An Interview with Bill and Kathleen Christison
By JEFF GORE - October 23, 2009
In 1979, Kathleen and Bill Christison retired from the CIA, where they worked as analysts. Ever since then, they've had an unorthodox retirement, to say the least. With only a couple relatively brief interludes, they've dedicated what could have been years of relaxation to fighting perhaps the most uphill battle imaginable: trying to bring the plight of the Palestinians to the public eye. The newest addition to the Christison canon is Palestine in Pieces: Graphic Perspectives on the Israeli Occupation, published in August by Pluto Press. During this decade the Christisons have made a habit of visiting Palestine at least once per year; they returned from their most recent trip earlier this month. Since the couple warned against the potentially endless nature of a conversation over the phone, I elected to send them a few questions via email, which they were gracious enough to answer.
Jeff Gore: Kathleen: In a recent interview with Laura Flanders on GRITtv, you said that based on your travels to Palestine over the past half-decade or so, you believe the situation of the Palestinians “has gotten worse, every year.” Given that the interview was conducted before your latest trip, would you still say this today, considering the downgrade or closure of several checkpoints this year, and, according to the New York Times, “a sense of personal security and economic potential...spreading across the West Bank?”
Kathleen Christison: This is an extremely important question. The supposed closure of checkpoints throughout the West Bank and what is being widely touted as an opening of economic potential are a fiction—a huge scam perpetrated by Israel and the U.S., intended to make it look to the world as though Palestinians are now prospering, that the Palestinian economy is thriving and Palestinian society is now content, all thanks to the beneficence and good will of the Israelis. The media—not just the New York Times, but other print and electronic media and various opinion-molders like Thomas Friedman—have fallen for this scam and indeed have been knowingly participating in it.
The objective is to delude us all, including the Palestinians, into thinking that a new era of peace and prosperity is dawning in the West Bank because Palestinians have stopped terrorism and Israel has responded in good faith by easing restrictions, all in contrast to the situation in Gaza, where all the misery is supposedly the fault of Hamas because it refuses to recognize Israel and refuses to end violence. We are meant to forget that the occupation in the West Bank and East Jerusalem continues and is continually being reinforced, that Israel launched an unprovoked murderous assault on Gaza early this year, that Israel continues to dominate every aspect of Palestinian daily lives.
In actual fact, things are no better for Palestinians in the West Bank, and in many cases they are worse. We’ve made two trips to Jerusalem and the West Bank this year, in April-May and October, and we’ve seen no substantial improvement in the situation Palestinians face on a daily basis. Despite the supposed removal of many checkpoints, most remain, and all can be reimposed at a moment’s notice. OCHA, the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, which has kept careful track for the last several years of Israeli movement obstacles, just issued a report indicating that the numbers of obstacles, which include checkpoints, roadblocks, earth mounds across roads, and gates blocking roads, had been reduced in recent months hardly at all—from 618 earlier in the year to 592 now. OCHA also suggests that there’s a good deal of subterfuge in Israeli reporting: although the Israelis promised the removal of 100 roadblocks by the end of Ramadan and issued GPS coordinates for these supposedly vanishing obstacles, OCHA did an on-the-ground survey and could confirm the removal of only 35. In numerous instances, the Israeli GPS locations weren’t even in the West Bank.
It’s true that there has been some improvement in a few showcase locations. The cities of Jenin and Nablus are rebuilding after the terrible destruction there during the Israeli siege of 2002 and 2003, and there’s a bit more economic prosperity. Even in Hebron, which lives under siege from the most vicious of Israeli settlers, some market areas are reopening. The most notorious checkpoint, Huwara just south of Nablus, has been opened up somewhat so that Palestinian cars may now drive through and people no longer have to walk through. But this is classic colonialism, designed to make things just enough better to take the edge off the anger of the colonized: you fill the natives’ stomachs and hope they become tame, that they won’t want to resist your oppression, that they’ll forget that they have no freedom, that they still live under oppression, always at the mercy of a colonialist oppressor who has no intention of relinquishing his domination or ending his exploitation of the oppressed and their resources.
