The hope of Shatila
By Karma Nabulsi, The Guardian 1/8/2004
The Geneva accord won't bring peace because it signs away the rights of Palestinian refugees -- This year is the 250th anniversary of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's legendary Discourse on the Origins and Foundations of Inequality. In its dedicatory epistle to the Republic of Geneva, Rousseau, citizen of that virtuous city, described the democratic vision he claimed was inspired by it: "I should have wished to be born in a country where the sovereign and the people could have had only one and the same interest, so that all the motions of the machine might only tend to the common happiness; since this is impossible unless the people and the sovereign are the same person, it follows that I should have wished to have been born under a democratic government."
The Palestinian people desire such an equal happiness as did Rousseau for the citizens of Geneva. Last month, the Swiss government invited dozens of international luminaries and VIPs to this same Geneva, in order to celebrate a peace plan between Israelis and Palestinians. The plan calls for a two-state solution, the sharing of Jerusalem, the dismantling of some settlements and the keeping of some others and, most fundamentally, for Palestinian refugees (the Palestinians being largely a refugee population with more than 5 million refugees) effectively to give up the right of return to their original homes and properties inside Israel as the necessary "painful compromise" for peace.
All those guests - Jimmy Carter, Lord Carrington, Hans-Dietrich Genscher - are citizens of countries imbued with the very institutions whose creation are due, in no little measure, to Rousseau's seminal texts. The Geneva accord has been universally welcomed as a moment of great hope; a serious response at last to Sharon and his bleak enterprise. Some movement, some protest, by those in the international arena who have been standing idly by while their own citizens the world over have demanded action. We need hope, the papers said. This is it. There is a partner for peace.
How, then, to explain that the accord directly contradicts the values shared by those dignitaries at Geneva? Or how to portray the despair it has engendered among the vast majority of Palestinians? For not only is our predicament in facing the Israelis desperate; it has just been made worse....
'The Family Never Lived Here'
By George Bisharat, Palestine Chronicle/San Francisco Chronicle 1/8/2004
Last May 14, the 55th anniversary of the Palestinian "Nakba" ("Catastrophe"), when one people gained a homeland and another lost theirs, I was thinking of a home in Jerusalem.
It was the residence occupied by Golda Meir, author of the famous remark that "the Palestinian people do not exist" when she was Israel's foreign minister. It was also the family home built in 1926 by my grandfather, Hanna Ibrahim Bisharat, "Papa" to all of us.
I went to visit our home for the first time in 1977. Although he was a Christian, Papa named the home "Villa Harun ar-Rashid," in honor of the Muslim Abbasid caliph, renowned for his eloquence, passion for learning and generosity. Painted tiles with this name were inset above the second-floor balcony and over a side entrance.
When Papa first built the home in what became known as the Talbieh quarter of Jerusalem, few other residences existed nearby. As I grew up, my father regaled me with tales of his boyhood exploits in the surrounding field and orchards. Two of my uncles were born while the family lived there; one succumbed to pneumonia in Villa Harun ar-Rashid. The young boys went to school up the road at the Catholic-run Terra Sancta College. My uncle Emile told me of a wager he made with his younger brother, George (for whom I am named), that he could not stand on a swing on the front porch and swing with no hands - with predictable, but fortunately mild, consequences.
A Very Special Relationship
By Amos Elon, Miftah 1/8/2004
The alliance between the US and Israel, which has been tighter than ever under the Bush administration, is often thought to have started under President Johnson following the 1967 war. Johnson was pleased with Israel's success in defeating two Soviet clients, Syria and Egypt, in only six days and he proceeded to grant Israel unprecedented political, economic, and military support. The closing of the Suez Canal, which forced Soviet supplies to North Vietnam to take the long route around Africa, was another bonus in Johnson's eyes.
It is true that Johnson officially disapproved of Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem and of the other measures it took in violation of international law. But US protests were perfunctory and soon ceased altogether. The US became Israel's major supplier of the latest sophisticated weapons. Israeli generals were predicting one hundred years of peace. In Jerusalem in 1971, I heard the foreign minister, Abba Eban, entertain his guests with the story of his visit to the White House during the Johnson administration. "Mister Eeeban," Johnson said, "aa'm sure glad to see you! Just the other day ah was sittin' in the Oval Room scratchin' my balls thinkin' about Israel!" Johnson promised Eban to supply Israel with the most up-to-date fighter planes, air-to-air missiles, and tanks, all of them otherwise available only to NATO members.
In the two books under review, Warren Bass, a senior fellow at the Council of Foreign Relations, and Avner Cohen, an expatriate Israeli working at the National Security Archive at George Washington University, show that Johnson was not the first to break the US embargo—imposed by Harry Truman in 1948—on supplying major weapons to Israel. It was Kennedy who did so, although he had at first opposed deliveries of major weapons. At the same time, and even though nuclear proliferation was one of Kennedy's principal concerns throughout his brief presidency, he failed to prevent Israel from going nuclear. Both books are well documented from material recently released by Israeli and American archives, and tell stories that should be read.
