http://www.imemc.org/content/view/23324/1/ Following the Scar over Bethlehem Mike Mullenix - Friday, 22 December 2006, 11:09 Yesterday, while I was walking the streets of Bethlehem and Beit Sahour, I was struck by the gleaming white buildings on a hill parallel to the city that is the birthplace of Jesus. While most of the buildings in the Bethlehem area date back for centuries, these seemed to have been produced, in the last few years. Even though in Bethlehem, there is some ongoing construction and some newer buildings, you can sense the history of this, a holy place. As Christmas approaches, there was almost a spiritual awe that overtook me as I walked the streets that Joseph and Mary walked as they themselves struggled up the hills on the day before the birth of Jesus. The mere sense that the footsteps I had taken may have been the same one that Joseph did, as he led Mary to the birthplace of Jesus, simply overwhelmed me. Even though I am not a Christian, the feeling of religious power seemed to make me giddy with excitement. That excitement was tempered and turned to sorrow when I heard it was another Israeli settlement that goes by the name of Har Homa. This hill was formerly known to the Palestinians as Abu Ighnam, which used to be a beautiful hill covered with Olive trees. It now is nothing but a concrete scar. So this morning, I, like the wise men, decided to follow the scar over Bethlehem. As the illegal settlement came closer into view, I was struck by the amount of construction equipment and rooftop cranes, busy at work, continuing construction. At a time when the Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Ohlmert, is talking peace and returning to 1967 border, settlement expansion is moving forward at break neck speed. It suddenly became obvious to me, that no one would invest the amount of money into settlement expansion that Israel is, if it truly is willing to abandon the buildings and return the land to the Palestinians. It was also surprising to me, as I, like most Americans, have been led to believe that settlement activity was frozen, as part of the road map to peace. Obviously, only the Palestinians have to follow the road map, Israel must be using a different map. It is clear to me that the map they are using, is one that shows a greater Israel that stretches from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, and from Syria to Egypt. In speaking with the citizens of Bethlehem, I was also taken aback by the reports that Israel was planning to build an Orthodox church in Har Homa and name it, The Church of the Nativity. I have to admit that I am appalled by the land theft, the theft of resources, the theft of the lives of the Palestinians, but now they also wish to steal history. It was also disconcerting to walk down from Bethlehem, and see a billboard with small children on it and a logo that said - USAID. I thought it was appropriate that when the sign was erected, it was directly in front of Har Homa. To me it was humorous and sad and indicated to me that the only US aid is aiding Israel in building settlements, stealing land and supporting state-sponsored terrorism. America is supporting Israel to the sum of 3.2 billion dollars a year of American tax dollars to commit acts that would make the average American nauseas. While approaching the illegal settlement, the road leading to the area came into view. While I was walking on a rubble strewn road, the perfectly laid, brand new road, surrounded by a barbed wire fence, clearly with warning signs, snaked its way to the settlement. I decided to walk across an olive grove, and see what the signs said. When I got within about 10 feet of the fence, Israeli soldiers started yelling, either in Hebrew or Arabic, neither of which I understand, and released a guard dog. I continued to take pictures and when finished, I then turned away and left the scene. As we approach one of the most holy days in Christendom, I had to think to myself, what would Jesus say, if he was here today. Jesus who was a man who preached love, selflessness, caring for the weak, helping your fellow man and loving each other, and here I am, a witness to the type of hatred, selfishness, lack of love and outright theft and abuse that Israel expresses towards the Palestinians. Two nights before, the Israeli army raided and destroyed a child care center and kindergarten, just 100 yards from where I was staying. I went to the location afterwards and witnessed the type of hatred and terror distributed at the hands of the Israelis, with support and funding from America. Doors destroyed, classrooms demolished and cabinets emptied. The only thing they didn't damage was a picture of Mickey Mouse on the wall. During my stay in Palestine, I have been treated with such kindness and love that at times I have to lower my eyes in embarrassment, knowing the support my government is giving to help Israel terrorize the Palestinians. For anyone who wishes to visit Bethlehem, I have to say, please come, please visit, please support the Palestinian people, as they are the warmest, kindest, most wonderful people I have ever met, anywhere in my entire life. To come to Palestine the only thing you have to fear, is the Israeli Border police, the Israeli soldiers and Israeli hatred.