The “model cities” in Jenin and Nablus and the “model checkpoints” such as Huwara are the exceptions in the Palestinians’ grinding life under occupation. Movement from one area to another is still severely restricted. Most West Bank Palestinians still cannot visit Jerusalem. Those who have work permits to enter Jerusalem must still wait for hours in endless lines to enter the city and pass through multiple security checks, including biometric checks that leave a record of when they entered the city and whether they have exited by the end of the day. Israeli settlements continue to be built and expanded on confiscated Palestinian land. The road network connecting the settlements to each other and to Israel, on which Palestinians may not drive, continues to be expanded, cutting off increasing numbers of Palestinians from each other. Palestinians are still harassed and physically attacked by aggressive Israeli settlers. Olive groves and other agricultural land continue to be confiscated, destroyed, burned, either by settlers or by bulldozers clearing land for more settlements or for the Separation Wall. Construction of the Wall is proceeding, cutting off more Palestinian land from its owners.
Non-violent protesters who demonstrate regularly against the Wall continue to be shot and killed or imprisoned. While newly trained, spiffily uniformed Palestinian security forces patrol city streets during the day, Israeli forces control the night and therefore control the entire territory. They conduct middle-of-the-night raids in villages throughout the West Bank, arresting young Palestinian men on suspicion merely of being Palestinian, beating or even shooting anyone who resists. In Jerusalem, where the Netanyahu government is currently concentrating its harshest oppression, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians continues quite openly. Palestinian homes continue to be demolished for no other reason than that they are in Israel’s way—in the way of the Wall’s advance, or of the next new or expanding Israeli settlement, or of Israel’s efforts to depopulate the land of Palestinians and create a Jewish majority. Palestinian families continue to be evicted from their homes so that Israeli settlers can live in them.
The catalog of horrors is long, and it is not ending, despite the hypocritical claims by the New York Times and others of an increased “sense of personal security,” despite all efforts by Netanyahu and the Obama administration to make us think peace has come. The occupation continues, and more harshly than ever. As Israeli journalist Amira Hass recently put it, the occupation “completely shrinks people’s lives,” and this has not changed.
JG: What are the advantages and disadvantages of being a white Westerner traveling in the Occupied Territories?
Kathleen & Bill Christison: Although we feel very comfortable among Palestinians, and have always felt very welcome, at the same time we always feel some embarrassment because we’re there basically as voyeurs watching other people’s misery. In fact, we feel we’re helping by bringing the Palestinians’ story, the facts of the occupation and what it means for Palestinian daily lives, to public attention in the West, but it’s still hard to get away from the feeling that we’re invading other people’s privacy by watching them line up at checkpoints and taking pictures of them, or watching them sob as their homes are demolished. Or, as happened to us once, talking to a man scheduled for surgery in Jerusalem who had been waiting for days for an Israeli permit to get into the city and who cried as he told us his story and asked us to take a picture of the medical certificate that attested to his need for surgery and should have provided his entrée to the city. We’ve told his story, but we knew, and he knew, that we couldn’t do anything to help him and that we would ultimately be able to go home to our comfortable lives in the U.S. while he waits—waits for his permit, waits for his freedom, waits for a decent life.
This is the principal reason, incidentally, that we’ve decided we won’t take any royalties or other profits from our new book, but will donate them to organizations that we feel most benefit the Palestinians. No book on the Palestinians will ever make much money in the first place, sad to say, but the idea that we personally should make any money because we’ve been witness to other people’s misery is unacceptable to us.
JG: I've always thought that the strongest argument for the two-state solution -- and against the one-state solution -- was Michael Neumann's assessment of Israel as unwilling to “abolish itself.” On the other hand, Kathleen, you've written critically about Neumann's remarks and advocated a single democratic state in Palestine. Ruling out any precipitous fall in American power, any miraculous surge in power of the Palestinian governing body, or God forbid, any catastrophic regional war, in what scenario can you envision Israeli Jews consenting to a bi-national secular state; to changing their flag, national anthem, even the name of their country?
KC: I have to say I object to the premise of Michael Neumann’s argument—that we should or should not pursue one or another solution simply on the basis of whether it meets Israel’s desires. I think, on the contrary, that we should pursue a solution for no other reason than that it is just, for both Palestinians and Israeli Jews. A two-state solution—which at its very best would give Palestinians a state in less than one-quarter of their original homeland and at it most likely would give them a non-viable, non-contiguous state in little pieces constituting quite a bit less than one-quarter—is simply not just. I recognize that realists like Michael disdain “dreamers,” as he’s called one-state advocates, as naïve and maybe other-worldly to be talking about unrealistic, impractical concepts like justice. But I don’t think, first of all, that it’s really so naïve or even futile to advocate and work for justice—justice does prevail on occasion. And, secondly, I think perpetrating gross injustice is ultimately totally impractical and cannot endure: a two-state solution, to my mind, is so grossly unjust—not to say also unlikely because Israel doesn’t want that either—that it is also impractical.