Odd couples in space: Israel, Russia
By Stephen Blank, Asia Times 1/6/2004
On December 28 last year, a Russian Soyuz rocket carrying an Israeli telecommunications satellite blasted into space. This event received scant global media coverage because on the face of it there is nothing particularly startling about such launches. Satellites are hardly big news now, and since 1991 Russia has been using former missile launchers that were of very high quality to launch its own and other states' rockets into space, thereby making a lot of money.
But in fact this launch represents some very important developments and its very normalcy attests to the distance we (old rival nations?) have traveled in several directions since the end of the Cold War.
First, who would have thought during the Cold War that Russia and Israel would be collaborating on programs that have definite and substantial strategic and military implications - and that such collaboration would be routine, a matter of no interest to most media?
Yet that is the case and it shows just how Russia's relations with the Middle East in general and with Israel in particular have changed. As numerous authorities have observed, space is big business today, and it affects national economies in many diverse ways. And, as noted here, space launches are one of the few areas where Russia enjoys a competitive advantage, and thus can cash in handsomely. And so Moscow is launching satellites for a host of states, including some of Israel's greatest enemies, Saudi Arabia and Iran. And these launches, too, have become routine affairs that receive little media coverage.
Is that Naomi?
By Yossi Sarid, Ha'aretz 1/8/2004
The Likud Central Committee was considered until this week to be the "seismograph" of the "nationalist camp." The volume of its applause signals who among the Likud leaders is more popular than whom. But this week, even this reliable seismograph broke down and became a useless instrument. It broke down because it registered a peak response to the appearance of MK Naomi Blumenthal, who is almost certainly not about to inherit the position of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Blumenthal is a warm and pleasant woman, but I don't know the secret of her popularity. I think I do know the secret of the thunderous applause that shook the foundations of the Mann Auditorium in Tel Aviv on Monday.
Those who cheered Blumenthal there were not only people whom she favored with wedding and bar mitzvah gifts, and not only people who had a good time at her expense at the City Tower Hotel. The cheers filled the entire auditorium. They were not organized like the cheers for Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert or Education Minister Limor Livnat, and we can assume that they were entirely spontaneous and expressed profound and real emotion.
At least Blumenthal brought from home the money that was earmarked, according to the indictment, to bribe members of the central committee, whereas many of her colleagues brought it from some public coffer. So the entire community sinned, and only Naomi was punished? Such Hottentot morality is unacceptable even to "criminal elements," not to mention decent people, who can also be found here and there in the central committee.
Commissioner-General’s address to the Second International Academic Conference
By Peter Hansen, Miftah 1/8/2004
Ladies and Gentlemen -- It gives me great pleasure to address such a distinguished gathering at this conference. One of the remarkable characteristics of the evolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the past decade is the grass-roots mobilization of the common people, academia, non-governmental organizations and institutions of civil society focused on conflict resolution, reconciliation and reaching out to the other. Though this phenomenon has been eclipsed by the official representatives of the parties to the conflict and their versions of political developments, this ‘grass-roots’ track has complemented, and at times, competed with the official one. While they are traditionally referred to as "track two" initiatives, in the Israeli-Palestinian context they merit far greater attention and recognition especially because "track one" could not sufficiently underscore and realize the aspirations of ordinary Israelis and Palestinians. Your presence here today further contributes to the momentum for peace in the Middle East.
The over five decade-long conflict in the Middle East has spawned its own lexicon. Peace has been used by the parties to the conflict along with a variety of adjectives – just peace, durable and lasting peace and a balanced peace. The concept of ‘justice’ is central to the purposes of the United Nations. Article 1 of the UN Charter notes the purpose of the UN as bringing about an "adjustment or settlement of international disputes" through "peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law". Article 2 of the Charter enjoins member states to "settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered". What then, are the principles of justice that have been enunciated by the international community to deal with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? How have such principles of justice evolved over time?
The IDF prefers the settlers
By Aviad Kleinberg, Ha'aretz 1/8/2004
Is it permissible to open fire only on a gathering of Palestinians, or also on a mixed gathering of Palestinians and Jews? And what about a gathering of Jews? And leftists, do they count as Jews because of their origin or as Palestinians because of their opinions? -- Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon has accepted the conclusions of the Israel Defense Forces in-house examination of the incident of the shooting of an Israeli demonstrator at Maskha last month. Ya'alon has refrained from taking steps against the officers and soldiers who were involved in this incident. The rules of engagement in the sector will be reexamined. It is not true, then, that there is no learning of lessons in the IDF. If in the past the blame would roll its way down to the sentry, now it is dispersed entirely in the pure, clear air of the IDF. No one is to blame. Not the shooter, not the company commander who was in charge, not the brigade commander who approved, not the commander of the sector; the soldiers who prevented the swift evacuation of the wounded man are not guilty, nor are the settlers who danced, nor, of course, is the sentry. We have learned the lesson.