http://www.imemc.org/content/view/23331/1/
PCHR weekly report on Israeli violations in the occupied territories
Saed Bannoura - IMEMC - Friday, 22 December 2006, 15:15

The Palestinian Center For Human Rights in Gaza published its weekly report on the Israeli violations in the occupied Palestinian territories. Nine Palestinians, including one child, were killed, and twelve including seven children were injured. Period of report December 14 – December 20.

The center also reported that Israel continued the construction of the illegal annexation Wall in the occupied West Bank.

The PCHR stated in its report that the army continued its “Systematic Attack” on Palestinian civilians and their property.

Summary of PCHR report;

Nine Palestinian civilians, including one child, were killed by Israeli military fire. Four of the victims were extra-judicially executed.

Israeli troops carried 30 invasions into Palestinian cities, villages and refugee camps and took prisoner 32 residents including three children.

The Gaza Strip remained isolated by the army as the crossings remained closed, while in the West Bank, soldiers installed additional checkpoints; five residents including one child, were taken prisoner on these checkpoints.

The siege Israel is imposing on the West Bank remained in place, while Jerusalem continued to be off-limits to the Palestinian residents living in the West Bank, and around the Holy City.

The PCHR reported that as the army continued to construct the Wall inside the West Bank, more Palestinian farmland and orchards wee razed especially near Avni Hevetz settlement, east of the northern West Bank city of Tulkarem.

Troops annexed 144.6 Dunams of agricultural land for the purpose of the construction of a new section of the Wall.

The Israeli High Court of Justice also rejected on December 13 a petition against the route of the Wall in al-Rama and Dahiat al-Barid areas, north of East Jerusalem.

The court said in its ruling that the Wall “does not affect Palestinian civilians in that area”.

In a step towards enhancing the Advisory Opinion issued by the International Court of Justice on 9 July 2004, which considers the Annexation Wall illegal, the UN General Assembly endorsed on Friday, 16 December 2006, by an overwhelming majority of votes in favor a resolution to establish a UN registry to handle Palestinian claims of damages resulting from the construction of the Wall in the West Bank.

The Israeli violations since June 25 2006 have claimed the lives of 483 residents, 306 of them were civilians including 92 children and 30 women.

Wounded count since June 25 2006

At least 1628 Palestinians, mostly civilians, including 345 children, 110 women. In the Gaza Strip alone, 1275 Palestinians, mostly civilians, including 345 children, 104 women, 4 paramedics and 7 journalists, have been wounded by the IOF gunfire.

http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=18033
Jeff Halper of ICAHD elucidates the
impossibility of a contiguous Palestinian state
Date: 12 / 12 / 2006 Time: 17:58


Ma'an - On Monday 11 December, a group of journalists, including a representative from the Ma'an English team, gathered at the headquarters of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) for a tour of Israeli settlements around Jerusalem. The tour was led by Jeff Halper, the founder of the committee. Upon arrival, we were told that a house in Jerusalem, that had previously been demolished by the Israeli authorities and then rebuilt by Rabbis for Human Rights, was currently being demolished again.

This proved the introduction to an intense and informative tour through settlement areas whose existence is based on the demolition of Palestinian properties and the illegal annexation of Palestinian land.

The background to house demolitions

Halper began by explaining the background to Israel's policy of house demolitions. He spoke of the stark contrast between Israel's declarations of land concessions and the "facts on the ground," which he said are the irreversible factors of the occupation. Israel will enter into negotiations regarding land, Halper said, but prior to the negotiations, Israel would have decided the outcome through annexing land and irreversibly populating areas. This, Jeff Halper has termed the "matrix of control."