So my preference, if we’re faced with a situation in which Israel is not willing at the moment to “abolish itself” but is also not willing to give the Palestinians anything, not even a non-viable, cantonized state, is to work for the most just solution, which is a single democratic state in which Palestinians and Jews would live as equal citizens with equal access to the instruments of government and a constitution that would guarantee the equality of everyone. (I would not, by the way, call this a “bi-national” state, which I see as a state that maintains some de jure separation between the two peoples. This is something I fear would perpetuate the power imbalance and perpetuate Jewish domination of Palestinians. Although nothing would be easy for the Palestinians no matter what solution is pursued, a single integrated state with constitutional guarantees of equality would more readily assure them of some kind of political and economic parity.)
Those like Michael who argue on the basis of what Israel would not want to do are arguing from the premise that might makes right, that might makes a reality that we cannot counter, and that simply because the powerful party in this conflict doesn’t want something, it won’t come to be and none of us should even speak about it. This is absurd. Who would have expected in the mid-1980s when liberals throughout the world were fighting a seemingly futile battle of sanctions against apartheid South Africa, that the very powerful white leadership of that country would decide in the next few years to “abolish itself”? Who would have expected at that same time that the very powerful Soviet Union would “abolish itself”?
My crystal ball isn’t clear enough to be able to lay out a precise scenario, but I believe that Zionism and the racism and injustice inherent in it simply cannot endure and that Israel will collapse of its own weight at some time in the future, hopefully in our lifetime. No empire has lasted in history, and gross, systematic injustice does not last either. I also give Jews greater credit for having a conscience, for caring about justice and caring about the injustices perpetrated against the Palestinians in the name of world Jewry, than Michael or others like Uri Avnery do, who criticize us one-staters because we don’t seem to realize, as they say, that Israeli Jews will always want to screw the Palestinians if they all live in the same state. I just don’t buy that. If white South Africans and Soviet appartchiks could relinquish power voluntarily and non-violently, then I believe Jews will ultimately be led by their consciences to do the same.
My bottom line is, I don’t think we can or should shut our mouths about a just peace settlement—or, even more importantly, deliberately limit Palestinian options by refusing to speak about the possibilities—simply because Israel might not happen to like it, which is what I see as the principal argument of the anti-one-staters.
JG: Similarly, in your travels, what impression have you gotten from Palestinians as to which solution they advocate?
KBC: It’s hard to make a definitive judgment on this, but it is fair to say that support for a one-state solution is growing among Palestinians. Polls of Palestinian opinion still show this support in the minority, but growing. Many Palestinians whom we’ve talked to still favor two states and specifically reject one state, either because they fear Jewish political and economic domination in a single state or because they are closely enough connected to the Palestinian Authority that they are unwilling even to think of any alternative to the PA’s official support for two states, which is the position that gives them entrée into negotiations and whatever favors are bestowed by the U.S. But an increasing number of our acquaintances now more explicitly favor one state. They are increasingly dissatisfied with the PA’s position and its acceptance of the two-state solution, all of which they see as collaboration with the Israeli oppressor and a betrayal of fundamental rights in return for no benefit whatsoever for the Palestinians.
Much of Palestinian thinking is formed more around the possibilities than strictly on the basis of preferences, which is to say that as long as the two-state solution was the only alternative held out to the Palestinians, support for this option was quite high, but the more the possibility of a one-state solution is talked about—and, of course, the more the likelihood of a real, independent Palestinian state ever being formed in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem has receded—the more Palestinians are willing to think about and advocate a single state. As it has become clearer and clearer to the Palestinians that Israel under its current leadership has no intention of ever withdrawing from the occupied territories and no intention of allowing Palestinians any sovereignty in Jerusalem, support for a single state in all of Palestine has grown. More importantly, Palestinians increasingly recognize that their demand for the right of return is ultimately incompatible with a two-state solution, in which only limited numbers of refugees, if any, would be allowed to return to their homes and land inside Israel and the vast majority would have to be accommodated inside the tiny Palestinian state. It’s unlikely that an enduring peace settlement will ever be forged that does not address and provide a fair solution of the refugee issue and the right of return.
JG: In my recent interview with Jonathan Cook, he spoke highly of the Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement, saying that in his view, “there is no way to end the occupation unless Israelis are made to see that they will pay a heavy price for its continuance.” Would you agree with this? If so, how would you respond to criticism about harming “innocent” Israelis with a blanket boycott or sanctions? Or is there even such a thing as an “innocent” Israeli when it comes to the issue of Palestinian suffering?
