sourcing the funds to begin. Every dollar donateduntil 9 pm tonight will be matched by Global Giving by 30%
In any other place in the world, planning & building homes is normal civic activity; in Area C, it's civil disobedience. Maybe we here on Mondoweiss can give them a big boost!
The village's motto is "Rebuilding to Remain" and lots is going on right now. They're planning to build homes under permits issued by the village in coordination with the PA. For more information about this very imaginative plan (which anywhere else would be normal, but in Area C is a form of civil resistance), please see this statement.
Note that on Wed, Oct 19th, the village, with help from international supporters, will attempt to crowd-sourcing house down-payments on GlobalGiving.org, taking advantage of a GG 30% matching grant that day to entries that reach a certain threshold in that single day.
I say, let Annie be Annie, hopefulness & all.
If we think anyone owns springtime, we're in real trouble.
These tent protests may turn into something entirely unexpected. Can we really predict where this is all going?
I read this morning that some Israelis walked a tent around the White House yesterday (or today?) Maybe we should take a hint.
Annie, a new tent has been pitched in Tel Aviv! See Twitter, #tent48 . Their new Facebook page also gives live updates:
Fosna Facebook is following them as well. Let's spread the news…
Here's an excerpt from their (tri-lingual) Facebook info page:
"A group of citizens, …which believes in shared sovereignty of all its citizens. Instead of thinking about separation and limitation, we think of using the existing power of possibility…. Policy of divide and rule, … prevents real change and produces a deep social demands boundaries. If we work together we can only benefit."
Kate and Seham, I've been mapping reports to an Ushahidi crowdmap for the past month, encouraged by Donna Baranski-Walker at Rebuilding Alliance who is interested in the platform's possibilities.
"Today in Palestine" has been a big help. Patterns (easier to visualize on a map) are already emerging in this short time- for example the growing number of reported demolitions in the Jordan Valley (about 16 jv to 9 elsewhere) Obviously the map only captures what's in the news, and only a portion of that. - Léa
I don't think Obama agrees with me, secretly or otherwise. :)
I just think his ME failure (settlement stop & 67 borders as basis for negotiations) has also provided a very high profile reality check on the Israeli narrative that benefits us.
Whereas I tend to see Bush's failures as… just damn bloody failures.
(yep, Afghanistan could be Obama's dbf)
You're right about "saints". But I think there are a lot more of those types around than just the famous ones and that it's all of our moments of saintliness that actually hold things together. If there's anything the Palestinians I've met have shown me, it's that scorn-free truth telling is an exercise in samoud, not a capitulation.
I'd put it this way: with regard to human relations, basic respect for the human person before us, along with standing up for the truth of a situation, are two aspects of the very same thing, which is the basis of a sustainable life together. This basis must by necessity acknowledge the reality we are.
But what is that "reality" we are ? That we grow and change, and are each somewhat "unknown" to both ourselves and others. That means that I make a big mistake when I reduce others, much less myself, to the ideas and feelings they (or I) hold.
So, to get real, if I berate another person (much less myself), the most healthy reaction on their part (or mine) is to recoil. In fact, a steady deluge of scorn, prejudice, and ad hominem attacks tends to "weaponize" people. Hence the undeniable fact of on-going "cycles of violence", even when, especially when, we deny we have any common interest.
The trick is to tell the truth without dripping with scorn, to love without falling into the "sentimentality" of avoiding hard truths. But I've seen people do it: that is, be hard as nails with respect to truth, but also respectful of others' basic humanity.
This is not sentimentality. It's the toughest, most resilient, process there is. It's life itself.
I think Moses pointed to what's at stake in his parting words: I've set before you life and death, blessings and curses; now choose life, so that you and your children may live. (Deut 30:19)
Phil and Annie are on to something - ie that listening hard to what Obama says can teach us something, even when the contrast between the suffering we see on the ground, and the mere "words" of his speeches, makes our blood boil.
I'm guessing that Obama see leadership very differently than most of us do. I think he sees his task as laying the basis for "real" change , and that means his "moves" are not all-about-him. They're about us. Specifically, it seems to me that his overall strategy is to clear a space for the rest of us to step up. If we don't agree with him, he expects us to organize. If we do agree with him, he still expects us to organize.
