Crossed roads
By Graham Usher, Al-Ahram Weekly on-line 2 - 8 October 2003
Palestinians passed the third year of the Intifada this week seeking leadership -- they didn't find it. -- Palestinians in the occupied territories observed the third anniversary of the Al-Aqsa Intifada less with a bang than a whimper. There were marches and rallies in Nablus and Gaza, staffed by Fatah militiamen vowing "revolution until victory". But the dominant mood was one of introspection, with Palestinians -- analysts, activists and people -- pondering a revolt that has so far been short on accomplishments and long on losses, including the death of 2,201 of their people, 400 of them children.
The sense of defeat was reinforced by two decisions, one Israeli and territorial, the other international and diplomatic.
On Wednesday the Israeli government approved construction of the central section of the West Bank "wall", including barriers that would go east of the settlements of Ariel and Kadumim, some 15 miles inside the West Bank. In deference to US misgivings these barriers will not yet be joined to the main wall, actually a vast rift consisting of electronic fences, concrete walls, trenches and military towers. But few Palestinians believe the linkage will be anything other than a matter of time. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz have both made it clear that Ariel and other Jewish settlements "will be in the right place" when the decision is finally made -- ie within the wall rather than beyond it.
One State Solution Ploy Too Dangerous
By Uri Avnery, Palestine Chronicle 10/2/2003
In his final speech in court, Marwan Barghouti, the Fatah leader on trial, issued a resounding warning: If Israelis do not adopt the Two-States Solution soon, Israel will disappear. The whole country will become one state, and in this state the Palestinians will soon constitute the majority.
I don’t know whom Barghouti talked with before using this argument. Probably it was Israeli left-wingers, who are convinced of the brilliance of this stratagem.
And indeed, it could be very convincing. Shimon Peres and people like him have been using it for a long time. It is based on the following reasonable assumptions:
- If there is one thing on which 99% of Israelis are united, it is the will to live in a state with a solid Jewish majority, whose language and culture are Hebrew.
- This is deeply imbedded in the collective consciousness, partly as a reaction to the persecution of the Jews, the Holocaust and anti-Semitism in countries where Jews were a minority. Of course, all other peoples want the same, too.
- To the vast majority of Israelis, the idea of a bi-national state, which means the elimination of the State of Israel, represents the loss of all they have achieved in the country since the first settlers came in 1882.
Therefore, the advocates of this tactic say: don’t come to the public with slogans of peace, reconciliation and hope. That will not work. The Jewish public hates the Arabs and does not trust them.
Jerusalem… Three Years After Sharon’s Aqsa Visit
By Isabelle Humphries, Islam Online 9/28/2003
I had a silly half asleep, half awake dream that morning that one day my husband and I would be able to live in the beautiful city of Jerusalem. Stupid, because I am a non-Jewish foreigner with Palestinian friends, and he is an Egyptian Arab. How naďve to think that this could be a normal country where any nationality could apply for a work permit and stay for a while in the beautiful land of Palestine.
I was awoken by shouting in the street outside. I stumbled blinking on to the balcony to see a bunch of settlers shaking the metal gates of the Israeli courthouse; that ugly building placed in central East Jerusalem by the occupiers as a warning to the natives.
However on this occasion it was a Jewish “militant” who was being taken into the courthouse. Salim, working in reception, sighed wearily when I inquired what was going on. Apparently it is happening everyday at the moment. A trial for some rabid settler who started to irritate the Israeli authorities. Unlike friends and relatives of Palestinian prisoners, his friends are of course allowed to stand outside with their massive guns strapped across their backs. For this reason there is no picture of them here for you to see. I tried to get closer to snap one for you, but I was wary. Last time I got too close to soldiers interrogating Palestinians, the commander ripped out my film and threatened to smash my camera and confiscate my passport. And we all know that settlers are even more ready with their weapons than soldiers.
Sharon's concept
By Yoel Marcus, Ha'aretz 10/3/2003
Three weeks ago, yours truly pleaded with the prime minister: "Speak to us, Sharon!" In a world where leaders conduct dialogues with their people, explain their moves and furnish information about their goals, Sharon's silence was a mystery.
But when he suddenly decided to grant Rosh Hashanah interviews to anything that moved - afternoon papers, television channels, radio stations - a total of nine interviews, all told, the mystery was solved: The man simply had nothing to say.
With 862 Israelis dead and 6,785 wounded during the three years of the intifada, most of them during Sharon's term; with the socio-economic situation deteriorating by the minute; with the sharp decline in Sharon's trustworthiness in the eyes of the public in nearly every sphere, the prime minister had no tidings and no plan that aroused any desire in him to chat for any length of time with the people.