KBC: We do indeed agree with Jonathan on the wisdom of BDS and the notion that Israelis must be made to pay a heavy price for continuing the occupation if there’s to be any hope of ever ending it. As to whether “innocent” Israelis might be harmed by a blanket application of BDS, we would ask where one should draw the line on what harms Israelis. Does it harm innocent Israelis to cut off or cut back U.S. aid to Israel—which would be the ultimate sanction? Under a long-term ten-year agreement, the U.S. gives, not lends, Israel $3 billion of military aid every year—in cash, at the beginning of each fiscal year—plus additional increments of economic aid and loan guarantees on a year-by-year basis. Aid of this magnitude and given under these terms obviously greatly helps the Israeli economy. It also gives Israel virtually total impunity to commit whatever atrocities it wants against the Palestinians without fear that the U.S. will cut it off. So if we’re worried about harming individual Israelis, we have to worry about the guy in an electronics shop who is harmed economically because he no longer gets the subcontract for some airplane or tank part, but we also have to worry about the innocent Palestinians—the literally millions of innocent Palestinians—in Gaza particularly, but elsewhere as well, who are being killed by those airplanes and tanks and other military equipment that Israel uses with the impunity granted it by the U.S. If blind justice weighs these two groups of innocents and the harm done to them on her scales, we believe she would conclude that the “innocent” Israeli is after all not so innocent.
Although it may be clearer how the scales should balance when we’re talking about military aid, the same factors must be weighed when we deal with boycotts of non-military products and academic and cultural boycotts, and we think the same conclusions must be reached: ending Palestinian suffering at Israel’s hands is a more worthy, more just objective than saving the economic hide or the jobs of any Israelis. Maybe you’re right that there is no such thing as an “innocent” Israeli when it comes to Palestinian suffering. In a democratic state—democratic at least for Israeli Jews—all Jewish Israelis are responsible for the injustices and the killing and the atrocities visited upon the Palestinians. They elected the governments that have carried out these policies and actions; they have failed to put an end to them; they live in a state established on the suffering and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians over 60 years ago. We Americans are just as responsible for the killing and atrocities visited by U.S. forces on Iraqi and Afghan civilians and in past eras on civilians in places like Vietnam, and we would not claim that sanctions against the U.S. were unfair, even if these caused us to suffer personally. Perhaps this should be the criterion: that innocence lies in greater measure with the people being oppressed and bombed and occupied, and we must be more concerned with ending harm to them than with causing incidental harm to individuals in the oppressor-occupier nation.
JG: In your new book you briefly compare Israel's treatment of the Palestinians to the U.S's treatment of Native Americans. That said, I was wondering if you had an opinion on how to respond to one of the peskier questions addressed specifically to Americans that nobody seems to be able to answer. The question is: what right do I have to criticize Israel as a “colonial” or “settler” state when I am a descendant of colonists and settlers myself, enjoying the spoils of theft from an indigenous people?
KBC: This is indeed a difficult question to answer, and there is for sure a measure of hypocrisy in criticizing Israel without also rectifying our own nation’s sins. But we don’t believe that one injustice, even when perpetrated by our own country, imposes an obligation to remain silent about another injustice or requires that we stop working on Israel’s injustice until we’ve resolved the United States’ unjust policies. In fact, having acquired a conscience about what our country did, and continues to do, to our own native population has given us, we feel, a bit more moral authority from which to demand that the United States stop giving Israel the means—the political, military, and economic support—with which to commit a similar atrocity against the Palestinians.
We all pick our battles in this life, and we happen to have picked support for Palestinian rights as our battle. We did this initially from a position of considerable—and, we would acknowledge, shameful—ignorance about the history of U.S. treatment of Native Americans, but our focus on the Palestinians has helped open our eyes to the Native Americans’ situation, and we’re now more conscious of the need to work for justice for both peoples. If we personally continue to devote more of our attention to the Palestinians, this is because it’s a more easily resolvable situation and because we’ve already invested 30-plus years of our education and work in it. But to repeat, whatever inequity exists in our own allocation of attention, whatever hypocrisy exists in demanding of Israel what the U.S. has not done for its own native population, does not put any obligation on us to give Israel carte blanche to continue its oppression unopposed.
JG: Kathleen, in the GRITtv interview you described losing interest in the conflict for a few years before returning to it due to its "haunting" nature. Could you describe that in more detail, or in other words, what has compelled you to keep writing on behalf of the Palestinians for three decades, despite their situation growing increasingly worse over that time period?