Halper explained how, historically, these policies began with the early Zionist movement who determined borders through 'land transfer' – simply transferring Arabs off the land – and settlements. The Zionist Jews claimed a historical connection to this land: they wanted to revive the Jewish language, institutions and culture. Halper claimed that the resulting conflict was not inevitable but resulted from the occupying population not accommodating the indigenous people.

The Israeli determination to create a one-race, one-religion, one-people state, is deemed by Halper 'tribal nationalism,' similar to a phenomenon prevalent in Eastern Europe and described in Charles Glass' book, 'Tribes with Flags' . Halper stated that Israel, unlike Western democracies, where, ideally, a country belongs to all its citizens, Israel belongs to a specific people: the Jews all over the world. It actively persuades Jews to come into the area to oust the 'Arabs.' If an Israeli chooses to run for political office and declares that Israel belongs to all its citizens, they will be disqualified from running, Halper stated. Every individual running for office has to sign a declaration stating that Israel belongs to the Jews. In a Western democracy, this would qualify as racism, but not in Israel, despite its support from the US and many other Western 'democracies.'

What the Israeli government will have its citizens believe is that there is no conflict; a conflict requires two sides. According to the Israeli government, this is not the case; there is just a bunch of Arabs standing in the way of a historical process of Jews returning to their homeland. A conflict admits that the other side has rights, or even a legitimate claim, but the Israeli government has claimed that there is no conflict and, therefore, there is no solution. So, according to Halper, the whole issue is reduced to 'terrorism.' When the citizens ask: why do they oppose us? The government responds: because they hate us. Ehud Barak said, "There is no partner for peace." The Israeli people, therefore, do not believe that peace is a possibility, Halper said, or that there is anyone to negotiate with.

A technical problem

So Israel is confronted not with a conflict problem, which requires a peaceful solution, but with a technical problem: how to bring Israel security. So the Israeli people elect parties and candidates who will bring them security, because they do not expect that anyone can bring them peace. Sharon was elected and he delivered: 2005 was the quietest year for attacks on Israelis. Sharon was also charged with creating facts on the ground and for this he was granted an unlimited budget. These 'facts' made the creation of a viable Palestinian state impossible.

The former Israeli prime minister, Netanyahu, said, "We're going to give the Arabs, autonomy plus, state minus." By this he meant that Palestinians would have a certain amount of autonomy, but they would ultimately be under Israeli control. The problem was that the Israeli government could not give the Palestinians citizenship because then it would not be a solely Jewish state, and it cannot give them territory, because it is the Jewish holy land. Halper drew a comparison to South Africa, when the ruling authority shoved all the blacks into disparate Bantustans and claimed 87% of the territory for the whites.

The three-stage plan

So, Halper asked, "How long will this occupation last for?" Well, Israel claims that there will be an end to the process. They have declared a three stage process of which we are currently in the third stage. The first stage was to create facts on the ground in the form of settlement blocs. This is the 'cantonization plan,' Halper explained, which makes the project sound quaint and Swiss. The settlements will create Palestinian cantons. When there is a Palestinian state, and Halper says that the Israeli government does intend this outcome, the Palestinians will have no control over their airspace, their communications and nor will they be allowed to enter into foreign alliances without Israeli permission.

The second stage of the process was to get US permission. Sharon went to Washington and obtained a fundamental change in policy that recognised the settlements as a part of Israel, no longer constituting a violation of the Roadmap.

The third, current stage is simply to wrap it all up.

Nof Zion

The tour primarily took us to 'Nof Zion,' a private development of villas, advertised as a 'neighbourhood.' It is part of a process which Halper terms, 'Judaising Jerusalem.' It is sold to its purchasers and inhabitants as a Jewish project, with a Jewish landscape, overlooking Jewish monuments. On a landscape map at the entrance to the settlement, all the Palestinian sites are ignored - the Al Aqsa Mosque, the Old City - and instead the barely visible Mount Zion, and the Temple Mount are marked. Nof Zion overlooks a vast open land owned by Arabs, described as an 'open green space.' Arieh Amit, former chief of police of Jerusalem is one of the core property developers of the Nof Zion project. He has used his contacts obtained in his role as chief of police to enable the project.