Sharon's holiday interviews, although they were obviously drafted ahead of time by his advisers, revealed a tired man to whom unpleasant things are happening. His sons' silence at police headquarters. The police investigation of suspected bribe-taking. A catastrophic situation in which small businesses are collapsing by the hundreds and thousands, so that the only thing flourishing around here is unemployment and poverty.
Remembering Sabra and Shatila and atoning
By Ellen Siegel, Daily Star 10/4/2003
Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, begins a 10-day period known as the High Holy Days or Yamim Noraim, a time of reflection, repentance, renewal and prayer that ends with Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. During these days we are asked to examine our past deeds and ask forgiveness for our sins, to remember our history as Jews and to pray for Israel. We believe that on Rosh Hashanah, God has judged us and has recorded the judgment in the Book of Life. On Yom Kippur the Book of Life is closed and sealed. Those who have repented for their sins are granted a good and happy new year.
I love this holiday. It brings back memories of attending synagogue with my father. I would watch lovingly and with great respect as he prayed. He always observed the holiday with all of its rituals. Yet as the years have gone by, the holiday has taken on other memories.
In 1972, I was in Beirut during the holidays. I was there to learn more about the Palestinians and the Arab world. I made contact with the Jewish community and attended services at the Maghen Abraham Synagogue. I was in a refugee camp when word came that Israeli athletes had been killed at the Munich Olympic Games, and I witnessed Israel’s mighty retaliation against the refugee camps. I remember the destruction of innocent lives.
I was again in Beirut in September 1982. This time I had volunteered as a nurse in a hospital in the Sabra refugee camp following Israel’s invasion of Lebanon. It was on Rosh Hashanah that the Israeli Army, under the command of then-Defense Minister Ariel Sharon, stood watch over the camps of Sabra and Shatila as a grotesque massacre of Palestinian and Lebanese men, women and children by the Phalangists took place....
The future can wait
By Gideon Samet, Ha'aretz 10/4/2003
In case you haven't noticed, the future has disappeared. And not necessarily because it looks bad. It's gone. No one talks about it. Even the Hebrew language, an important harbinger of Israeli trends is being spoken today chiefly in the present tense. Previously, it heralded the birth of a confused younger generation that can barely make itself understood with all the "likes" and "you knows" it uses for padding.
Army Radio, for example, has forgotten how to conjugate verbs. The noontime newscasters always say that the chief of staff "says this morning," and the government "decides yesterday." But the real significance of this takeover of the present goes much deeper, of course. Here are a few explanations why the past and the future have only a bright present in this country.
.....Victory, Ya'alon-style: On the other hand, there is always some daring prophet, usually someone with military brawn, like Chief of Staff Ya'alon or Defense Minister Mofaz, who suddenly envisages a delightful future. Ya'alon, who has already announced half a dozen times that the intifada is on its last lap, did some thinking about Yom Kippur this week. "We're going to win the war against the Palestinian Authority like we won in 1973," he said. So for those of you who can't resist looking into the crystal ball, no matter what, my advice is to start running for the bomb shelters. Like 1973? With 2,569 dead, 7,500 wounded and 103 POWs?
Denouncing a show trial
By Khaled Amayreh, Al-Ahram Weekly on-line 2 - 8 October 2003
Imprisoned Fatah leader Marwan Barghouthi delivered an eloquent defense of himself and the Intifada before an Israeli court. -- Speaking before Tel Aviv's District Court on Monday, Marwan Barghouthi, who is being tried on trumped-up charges relating to his leadership role in Fatah, the mainstream faction of the PLO, slammed the Israeli occupation as 'the highest degree of terror'.
'We have been suffering under your sinister military occupation for over 36 years during which you killed us, tortured us, destroyed our homes and usurped our land. You made our life an enduring hell. We have an inherent moral and legal right to resist your occupation of our country. If you were in our shoes, you most certainly would do the same as we are doing. You would resist,' said Barghouthi during an hour-long polemic.
Telling the court that it had no right to prosecute him, Barghouthi reminded Israelis that they had committed incalculable crimes and massacres against the Palestinian people in 1948, which culminated in the expulsion of the bulk of the Palestinian people from its ancestral homeland and dispersal to the four corners of the world.
The war on al-Jazeera
By Dima Tareq Tahboub, The Guardian 10/4/2003
The US is determined to suppress the independent Arab media -- When my husband decided to go to Baghdad, he knew that I would protest. He told me that I was exaggerating the risks; that there was nothing to be afraid of because he was a reporter, an objective witness, neither on this nor that side, and because of that was protected by world protocol. He bid us farewell, apologising for having been so busy. He promised to make it up to me and our daughter, Fatimah, when he returned.