Given the considerable constraints of US politics, it's a brilliant approach. So Obama puts "settlements" front and center, exposing the problem, and the perpetrator, to a US audience that's mostly ignorant of Pal/Is realities. Next, he puts "'67 borders" front and center. Ditto. All the while, essential actors, large and small, around the world and within the region,are taking the initiative.
Looking at the world stage, what can we next expect?
PA Unity government gets off the ground in time to put Statehood resolution before the Security Council in July. Palestine lobbies hard so that if/when US vetoes, it will veto (more or less) alone, which is essential if Palestine is to successfully invoke "Uniting for Peace" GA Resolution 377 (Read JPost editor David Horowitz on 377 ) , and force a vote on the matter in the General Assembly.
This summer/fall is the two-state moment. It may be (very) brief, in which case on to one-state. But things are moving and Obama, I believe, sees his task as positioning the US in "the very center" (to use Justice Goldstone's phrase at the Stanford Debate), where truth, & respect for the humanity of all parties, must be acknowledge, which would be no small achievement in itself.
Either way, something entirely new is breaking out, and I think Obama gets that only we, the people, can effectively align our country with the good in it.
Chaos & Donald: Can't you lay off Richard for once? What's the point…?
Annie, so grateful…
Really appreciated Dillingham's interview with Jonathan Cook.
Makes so clear what a huge problem "exceptionalism" is, whether applied within Israel-48, or beyond the '67 borders.
The bottom line, it seems to me, is that in the end no one in Israel Palestine will settle for anything less than a secure homeland. Any future political arrangement, with however many "states", must guarantee that, or fail. Crucial to secure homeland(s) are uniform laws – including "rights of return" – applied to majorities and minorities on an equal basis – and building from there.
Problem is Israel's settlement policy has made those negotiations a sham. The present situation is disastrous. Omar Barghouti has eloquently laid out the principles that must be satisfied by any political solution: equal rights for all, everywhere. Richard Witty has pointed to another dimension that must be addressed: both peoples must give up the "exceptionalism" of their own suffering insofar as it prevents them from acknowledging that of the other.
I would add that I think it's the deeply engrained sense of our own political/religious exceptionalism that makes US opinion so vulnerable to Israel/AIPAC hasbara. We're used to their sort of "exceptionalism"; we still drink our own brand of that kool-aid everyday for breakfast. So if we're to break free from hasbara, without reverting to anti-jewish stereotypes, I think we're going to have to confront that head-on.
I totally agree. And, yes, the American people's role in changing our policy so as to demand accountability is crucial. I just think there are deeper impediments to that happening than the Lobby.
I disagree with your characterization here of "most Israelis" and "a majority of Americans". I don't think it's clear at all what most Americans want with respect to our own brand of militarism, imperialism, and even democracy. As far as blaming Zionism for our problems in this regard, the US was exhibiting a good deal of militarism & colonialism long before 1967, long before Zionism or Aipac was a factor in our domestic politics.
Jews have historically been scapegoated by empire: As our honeymoon with Israel ends, as its usefulness declines, will the Left be complicit in perpetuating this convenient tactic one more time?
This is not to say that Israel isn't responsible for its actions; of course it is. But we're also responsible for ours. So for me it's not a question of "freeing our government from the Zionist yoke", it's a question of freeing ourselves from our very own non-partisan "yoke" of racism, ignorance, and fear. And, yes, in this I truly believe we are "like everyone else".
Wiesenfeld should be referred to the scene in Exodus where two young Holocaust survivors, Dov Landau and Karen, talk about hating- the tortured Dov wants to "kill, kill, kill" while the "angelic" Karen says, basically, that they have to learn to trust in people again. Anne Frank, in her Diary, seems to have been aware that she had the same choice, ie to believe in our common humanity, or get pull to pieces by hatred. The point is, the Jewish community has been wrestling with both these two responses to exceptionalism and suffering forever, but perhaps especially in the wake of the Holocaust. A simple recognition of this fact would go a long way toward a recognition of the Palestinians' humanity.