The housing shortage

The housing shortage of East Jerusalem is artificial, Halper said. There is a shortage of 25,000 housing units, but the land is available for building on. The Israeli government has generated a freeze in Palestinian property development. Planning is covered by a political agenda; Palestinian development is considered illegal and new properties are issued with a demolition order. So, the majority of Palestinians choose not to build. But 10,000 have been forced to build their properties in order to have somewhere to live and therefore there are 10,000 homes without permits that have demolition orders. A randomised demolition policy serves to perpetuate a fear amongst those with 'illegal' properties and stifle any future development. There is a psychological war going on and 10,000 mothers look out of their windows every morning to check for soldiers and bulldozers before they wake their children.

Between the settlements that encircle Palestinian land, the Israeli authorities are building huge highways that link the settlements of East Jerusalem to complete the siege of Palestinian areas. Many of the construction workers used to be Palestinians who were forced to work towards the annexation of their own peoples' land, but gradually they are being replaced by Romanians.

We left the settlement and entered a Palestinian area, the Abu Dis neighbourhood of Jerusalem, located behind the wall in the occupied West Bank. There is a bleak contrast between the two areas, the artificial clean streets and new white buildings of the settlement and the Palestinian area with old buildings, no rubbish collection, no pavements and no paved roads. The Jerusalem municipality claims that the reason for this is an attempt to maintain 'the village character of Palestinian areas.' Does a 'village character' comprise rubbish-strewn streets?

Yet the hidden taxation of Palestinian people is prevalent. When a Palestinian home is demolished, the house owner receives a bill for $1,500, because it is felt that Israeli citizens should not have to pay for the demolition of 'illegal properties.' When properties are 'illegally' constructed, the individual who constructed the building is sent a bill for $15,000 - $20,000, even before the building is demolished.

We drove past another settlement, paid for by Irving Moskowitz, an American bingo-hall owner who likes to be thought of as a philanthropist but gives millions of US dollars to Israeli settlers. (See http://www.stopmoskowitz.org/ for more information on Moskovitz' exploits).

The construction of the apartheid wall

We drove to an unfinished section of the apartheid wall in East Jerusalem. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, approximately 230,000 Palestinians hold East Jerusalem residency permits and are thus entitled to live and work in Israel, however they are not granted Israeli citizenship. Once the wall is completed, about one-quarter of this number will be located on the east of the wall, forced to live in the West Bank, and they will need to cross the wall to access the services to which they are entitled inside Jerusalem.

Olmert is pushing for the wall's completion by the end of the current Jewish year (next September). We can already see the effects the wall is having on the local people: we watch a Palestinian man push a letter through a hole in the wall to someone on the other side. At the top of the wall, there is barbed wire and an electrified fence, put in place because it was discovered that Palestinian children can get over the wall in very little time by putting their hands and feet in the crevices, climbing up and then attaching a knotted rope at the top and abseiling down.

We also passed a demolished apartment building that once housed 21 families. It was demolished 2 years ago and is now merely a pile of rubble. This house posed no security threat; it was demolished as part of the randomisation policy, to remind the Palestinians that they are not safe wherever they choose to build, whether they live in a Bedouin tent in the rural Negev, or in an apartment building in Jerusalem.

Halper said that 70% of Palestinians live under the poverty line in Jerusalem, so cannot afford housing at Jerusalem prices. This is part of the 'quiet transfer' of the Arabs, pricing them out of Israeli-Jewish areas. But many choose not to leave their ancestral homes or lose their Jerusalem residency. We passed a squat which several families have occupied for the last ten years. It is just a shell of a building: it has no electricity, no running water, no waste disposal, sewage disposal or sanitation.

