The golden rulemakers
By Gary Younge, The Guardian, November 11, 2002
It was founded on humanitarian principles, but now the interests of money and power are driving the UN: When Yemen voted against attacking Iraq in 1990, the American government described its vote as "the most expensive 'no' in history". Yemen may have been a member of the United Nations security council, but with a per capita income of around 2% of that in the United States, its diplomatic rights were no match for the dollar's might. Following its refusal to back the first Gulf war, America cut off aid and pushed to make it a virtual pariah state. As the UN's chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, packs his bags for Baghdad following Friday's security council resolution, the UN risks being used as a fig leaf for the military and economic pretensions of the US and Britain.

Ominous signs
Editorial, Arab News, November 11, 2002
Little can contribute to a Middle East peace following the announcement of early general elections in Israel. The American “road map” leading to a Palestinian state and security for the Israelis — already a daunting task to implement — now faces certain delay and an uncertain outcome. Before the elections, though, comes even more uncertainty as Prime Minister Ariel Sharon must first fight to defend his leadership of the Likud Party against the challenge from former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The two have already embarked on a course of confrontation that is expected to last until their fate is decided at Likud primaries later this month. It promises to be a tough campaign as seen by the uncompromising stand already taken by Netanyahu after he was sworn-in last week as interim foreign minister. “I promise you one thing,” Netanyahu told Israeli television. “By the end of 2003 there will not be a PLO terror state created here.”

Easing the tug of war
By Ghassan Khatib, BitterLemons, November 11, 2002
The Palestinians in Israel have always been a very sensitive and even explosive component of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The early intention of Jewish forces, in particular their terrorist gangs, was to expel as many indigenous Palestinians as possible in order to create a pure Jewish state. Later, official Israel denied any intentions to push Palestinians outside by force, but many Israeli historians have documented the direct and deliberate role of Jewish terrorist groups in acting to get rid of as many Palestinians as possible. The second significant episode in shaping the dominant concerns of Palestinians in Israel was their treatment at the hands of the Israeli state in the fifties and sixties, in particular. These measures included unusual and unnecessary security steps forcing Palestinians in Israel to live under curfew with severe restrictions on movement from one village to another, as well as the suppression of any political activities and the quashing of freedom of expression. The racially discriminatory practices of the state of Israel are today expressed in the unfair provision of state services, beginning with the policy of expropriating or confiscating Palestinian land and ending with lack of equal access to education, employment and other services.

The Palestinian citizens of Israel and the strategy of conflict resolution
By Majid Al-Haj, BitterLemons, November 11, 2002 
Since October 2000, Palestinian-Israeli relations have gone through a deep crisis. This crisis may lead either to a total deterioration in the whole area or paradoxically form a catalyst for peace. As other cases of deep conflict in the world show, the “status quo option” is not viable. There are many indications that we are approaching some sort of resolution of the conflict, which might be temporary (once again transitional arrangements before the next explosion) or a more comprehensive resolution with the backing of Arab countries and the world community. In any event, there is an overriding need to speak about the dynamics of relationships between the external conflict and internal conflicts within both Palestinian and Israeli societies. In what follows, we will briefly delineate the repercussions of possible settlement of the Israel-Arab-Palestinian conflict on Jewish-Arab relations in Israel and the measures that should be taken in order to create a reasonable atmosphere, which may serve as a stimulus for peace.

Sounds of slumber from Washington
By Akiva Eldar, Ha'aretz, November 11, 2002
Ten years ago the slogan "Money for the settlers, or money for the weak," topped the political agenda on the eve of elections. At the time the right-wing prime minister Yitzhak Shamir refused to freeze the settlement enterprise, despite American threats to hold back $10 billion in loan guarantees to help with the absorption of new immigrants. Then too the prime minister's rival on the left, Yitzhak Rabin, promised "to reorder the priorities" of both the political and security, and the economic and social agendas. Then too, in the context of a coming conflict in the Gulf, the United States was especially keen on promoting a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. And then too, Israel's settlement policy stood in direct confrontation with that of the United States and its interests in the region.

One Person, One Vote, One State: The Only Hope for Lasting Peace in Palestine-Israel
By Roger H. Lieberman, Palestine Chronicle, November 10, 2002
NEW JERSEY (PC) - Growing up in New Jersey I have been blessed with the opportunity to interact with men, women, and children of diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds. The ideal of a democratic, morally conscious society, open to people whose origins span the globe - all Americans, equal before the law - has always been dear to me. The recognition that a state must serve all who have made their homes in territory under its governance - not just members of a particular race or creed or tribe - has become almost universal in my country. Thus I am mystified at why the United States government, and much of the media and intellectual community, has persistently funded, endorsed, and made alibis for a government that so flagrantly flaunts this principle. I am referring, of course, to America's ubiquitous, one-sided, downright reprehensible backing for the State of Israel, and all its discriminatory policies.

Bush's "Clean Shot" at War
By Robert Fisk, Dissident Voice, November 10, 2002
"A clean shot" was The Washington Post's revolting description of the murder of the al-Qa'ida leaders in Yemen by a US "Predator" unmanned aircraft. With groveling approval, the US press used Israel's own mendacious description of such murders as a "targeted killing" -- and shame on the BBC for parroting the same words on Wednesday. How about a little journalistic freedom here? Like asking why this important al-Qa'ida leader could not have been arrested. Or tried before an open court. Or, at the least, taken to Guantanamo Bay for interrogation. Instead, the Americans release a clutch of Guantanamo "suspects", one of whom -- having been held for 11 months in solitary confinement -- turns out to be around 100 years old and so senile that he can't string a sentence together. And this is the "war on terror"?