With regard to being a "chosen people", that can be used as an excuse to kill, or a call to service. In the last century or so, as persecution was quickly followed by conquest and the establishment of a militarily powerful state, the first possibility became a practical alternative, enabling Israel to join the rest of us in the delusional cloud of "it's all about us" and domination.
Christians, of course, went this route (after hundreds of years of persecution by Rome) , when it became Rome's state religion in ~317AD. So "Christendom", which includes US and Europe, has "been there, done that" for the last 2,000 years. Really, we're all in the same boat. And none of us, certainly not the US, wants to face it, i.e. face our own darkness/light. But it's crucial that we do it. Hannah Arendt in a book called On Terror said that hypocrisy caused the French Revolution. Indeed. -Léa
I agree that Goldstone is one tough guy, committed to the Law. That "some force or person intervened" after the Stanford debate, leading him to write that Op-Ed, seems unlikely. Wouldn't there likely to have been a lead time? Wasn't the piece probably in the works, if not completed, before the debate five days before? Doesn't Norman Finklestein even claim that the Op-Ed had been submitted to, and rejected by, the NYT before it's submission to the Post? In any case, the further claim that Goldstone just as suddenly reversed course a third time, "changing most of the way back again", leaves us with as many questions as we started with.
I continue to believe that in writing that Op-Ed, Justice Goldstone's knew exactly what he was doing, and hasn't deviated an inch from his original intention. The Op-Ed was a combination of praise (misleading or not) and censure (fair or not) intended to get the parties to cooperate with the legal process the Mission initiated, not to stop it in its tracks, or influence the UN. It was targeted not at UN bodies, as Ethan Bonner implies, but at Israel, Hamas, and us.
For more on Goldstone-as-judge, and the predicament that might be at the core of Hamas' refusal to comply with the Goldstone Report's recommendations, see "Remembering Goldstone" at link to bindup.blogspot.com (This is a slightly revised version of an article originally posted here 4/14 as, "Rather than a retreat…" )
The treatment of Palestinian-Israeli citizens within Israel is looking more and more like the Israel government's treatment of state-less Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. In 2010, a 10' wall was completed in the town of Lod, to separate Palestinian from Jewish neighborhoods. This Oct 2010 article in the Economist lays it out: link to econ.st
"Many municipal services, such as street lighting and rubbish collection, stop at the boundaries of Arab suburbs. Sixteen kilometres (ten miles) from Tel Aviv, Israel’s richest city, sewage flows through some of Lod’s Arab streets."
"Tension and fear increasingly mirror the West Bank. Arab locals refer to the Jewish newcomers as mustawtineen, meaning settlers."
"“I feel safer in Kedumim [a national-religious West Bank settlement],” says an Orthodox Israeli woman who has just moved her family of six into a new national-religious housing block."
Some people say one-state is impossible because it will bring about even more terrible conflict. But when I read stuff like this I can't help but think that the civil rights/human rights struggle now under way on both sides of the Green Line that will inevitably create one.
Hastings may have withdrawn its brand, and the Dean his speech, but we were treated to a great conference at the school. Frankly, we in the audience didn't notice the absence of either.
The proceedings are archived here: link to bit.ly (see "Litigating Palestine: Panels 1-4) Panel 4, "Beyond Litigation" features Samara Esmeir at about 1hr 30 min into the video. She talks about problems of apply laws of war to asymmetrical conflict, and her concerns about how Goldstone Report is playing out on the streets of Ramallah. The Q & A which follows is fascinating and instructive, I think.
Anybody who wants to commend Hastings for hosting the conference despite the pressure, can find the people to write here: link to uchastings.edu
Richard, I agree with you that characterizing Israel as a renegade or illegitimate state, is not on Justice Goldstone’s agenda. But I don’t see anyone making those claims right now with respect to the Op-Ed, or that they were ever treated in the Report itself, whose task it is to help bring both a state (Israel) and a non-state actor (Hamas) to account for civilian casualties.