On the Israeli side of the wall, we witnessed the Israeli authorities' attempts at beautification. We saw a life-size picture of a beautiful Arab home, hiding an actual Arab home. Much of the wall is built in earth colours to make it fit into the landscape. Halper claimed that the idea is to make Israelis not notice its presence. In Arab areas, of course, it is an imposing, grey, concrete monstrosity.

Ma'ale Adummim, a settlement of 32,000

We arrive at the centre point of the tour, a vast settlement, even larger than Tel Aviv, called Ma'ale Adummim. It has the status of a city and has an estimated population of 32,000. It covers 53km of the West Bank and has a further 350,000 properties planned for construction. It stretches from Jericho to Jerusalem and is the most strategic of Israeli settlements. Halper calls it the "anchor of settlement blocs." The Israeli government calls it 'E1', a strategic area of land that serves to prohibit any prospect of a contiguous Palestinian state. Initially, the US government opposed the building of E1 as it annexed too much of the Palestinian territory. But after the Israeli disengagement from Gaza, which served as a kind of political smoke-screen to enable the further development of more strategic settlements, the Israeli government found no opposition to their 'E1' project.

Around us we can see the vandalisation of the holy land: mountains cut in half and new artificial towns built on an ancient landscape. The settlement is dotted with roundabouts, each beautified with an ancient olive tree, for cosmetic purposes only. These are huge olive trees that have been dug up from Palestinian orchards and are hundreds of years old, a family heirloom and an income-generator for Palestinians. The settlement is filled with affordable housing, subsidised by the government and the inhabitants are even given tax breaks to live here. It is a city containing everything a modern Jewish city requires: a shopping mall, a leisure centre, a school, a college and a synagogue. This 'city' has four swimming pools. 85% of the water in the West Bank is consumed by Israelis, Halper reminded us. It has a 'library of peace' because, apparently, this development symbolizes peace. Bedouins, who had been evicted from this area, are now employed by the city municipality to maintain it. 86% of the land needed to build this 'city' was taken from private owners.

On the way back to Jerusalem, we pass land which once contained hundreds of olive trees that have been cut down for security reasons. Only their roots remain. What threat can an olive tree possibly pose?

The UN on Israeli settlements

United Nations Security Council resolution 446 concerns the issue of Israeli settlements in the "Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem." The Security Council determined: "that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East." This resolution was passed in 1979 and continues to be ignored by Israel and other influential states in the international community.

http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=18035
A rare voice: Electronic Intifada interviews the Israeli author Ilan Pappe
Date: 12 / 12 / 2006 Time: 18:47


Pappe is a rare Israeli advocate
of boycott of Israel (MaanImages)
Interview carried out by Christopher Brown for The Electronic Intifada, 11 December 2006

-----
A tenuous ceasefire is holding in the Gaza Strip after almost five months of a heavy dose of "Operation Summer Rain" by the Israeli military.

The showers of missiles, aerial bombardment, military incursions into populated areas over the course of the five month 'rain' storm have left dead more than 457 people, a quarter of them children, and well over 1,000 injured.

Since the summer rains began, many in the Israeli peace camp have remained silent about the ongoing crisis in Gaza and the West Bank. However, one voice remains constant in Israeli circles and continues to speak out despite opposition to the contrary. Professor Ilan Pappe is a professor of history at Haifa University. He has written numerous articles on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and has openly and continuously called for academic as well as cultural boycotts of Israel.

These pronouncements have made Professor Pappe a scion in the eyes of the Israeli government and public, but he continues to move forward in the hope of reconciliation and justice for Palestinians. His latest contribution is the new book The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.

EI contributor Christopher Brown recently spoke over the phone with Professor Pappe about the current situation in Israel/Palestine.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Christopher Brown: Ehud Olmert recently appointed Avigdor Lieberman as deputy prime minister -- a man who some consider a "fascist" in light of his views towards Arabs, and Palestinians in particular. Yet, the world press has barely said anything about his rants; for instance, that all Arabs should be expelled from the territories, and Arab Knesset members be executed for having any contact with the Hamas led government. Meanwhile, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, has his every word recorded for all to hear, regarding the Holocaust being a hoax, the destruction of Israel and the like. Your response?