Tareq left for al-Jazeera's Baghdad office on April 5. He called me when he arrived - the journey was hellish, he said. He sounded exhausted, because he was sleeping only three hours a day, between shifts. Back home in Jordan, our life wasn't any better; we could hardly sleep and sat mesmerised in front of the TV waiting for Tareq to appear in a live report so we'd know he was OK.
On the early morning of April 8, I was still awake at 6am and saw his last live report, in which he described the situation in Baghdad as being very calm and quiet. I was relieved and went to sleep, only to wake up one hour later to the sound of my mother crying and yelling.
At first, I didn't know what had happened. I brought a chair and sat trembling in front of the TV. The house was suddenly full of people. I couldn't see or hear anyone. I was waiting for the film to end. I was waiting for the hero to appear and end all evil. I was waiting for the story of my life to end with "and they lived happily ever after". I couldn't cry, I was just listening to the news, seeing again and again all through the day how the Americans bombed the al-Jazeera office and killed my husband.
Is Zionism dead?
By Mohamed Sid-Ahmed, Al-Ahram Weekly on-line 2 - 8 October 2003
The inability to cope with new global and regional givens is causing confusion not only in Arab ranks, but also among Israelis -- On 13 September, shortly after Israel announced that it would act to "remove" Arafat, a delegation from the Israeli peace organisation Gush Shalom called on the beleaguered Palestinian leader at his largely destroyed Ramallah compound. Led by veteran peace activist Uri Avneri, they pledged to form a human shield to protect him against any assassination attempt by the Israeli authorities. According to Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, killing Arafat "is definitely one of the options" under consideration by the Israeli government. Although the outrageous threat to assassinate the democratically elected Palestinian leader did not elicit a similar response from Arab activists, it did provoke a storm of international protest. The UN General Assembly adopted a near unanimous resolution demanding that Israel desist from deporting Arafat or threatening his safety, with only Israel, the United States. Micronesia and the Marshal Islands in the Pacific voting against!
The sense of moral outrage that has been building up in international public opinion at the increasingly savage war Sharon is waging against the Palestinian people is now echoed inside Israel itself, with many prominent Israeli personalities within the ruling elite now openly condemning what they see as the degradation of Israel's Zionist ideals.
Fatah holds Palestine hostage
Editorial, Jerusalem Times 10/2/2003
Even though three weeks have passed since President Yasser Arafat has asked Prime Minister-designate Ahmad Qurei (Abu Ala) to form a government, and even though everyone, including Arafat, wants Abu Ala to rush the formation of the cabinet to take on its responsibilities and duties left void in this critical juncture of the Palestinian battle for survival with the sudden resignation of the former government under Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), the fact remains that the Prime Minister-designate has so far been unable to form what he calls a broad national government that has the support of the entire Fatah camp and the opposition groups, including the Islamic ones.
The reasons for this delay, however, seem to lie within the Fatah camp. Quarrel within the Fatah ranks over who is going to become a minister or who is going to get what post, and who is going to decide policy or who runs the country has left Abu Ala unable to get a consensus among his own political and ruling party, which is expected to dominate the government with at least 15 seats out of 23. The opposition groups, who were expected to give Abu Ala a hard time, have already said they would support his government even without direct participation and the small parties have already named their candidates for the government.
Washington's neo-Trotskyites
By Gamil Mattar, Al-Ahram Weekly on-line 2 - 8 October 2003
The US might be changing political tack but Palestine is the one thing the neo-cons and the moderates agree upon -- A political system that allows governments to change tack as needed without fear of military coups, civil wars or outbursts of public fury is not without merit. I wonder, however, if the changes the US has introduced in its foreign policy over the past few weeks are genuine or just diversionary tactics aimed at shoring up the popularity and credibility of the US and its current administration? Were these changes conducted due to divisions within the governing elite, or as a result of a new consensus between the so-called neo-cons and moderates in both Congress and the State Department? Will these changes encompass US policy on Palestine and the Arab-Israeli conflict, or is this part of US policy immutable, the subject of universal agreement by the US ruling elite, extremists and moderates alike? Because on this issue everyone seems extreme, at least from the Arab point of view. Only a few days ago Secretary Colin Powell spoke with a fair amount of moderation about various US foreign policy issues, but remained adamantly hard-line towards Palestine and the Arab-Israeli conflict.
US policy changes are made according to assessments prepared by US officials working for political agencies, the intelligence services or the White House -- people the likes of Karl Rove, senior advisor to President Bush in the re-election campaign. Here I am restating a simple view -- one repeatedly expressed -- that whatever decisions are passed in Washington affect the domestic affairs of other nations.
|