I don’t agree that “the institutions of international law…are incapable to adjudicating charges against Israel fairly, whatever their history may be. Many people, including Justice Goldstone, have laid out a fair & thorough process in this case. It’s my opinion that Israel can help itself enormously by cooperating in the future, which the Op-Ed pointed out.
As I wrote in my post, Israel isn’t the only party with doubts about being treated fairly- Hamas has them, too. Since I think external accountability is crucial, and that nothing can replace it in a situation like this, I believe international institutions and their legal entities can and must do the work.
Finally, I definitely agree with you that Justice Goldstone does not deal in “black and white”, in a situation that many of us are tempted to deal with in those terms.
I don’t feel I’m so much defending the op-ed as trying to figure it out its implications.
I agree with you that Goldstone could have called Hamas to account without characterizing Israel’s investigations. I don’t begrudge Goldstone’s treatment of them, mainly because I don’t think it’s going to make intern’l opinion more sympathetic to Israel's behavior or jeopardize the Report’s legal future. Will the Op-Ed encourage compliance on Israel’s part? I don’t know. But I do think Israel will be very careful not to do worse (which is small comfort).
The more challenging issue, as I see it, is getting Hamas to participate. And that’s where I find the Op-Ed, and the Report itself, more problematic in its approach, not because of Goldstone's or any other particular person's influence, but because of the (current) state of the law, whose implications for lo-tech actors like Hamas aren't clear. For example, Goldstone saying that "the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying" ignores the argument that Hamas, having the right to defend itself, is simply using what it's got, which are weapons that can't precisely target-from-a-distance, the way ours can, etc.
Your #2 was discussed at length at Hastings. As I said at the end of my reply to Richard, I really recommend listening to Esmeir and the Q & A afterwards: link to bit.ly
Richard, I don't think Goldstone is reconsidering the Report. On the contrary, I'm convinced he wants the process it outlined, based on its provisional findings, to go forward. Period.
I think the Op-Ed was a political move to get the parties to engage. Given his record in South Africa, where he crossed and re-crossed a lot of lines, such a move doesn't surprise me. For anyone, such as Netanyahu, to try to characterize it as a legal move is a non-starter.
As far as headlines are concerned- and "reconsidered" appears only in the Op-Ed's headline- tonight I got a taste of the power of changing one. I wrote the piece above under the title: "Remembering Goldstone" The editor choose something different, which is a pretty common function of editors. But, I'll tell you, it was a real surprise. It's punchier, and specific, but may also imply something that I didn't mean to say.
So to clarify: I don't think Goldstone's first priority was to tackle the issue of asymmetrical warfare per se. The Report itself doesn't treat the issue definitely. But because he's now addressing Hamas in such strong terms, it was bound to come up, and he recognizes it as a "significant issue". Esmeir's take on the choices Hamas faces with regard to it are very germane. I'd love to hear what Goldstone would have to say in reply.
For a streaming video of the Hastings talk on intern'l humanitarian law and asymmetrical warfare, go here: link to bit.ly
Esmeir's presentation is about an hour in. The Q & A afterwards is very provocative (in a good way), especially Victor Kattan's clarification of the circumstances under which an occupied people can be held liable for war crimes: link to bit.ly
"Litigating Palestine: Beyond Litigation"
I agree with the approach of considering a variety of strategies as "both-and" propositions before rejecting any of them.
But I also fear that among all the challenges ahead, the one that may prove most lethal to the Palestinian cause is the legacy of political corruption and illegitimacy engendered by generations of Occupation. Indeed, this legacy- the price of conquest and occupation- is proving lethal to Israel's political culture as well. In this context, civil disobedience, BDS, human rights work, education- everything to do with the revitalizing of civil society in all of Israel/Palestine- is crucial.
With respect to Fayyad's economic program specifically, Dr. Khalaf quotes a statement that Palestine's dependence on foreign aid is taking "a dip", and I've read in another report that Fayyad's goal is need for aid end altogether by 2013. Does anyone know what caused the "dip" last year, and what lies behind Fayyad's planning for aid to end so soon? Certainly a speedy end to Occupation must figure in his calculations, but even if it ended tomorrow without more bloodshed, I don't understand how Palestine could possibly become self-supporting in two years.