Ilan Pappe: I think you've put your finger on two very important issues. The first one is the ideology that Avigdor Lieberman subscribes to that is an ethnic cleansing ideology. Someone who believes that the only way to solving the problems in Israel/Palestine is by expelling the Palestinians from Israel and any territory Israel covets.

I think the problem with Avigdor Lieberman is not his own views but the fact that he reflects what most Israeli Jews think, and definitely what most of his colleagues in the Olmert government think but don't dare to say, or don't think is desirable to say for tactical reasons. But I do think that we should be worried about Lieberman, not as an extreme fascist but rather as a person who represents the mood of Israel in 2006.

The second point is the double standard, the hypocrisy that you pointed to where you compared rightly the utterances of Ahmadinejad being repeated and how similar, and worse generalizations and attitudes by Israelis are not heard at all. And I think the reason has to do with the very peculiar standing that Israel has among the western world. [However] not in the eyes of civil society ... [To] most people that live today in the west, [Israel] is a country that violates human rights, civil rights, and both its ideology and polices are not acceptable. But the governments are still very supportive of the state because the world is lead by an American president and a group of people who have a certain point of view, almost a religious point of view, in which such ideas like that of Lieberman fit well.

There's not that much difference between Israeli policy and U.S. policy in Iraq. And I think as long as America is the super-power in the world and Israel is its closest ally, we will continue to see this double standard in the attitudes of governments and in the mainstream media.

CB: Sixty-one Irish academics wrote a public letter in September, calling for a moratorium on EU aid to Israeli universities until Israel abides by international law and basic human rights norms. In addition, a Canadian teachers' union has also called for academic boycotts. Is this an effective way to pressure the Israeli government to address the occupation in a way that brings about justice for the Palestinians?

IP: It is an effective way if it's not only an academic boycott. An academic boycott is only one component in what one cold call a cultural boycott of Israel, because it will be very hard in this globalized world we live in to bring about economic sanctions, which would have been the most effective in forcing a change in Israeli policy.

The second best, and more feasible, [way] is to send a message to Israel from the societies at large that its policies are unacceptable, that as long as it continues to do what it does it cannot be accepted ... It cannot be in the community of civilized nations.

There is both a symbolic and a very political significance to a coordinated reaction by societies in the west for a message, a clear message, that is conveyed in the way of a boycott of divestment or any other symbolic act which says that there is a price tag attached to the policies that you pursue

I think there is both a symbolic and a very political significance to a coordinated reaction by societies in the west for a message, a clear message, that is conveyed in the way of a boycott of divestment or any other symbolic act which says that there is a price tag attached to the policies that you pursue and as long as you pursue these policies, you are not welcomed here. Not as individuals -- you are not welcomed here if you represent a certain ideology, a certain state, and especially if you appear as an official representative of this state. We are not inventing the wheel, of course. The cultural boycott was a very crucial component in the action against Apartheid in South Africa. It was very effective and useful according to people who lived there.

The most important thing to remember about such actions is that they are nonviolent. One has to show that the Palestinians, and the Palestinians have to discover it themselves, that there are nonviolent possibilities in pursuing the struggle against Israeli occupation. Because if they are nonviolent, who could blame the Palestinians for using every desperate means at their disposal to try and stop one of the cruelest and most oppressive occupations in modern times?

CB: What of those [like the Israeli lobby groups] who would say that proposing a cultural and academic boycott is furthering anti-semitism? How do you respond to that?

IP: Three points are important in this connection. The first one should highlight the fact that many progressive and liberal Jews both in the United States and in Europe are involved in the cultural boycott action. In fact, in the name of their Jewish identity, heritage, their understanding of Jewish values, they stood alongside those demonstrators against the violations of human rights in the southern United States, in South America, in South Africa, and in Southeast Asia -- they see no difference when it comes to Israel-Palestine. In fact, in this case, even though it's a Jewish state that violates human rights, it does not change their position. Whoever is the violator, they should stand against them.