It is not clear who is in fact guilty. It is even hard to say that there is any guilt here. Perhaps it would be more correct to say that there has been a linguistic failure here, a cognitive mishap in which mainly the victims are guilty. But don't think that the IDF is not prepared for self-criticism. Apparently in some mysterious way the procedures are also guilty - the rules of engagement on the innocent are not sufficiently clear.
Unilateral Delusion
By Roni Ben Efrat, Dissident Voice 1/6/2004
Beside the government and the Knesset, a parallel institution has developed in Israel. It is known as the Herzlia Conference. All the "who's who" of Israeli politics, the rich and the powerful, assemble there. Generals and politicians announce their plans in Olympian serenity – without the catcalls, backbiting and endless maneuvers that color our elected institutions.
This alternative arena suits the Prime Minister well. It is the second consecutive year in which Ariel Sharon has sealed the Conference with a "speech to the nation". Suspense, this time, was higher than ever. Sharon's deputy and presumed trial balloonist, Ehud Olmert, had given an interview to Yediot Aharonot (December 5). A consensus-sniffing right-winger, Olmert stopped the breath of the nation with a call for "the unilateral evacuation of most of the Territories and parts of East Jerusalem and the division of the land of Israel into two states with the border between them determined not by politics, national sentiment or religious tradition, but by demography." Olmert was referring to the projection that by 2012, the majority west of the Jordan River will be Arab.
Israel waited, therefore, to hear what Sharon himself would say at Herzlia. There were further reasons for suspense: Ever since the resignation of Abu Mazen, Israel has been floundering without a political agenda. The Americans have announced they will pull their civil administration out of Iraq by July 2004. Saddam is in their hands. Libya has joined the Axis of Good. Yet between Israelis and Palestinians, mere butchery continues.
Who Needs an Imitation?
By Uri Avnery, Arabic Media Internet Network 1/3/2004
Would you believe it? The Israeli Labor Party has a political program. Like a top hat for a bum.
Seems this program has been around for two months already. I just didn't hear a thing about it until somebody took pity on me and faxed me a copy the other day.
This is the Labor Party that is now considering whether to extend Shimon Peres' term as party chairman for another year or two. Shimon Peres, who served as Ariel Sharon's foreign minister and who is now longing to return to Sharon 's government.
So what has this party to offer? Only good things.
The program starts out with: " The settlement activity and the rule over the Palestinian people damage the security of the state and its citizens. The demographic balance between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan endangers the existence of Israel as a Jewish-democratic state. Therefore, political and demographic separation between the two national entities is the foundation of any settlement. "
What is lacking in this paragraph? Even a single word about morality and justice. Morality and justice do not sell, and prudent people should keep well away from them. There is no word about the iniquities of the occupation. Iniquities don't sell either. Any good copywriter will tell you that a program should speak only about how bad the situation is for the Jews. Palestinian women produce too many children.
Arab and Jew: Being young in a troubled land
By Melissa, Electronic Intifada 1/7/2004
Khaled is 19 years old but he comes across as being much older. He is very tall and slim but his face exudes experience and wisdom. Despite his quiet demeanour, he displays confidence and independence that was learned from growing up in a difficult situation. Khaled is great at dealing with people; he can be soft and kind to children but at the same time strong against those trying to take advantage of him. He usually gets what he wants and is respected across the city from people of all walks of life because he respects everyone and knows how to talk to people. I have met few with a better understanding of life than Khaled. He understands and accepts the bad as much as the good in life and really understands how the world works.
Khaled is in his first year of studies at Al-Azhar University in Gaza. Every day I ask him, "what are you going to do tomorrow?" The answer is always the same, "The same as every day, nothing." There is nothing to do in Rafah. Some days he comes home from school and sits with a frustration hiding behind his hazel eyes, more quiet than usual, staring at the walls for hours, moving only to light a new cigarette. He only smokes when he is upset, he tells me. "I feel lost," he says on a number of occasions, "I cannot see myself continuing my studies here for another three and a half years."
His thoughts may echo those of university students around the globe, frustrated with studying and exams, but in fact they are not the same. With an unemployment rate around 80% in Rafah, and around 70% in the Gaza Strip, there is hardly an incentive to continue studying. Thousands of university graduates have nothing to do every day. Khaled has two older brothers who have taken different paths in life. One completed his university studies in Business and years after graduating is still unemployed.
|