Roha, Some Jews did get out, in sporadic bunches, like the kids in the Kindertransport. Chile & Mexico are other countries that let refugees in, though very few. I find these exceptions to the general rule inspiring to the extent they illuminate what was possible against impossible odds.
Pablo Neruda, Consul General in Madrid, got 2,000 Spanish refugees aboard a ship to Chile after the fall of France- among them a number of Jews who had fought for the Republic during the Spanish Civil War, who would have been sent to Drancy & Mauthausen otherwise. (Jews and leftists all shared the same fate.) I met a number of them in Chile when I was a young woman.
Interestingly enough, Chile also has the largest population of Palestianian diaspora, after Jordan. This may explain why Chile's Senate this summer voted its own version of boycott against Israeli products made in Occupied Territories. Is this the consequence of there being a powerful Palestinian voting block in Chile? If so, I expect we'll hear about recognition by Chile along Brazilian lines sooner or later. To read more about this summer's vote, see link to en.mercopress.com
Thanks so much, Bumblebye.
There's a great documentary about kids transported out of Vienna to England just before WWII. Hedy was one of them and is interviewed in the film. Best part for me is seeing the contemporary footage (newspaper headlines would suggest the world knew a great deal about what Hitler's savage persecution of Jews, even before the war) and also the part documenting US Congressional response when England asked US to join the effort. See link to amazon.com
September 1997 report by US Institute of Peace on Dayton implementation of refugee return: link to usip.org
discusses nuts & bolts issues of refugee return in that case. Not definitive, certainly, but gives useful overview.
Better question would be not "who" but "where" are these Palestinian leaders.
Marwan Barghouti, for starters, is in an Israeli jail.
In fact, successive Israel governments have systematically imprisoned, killed, or exiled a whole "next generation" of talented and popular Palestinian leadership who were not, and are not "terrorists" in any definition of the word that would not also be applicable to, say, Sharon, Shamir, or Begin.
Thanks for the heads-up, Annie! Here are the correct links:
"Palestinians seek unilateral statehood recognition"
link to hosted.ap.org
Akiva Eldar's "U.S. pull out of freeze talks shows Obama's strength against Netanyahu"
link to haaretz.com
And what stage we are at with respect to two independent states vs a unitary state has implications for BDS. It seems to me that the now much debated and agonized-over (and to my mind, properly so) distinction between "targeted" and more general campaigns will disappear if Palestinians give up on a separate state for themselves. In other words, if the Arab-speaking population finds itself struggling for equal rights within one political entity, BDS will simply go general, no questions asked, similar to what happened in South Africa.
"…what’s the hold up? Declare autonomy and get cracking on developing the Palestinian economy."
A self-declared state is one thing, having the UN General Assembly declare a Palestinian state (60+ years after its first attempt) is quite another, and right now the more powerful option.
I don't think it's a question of good thing or bad thing, but of what form "the thing", ie breaking the Occupation, will take
That's Halper's subject in Palestine-2011 ( link to middleastpost.com )
Looks now like the PA is seriously preparing for a unilateral declaration, and has some important company. Such a declaration, which I'll call Plan B, will have actual consequences for facts-on-the-ground. Plan C, the dissolving of the PA, will also have actual consequences for facts-on-the-ground. Either plan entails considerable suffering for people in the Land. It appears the PA, whether in its own self-interest or as an act of statesmanship, has clearly decided trying an end run for statehood before going to a unitary state.
Yes, specificity and lack of equivocation on the part of a major power are what's important here.
"The State of Palestine is widely recognised by states, although often in equivocal terms.[19]"
from link to en.wikipedia.org
In any case, it's clear that in preparing a Plan B for 2011, the Palestinian Authority intends to ensure that, with respect to the world at large, "unilateral" won't mean "alone".
see Resource Generation at link to resourcegeneration.org
"Their children, for the most part, own sporting goods stores in the hipper towns of the Mountain West. But do they read intellectual magazines, take an intense interest in foreign policy, feel a sense of stewardship for America and its place in the world?