The second [point] is, the Israelis are over-using the anti-semitic accusation against anyone who criticizes them. Not only [against] those who call for a boycott, even the mildest criticism of Israel is depicted here as an act of anti-semitism. I think with a good educational network, one could disseminate the views that this is an Israeli tactic that has very little to do with real or actualized upsurges of anti-semitic feelings, which definitely still prevail in some parts of the world. Maybe one or two known anti-semites have joined the wagon, but that doesn't prove anything. The fact is that Israel wants to be immune from any criticism. And the shield it uses is always anti-semitism.

Thirdly, and most important, one should differentiate between Zionism and Judaism. By now we can see after 60 years the implementations of the Zionist ideology on the ground from the Palestinian point of view.

This ideology may have done some good things for Jews around the world, but it is definitely something that does not allow the Palestinians to live in peace or even to live at all on their homeland, and this is Zionism. It has some connection to Judaism, but its not about Judaism. It's about a certain colonial ideology that still, in the 21st century, is ascribed to by a state which is an unfinished project. The State of Israel has not been built properly. As you know, we don't even have final borders.
It's very important to educate people that this is not a Jewish question that we are dealing with; we are dealing with a certain relic of the colonial period

I think it's very important to educate people that this is not a Jewish question that we are dealing with; we are dealing with a certain relic of the colonial period that is still allowed to continue in a post-colonial situation. And as long as it continues as it does, [it] complicates the relationship between the Western world and the Arab world and the Muslim world.

CB: On November 7th the Democratic Party won elections that will allow them to control the Congress of the United States. The Democrats have been critical of the Bush administration's policies regarding the handling of the Iraq war. But the party has reiterated that the relationship between the U.S. and Israel would not change. Is this policy the best course of action for both countries, much less the Palestinians?

IP: Well, the results of the mid-term elections are good news from many aspects for the American public. But I don't think [the elections] bring any good news to this part of the world. In other words, I don't think that the shift in the balance of power in both houses would change American policy towards Palestine. It may change, and it should change of course, American policy in Iraq. But I think the Democratic Party is as committed to protecting Israel at the expense of the Palestinians as was the Republican administration. I don't think that in the foreseeable future we are going to see any fundamental change in American policy towards Israel.

You ask whether it should. Of course it should. It should because if [the Democratic Party] is loyal to the new perspective it brings to American politics -- the idea that Americans should have some inhibitions in international behavior, that the use of force in Iraq was wrong, and that there is a problem with the American image and standing in the world -- if indeed this is the message of the Democrats to American politics, then I think they should pay attention to fact that the Americans' standing and position in the world is not only affected not by the invasion of Iraq, but also the unconditional support that America gives to Israel at the expense of the Palestinians.

I think that they should realize that only in a change in the attitude towards Israel and a much more honest brokerage of the conflict can really bring constructive change in the relationship between the United States and the Arab world; the Muslim world is, after all, one quarter of the world's population.

CB: Peace Now [an Israeli Peace organization], has found that approximately 40 percent of the settlements, including long-standing communities, are built on private Palestinian land and not on state-owned land. Peace Now was given this information from a source inside the Civil Administration who wanted to expose the wide-scale violations of private Palestinian property rights by the government and the settlers. Do you believe that there are more in the government who disagree with the treatment of the Palestinians and are willing to speak out?

IP: Maybe there are more but I believe that this is not enough. This kind of criticism by Peace Now about the piece of information that they leaked to us is very important. But don't forget for one moment any square inch that has been taken by Israel is an illegal occupation, not only the 40 percent that was private land.
The problem in Israel is [that] between Peace Now [and Avigdor] Lieberman, contrary to what people are saying, there isn't that much of an ideological distance

It may be a starker violation but the whole Israeli presence there is a violation of human rights and civil rights. What is needed is much more than this kind of criticism. The problem in Israel is [that] between Peace Now [and Avigdor] Lieberman, contrary to what people are saying, there isn't that much of an ideological distance. It's a tactical question of how best to ensure a Jewish state with a vast demographic majority is not exclusive.