Not so much."
Actually, that's a cheap shot.
The privileged can't be painted with a single brush anymore than the rest of us. Here's a group of young privileged folks that are facing their responsibilities head-on:
and after more than sixty years, a younger generation is coming along that gets it. That's what JVP represents, it seems to me, along with their Israeli counterparts, the Shministim, Breaking the Silence, Rabbis for Human Rights, etc –all brave people whose commitment to justice may guide them to a political solution whose contours we have yet to clearly see. (Despite what the pundits say about it all being so obvious.)
"As a regular reader of Jerry Slater for the past couple of years, let me say that I have almost always found his posts to be extremely reasoned and fair. The present piece to my mind reflects Slater’s increasing sense of desperation at the breakdown of negotiations and impending loss of the two-state solution."
I agree with lobewyper. The Jewish community's historic suffering and their present plight (which is the realization that a nation state that sacrifices justice to security is never secure) can only be understood in terms of universal human experience in which no one group has a monopoly on either innocence or evil. As Donald said above: "The Holocaust is of course one of the greatest atrocities in history, but … the overall lesson is simple–work for a world where no group should fear persecution, where every nation treats all of its citizens equally no matter what their religion or ethnicity."
"the 67 borders, peace… Resistance now declares that only 'the people" decide, and not ratification."
Would we really have reason to fear right now (with no Agreement details at hand) that, in general, it's likely a two-state agreement, 67 borders, etc would be rejected by either Israelis or Palestinians in a plebiscite (referendum)?
Richard, I think peoples only rush into wars they think they can win. And my sense is that a majority Israels/Palestinians are way past believing their side would "win" a civil war, and that this recognition may even survive moves toward some version of "one state" or "confederation", especially if the arrangement were not imposed, but agreed to by their respective political leaderships.
What is dangerous right now, I think, is that many Israelis, if not the majority, do feel that the status-quo, which leaves their government in effective physical control of Israel/Palestine, can be maintained indefinitely.
So sorry for the misuse of blockquote tag above - I tried to put it around the part of Phil's post I found most intriguing: "The deal will not make a contiguous or viable Palestinian state? Obama is determined to get past that; states in this day and age are less important in territorial terms and more important as international actors; he means to make the Palestinians sovereign international actors. The Palestinians are divided? "
So what does "less important in territorial terms" mean? Seems to me the essential question buried here concerns political power, and the right litmus test for the legitimacy of any institutionalization of such power is "Does it secure human rights" as defined by international law.
For starters, a "compassionate" question is one delivered respectfully.
Richard, I want you to know that your comments on this forum enlarge my understanding. I think that's Hass' role, too- offering her Israeli readers opportunities to enlarge their understanding of people whose lives they affect but don't share or experience in any real & direct way as she does by living in Ramallah. So she provides a reality check- and basis for compassion- across a great divide. Can't ask more from a journalist than that.
"The use of force to displace the settlers would be in violation of Israeli law."
[Some] people will refuse to obey what they consider to be unjust laws. Whoever resists has a right to due process. Israel law as applied in the territories fails on all counts: Its laws do not conform to international law, and their implementation continually violates and subverts the basic rules of due process. Meanwhile, the apparatus of the State of Israel actively encourages illegal behavior, as defined by international law.
Commitment to non-violence, or Satyagraha entails respect for law and due process. I.F.Stone was calling for both. That is, I'm sure he wasn't calling for the feds to arrest people and then throw away the key. In contract, see, Why Israel imprisoned my best friend.
A commitment to non-violence, or more accurately , does entail respect for law and due process. I.F. Stone was calling for the feds to enforce the law AND abide by due process. That is, I'm sure he wasn't calling for them to arrest people and throw away the key. In contrast, see
The Case of Muhaned Abu Awwad: "Who are these children"
Feb 18 Confession as reported in Haaretz, by Avi Issacharoff
link to haaretz.com
BACKGROUND: Arrest a month earlier.
Jan 23 - Arrest reported by Palestine Solidariy Project
link to palestinesolidarityproject.org
Jan 23 - Arrest as reported by Haaretz, Avi Issacharoff
link to haaretz.com
Jan 24, 2010- Arrest reported on Parents' Circle web site
link to theparentscircle.com
Jan 25
British Friends of Parents' Circle link to theparentscircle.com
Jan 26 - Arrest as reported in Palestine Monitor
link to palestinemonitor.org
Jan 28
Italy
link to world.pressenza.org
Statement I received March 8, 2010. The original is in both Hebrew and English.
Dear friends,
I thank you for your concern and support of our family.
Attached you will find a letter which the Parents Circle – Families Forum wrote as an answer to the Peace NGO’s. I hope that it will be helpful for your conference and thank you again for your support.
Kindest regards,
Khaled Abu Awwad
General Manager
Who are these children?
Who are these children, these Palestinian and Israeli children of peacemakers? Do we expect miniature Martin Luther King's who will follow in the footsteps of their fathers or will the pressure of the street be stronger and will they be forced to take a path to prove a loyalty to their ethnic identity.
And what identity is that for a young Palestinian who grows up in the West Bank, devoid of parks, cinemas, malls, concerts and yes sport. Playing in the street does not breed a gentle spirit. How can he feel a need for reconciliation when he cannot even touch the sand of a beach without permission or see a lion in the zoo or feel the freedom of movement without being challenged to prove he is indeed a peace maker at every check-point and barrier.
This young Palestinian will not only be challenged in his daily life by the powers that be, he will also have to prove that he is loyal to the cause and not, certainly not a collaborator, even though the stickers on his door talk about the fact that the conflict will never end if we do not speak. What do you mean by speak, should he come to a seminar and meet with his Israeli brothers, and form friendships and understanding and begin to understand the other, or should he be pressured by his peers to prove that he too will fight this occupation and be a hero. Most of the fathers of these young men, who are now peacemakers, have their credentials in their society by serving time in Israeli jails during the uprisings and being wounded and losing family members, but this glory does not exempt their children. Indeed their children carry a heavy burden of belonging.
What is the consequence for these children of peacemakers? One week they are at a meeting with their Israeli counterparts creating friends and looking for ways for a safer future and for a non-violent solution and then on their way back they are stopped at the entrance to their village by a young soldier, who is bored with his job, and would rather be anywhere else. Yes this young soldier decides to have some "fun" and keeps the children of the peacemakers for three hours until he has had enough and lets them go. What should that child feel? Should he produce an olive branch? Or should he go away with the feeling that all the past week talking of reconciliation was just a sham. It takes a pretty mature person of any age not to let this indignity effect who they are.
And so after the encounter with the soldier, he decides to prove to his mates on the street, that he is loyal, he still sticks to his non-violent ways and demonstrates against the occupation, then the army swoops in and arrest him at 3 in the morning. Whatever happened to other hours of the day. Remember on the door there is a sticker, "It won't stop until we talk", nevertheless the whole family including the small children are thrown into the street while the defenders of our future search the house Now starts the most painful and terrifying time for the "peacemaker" and his family he is punished twice. Once for being a father and again for being one fighting for years for a non-violent solution. The powers that be have a field day, and what are we left with, a broken family. The father says at the next meeting with Israelis, no matter what, I will not be broken, I will go on with my mission for peace. This father has lost two brothers in the conflict, has had his son on deaths door after being shot by Israeli soldiers. And yet, he is willing to go on, where is our compassion, can we not understand the dilemma and the pressure he has to face.
And what of the Israeli peacemakers children, they too have to face the dilemma of their peers, and the decision to go to the army and serve their country. Suddenly one week they are talking peace at a seminar and getting to know their Palestinian friends, and then the next they are standing at a checkpoint having to check their papers. They may even find themselves searching the houses of friends at 3 in the morning, what will that do to their souls. We are not advocating refusal of army service, we only want to demonstrate a need, an urgent need to take responsibility for the future of all of the children.
It is clear to all that the current situation is just a breeding ground for more and more hatred and fear, it is time to realize the needs of the other. It is time to nurture the peacemakers and not to try and pass laws to stop their urgent work on the ground. We can not allow a minority of war and fear mongers to ruin the moral fiber of Israel and what it should stand for.