Lieberman says, let's take any territory we need and achieve that goal by downsizing the number of Arabs living there. Peace Now says, no, let's take less land and downsize the land rather than the population and then we can have the coveted exclusive supremacist state. Both positions are morally and politically wrong and unacceptable because at the end of the day you have 20 percent to 30 percent of [Israel's population comprised of] Palestinians, even in the smallest state that Peace Now covets and Peace Now is not willing to see them as equal citizens.

And people, even in Peace Now, would put the idea of a Jewish state above any other failure, democratic or liberal. So I think that even if I would have found in the government or the administration people who want a cleaner mode of occupation, a more legitimized occupation, I would of course welcome it. But I'm warning [that] we've been there before. These people have even been in government and they didn't make any change because the reason for the ongoing conflict between Israel/Palestine is not because Israel occupies parts of the West Bank and Gaza and is not willing to give them back. The reason we have the conflict is the Zionist ideology. This is where it starts and this is where it ends. As long as the vast majority of Jews in Israel subscribes this ideology in its present interpretation, I'm afraid we will not see peace and reconciliation coming to this land.

CB: Finally, Ilan Pappe, what can people who hope for the security of both the Israelis and Palestinians do?

IP: Well I think everybody has his or her role to play, especially people who care; either those that belong to Israel-Palestine or care about Israel/Palestine. I think the Palestinians have their role of resistance; the progressive forces inside Israel continue to try and educate and change the point of view of their compatriots.

But society outside has to play the same role that the anti-Apartheid movement played in the West during the heyday of Apartheid. We need a strong lobby inside the western world -- especially in the United States, but also in Europe. That [lobby] would send a very clear message to Israel that these polices and ideologies are not acceptable, especially if you want to be part of the democratic world, and we need you to change your policy, the ideological nature of the state, and have a much more democratic society on the ground.

Israel needs a wake-up call. Israelis don't know that this is what the world thinks about them and I think that civil societies around the world can be the alarm clock for them, and they should be the alarm clock.

---
from the Electronic Intifada

http://www.imemc.org/content/view/23318/1/
UN General Assembly Reiterates Palestinian Sovereignty over the Palestinian areas
Rami Al-Meghari-IMEMC & Agencies - Thursday, 21 December 2006, 17:40

United Nations General Assembly endorsed unanimously Wednesday a resolution that acknowledges the Palestinian people’s permanent sovereignty over the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) including the Gaza Strip, West Bank and East Jerusalem.

164 UN member states voted for the resolution, 6 rejected and 9 others abstained including Canada, Kameron, Kut Divora and Uganda.

As of this year, such a resolution has gained 8 further votes compared with the years 2005 and 2004.

The resolution has been based on the UN Security Council’s resolutions 242 of 1967, 465 of 1980, 497 of 1981, the United Nations’ charter, the Fourth Geneva Convention for the protection of the unarmed civilians in times of war as well as all other relevant human rights conventions.

The General Assembly also expressed concern over exploitation by the Israeli occupation authority, referred to as the ‘occupying power’, of Palestinian natural resources of the oPt, including farm lands, uprooting trees along with the devastation of Palestinian infrastructure.

The UN body also emphasized the need to swiftly resume the Middle East peace process on basis of the UN Security Council’s resolutions and the road map peace plan, leading to a two-state solution for Palestine and Israel and a final compromise at all other tracks including the Syrian and the Lebanese.

According to international legitimacy, mainly the United Nations, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem are occupied Palestinian territories, from which Israel must withdraw immediately. Since 1967, Israel has been imposing a strict military control over such territories, with an Apartheid Wall recently, growing settlement buildings in the West Bank and continued closure of the Gaza Strip, despite unilateral disengagement in 2005.