"Finally, I REALLY want to IMPLORE you to agree (i can handle sending the invitations) to invite Palestians into this discussion." - Matthew Taylor
Please, Phil, would you agree to do this?
I'd add to Matthew's list Khaled Abu-Awwad, the Palestinian General Manager for the Parents' Circle/Family Forum, whose son, Mohaned, was arrested in January 2010 and whose "confession" to being a terrorist was announced in Haraatz– under the headline "Son of Palestinian Peace Activist Admits to Attempted Terror Attack"– a month later. Awwad was kind enough to email me a statement that the PCFF sent to other Israeli peace groups after that development, a statement that went way beyond the blame game at a moment when a father, and an organization such as the Parent Circle, would have every temptation to indulge in it. I'd like to pass it along, but am not sure how (paste it into this Comments section? I'll try it in a separate post)
My point is that Palestinians practicing non-violence, and the Israelis who join them, are putting their lives and their families on the line every day in ways we cannot imagine. As others have already said, this conflict is different from India because the Land must eventually be shared; it's different from our Civil Rights struggle because the two sides are not (yet) subject to one juridical system. So something entirely new is in the making. Palestinian participation in this discussion is crucial if we are to understand what that "new" is, and learn from it ourselves.
Finally, I have to register my feelings about what Matthew quoted in his longer article, the statement of a "senior leftist Israeli negotiator" that a "massive unjustified slaughter" would be necessary to end the occupation. Please. This is certainly something that can never be legitimately wished for. And emphasizing this outcome is a distortion of Satyagraha, substituting a partial truth for a whole one. The whole truth is that the outcome of such actions can go either way: soldiers can refuse to fire, or innocents can die. The task is to increase the chances of the former, not set up the latter in order to win sympathy. Another reason to hear from Palestinians & Israelis on this subject. To keep it real. To learn from them.
Absolutely!
I'm not an open Zionist agent, and I think I'm following what's Taylor trying to say: Resistance, BSD, European + Russian (and I'd add + US) + political reparations to the Jewish community on the part of Europe,US, Russia. It's all of a piece. Why not? Is respect for Palestinians, or commitment to justice and security for them diminished by considering this?
The "religious" principle involved is that "the means you use creates the ends you get", I'm an old woman whose mother lived in Germany in the 1920's. Believe me, attending to the full humanity (or whatever remnant is left of it, either in oneself or one's enemy) in war is worth the effort, because without that effort the cycle of violence continues over and over and over.
"hugs and apologies and lollipops" are not being called for here, but rather consideration of something much more serious- opening our own doors to immigration, for example- that would call us to account and expose our own hypocrisy depending on our reaction. Taylor's proposing just reparations of a different sort than money, to be pursued in conjunction with continued nonviolent resistance, BSD, etc. It makes total sense. But rather than "hugs", let's call it "political reparations". (Anything but "hugs", a word I find vapid and offense in this context.)
The fact that Jews went straight from Holocaust to national state & colonizer in less than one generation, traumas all intact, is what sets their recent experience apart from that of other oppressed minorities.
That said, I wish you would excise the word "hug" from this discussion and find another that would do justice to seriousness of what you are proposing, which I think is absolutely correct: that is, an acknowledgment of our own collective responsibility, and a commitment to substantial remedial actions that cost us more than money. I particularly like the idea of offering Jews anywhere in the world a free pass into any country of their choosing, or some variation thereof.
Friedman also got his facts wrong. He states that "... Israel has taken down most of the checkpoints inside the West Bank. So internal commerce and investment are starting to flow, and even some Gazans are moving there." Huh?
On June 20, AP reported that "Philippe Lazzarini, head of the U.N. humanitarian affairs office in Jerusalem, says Israel has removed 121 checkpoints, easing Palestinian movement between villages and towns, but 505 checkpoints and dozens of road obstacles still hinder travel."
And then there's the part about "even some Gazans are moving there" ie to the West Bank. I'd sure like more details, and context, about that claim.