KC: Maybe it’s precisely because the Palestinians’ situation has grown worse that I’ve been so “haunted” and so compelled to continue working on this issue. Although I had worked on the Palestinian question for several years before Bill and I left the CIA in 1979, I never actually met a Palestinian until the late 1980s, when I began interviewing Palestinian Americans about their attitudes toward Israel—which ultimately led to my book The Wound of Dispossession. It was only by doing these interviews, and doing a lot of reading on the history of Palestine-Israel, that I really learned the Palestinian story. And I was and continue to be shocked at how horribly that story has been distorted in the United States and the rest of the West. For me—and for Bill too—it’s been a kind of crusade to bring this story to greater public attention. The Palestinians are such a graceful people and the injustices perpetrated against them for six decades and more have been so horrific—and so deliberate—that we both feel we can’t give up.
JG: For those who don't have time or means to visit Palestine, but want to help the Palestinians, what would you suggest is the best thing that they can do?
KBC: This may be the most difficult of your questions to answer. The usual route, talking to one’s congressmen, is an almost totally futile pursuit on this issue. The Israel lobby, in all its aspects, has Congress so sewed up that it’s almost impossible to get any attention if one is talking about Palestinian rights or demanding concessions from Israel or advocating anything other than the current so-called international consensus on two states. We both think that at the popular level in the U.S. there’s been an upsurge in support for the Palestinians and a greater willingness to criticize Israel. This has been particularly true since Israel’s assault on Gaza early this year. But so far this change in viewpoint hasn’t reached up to the political level, meaning in the administration and Congress, because there simply aren’t enough people willing to mobilize, visit congressmen, write letters to the editor, etc. But this is what’s needed. We need to educate ourselves on the issue so that we can educate others, join whatever solidarity organizations exist in our areas, gain some political muscle by increasing our numbers, work together, lobby congressmen in numbers, write letters to the editor, force the media to pay attention to what’s happening on the ground, call out Israel’s supporters everywhere for their moral blindness, sign on to the many petitions and letters to politicians that circulate on the internet. In general, make ourselves known, make our position known, and make noise!
Jeff Gore is a freelance journalist based in Athens, GA. He is a frequent contributor to the Athens weekly Flagpole Magazine and has also written articles for Dissident Voice and The Comment Factory. His journal of his summer spent in Palestine can be read at holylanddispatches.blogspot.com . He can be reached at jgore00@gmail.com.
Source
Showing posts with label Solidarity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Solidarity. Show all posts
October 23, 2009
Why I disrupted Olmert
By Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 23 October 2009
If former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had merely been a diplomat or an academic offering a controversial viewpoint, then interrupting his 15 October speech at University of Chicago's Mandel Hall would certainly have been an attempt to stifle debate (Noah Moskowitz, Meredyth Richards and Lee Solomon, "The importance of open dialogue," Chicago Maroon, 19 October 2009). Indeed, I experienced exactly such attempts when my own appearance at Mandel Hall last January, with Professor John Mearsheimer and Norman Finkelstein, was constantly interrupted by hecklers.
But confronting a political leader suspected of war crimes and crimes against humanity cannot be viewed the same way.
The report of the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict last winter, headed by Judge Richard Goldstone, found that Israel engaged in willful, widespread and wanton destruction of civilian property and infrastructure, causing deliberate suffering to the civilian population. It found "that the incidents and patterns of events considered in the report are the result of deliberate planning and policy decisions" and that many may amount to "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity." If that proves true, then the individual with primary responsibility is Ehud Olmert, who, as prime minister and the top civilian commander of Israel's armed forces, was involved in virtually every aspect of planning and execution.
The killings of more than 3,000 Palestinians and Lebanese during Olmert's three years in office are not mere differences of opinion to be challenged with a polite question written on a pre-screened note card. They are crimes for which Olmert is accountable before international law and public opinion.
Israel, unlike Hamas (also accused of war crimes by Goldstone), completely refused to cooperate with the Goldstone Mission. Instead of accountability, Olmert is, obscenely, traveling around the United States offering justifications for these appalling crimes, collecting large speaking fees, and being feted as a "courageous" statesman.
In their 20 October email to the University of Chicago community, President Robert Zimmer and Provost Thomas Rosenbaum condemned the "disruptions" during Olmert's speech. "Any stifling of debate," they wrote, "runs counter to the primary values of the University of Chicago and to our long-standing position as an exemplar of academic freedom."
Was it in order to promote debate that the University insisted on pre-screening questions and imposed a recording ban for students and media? In the name of promoting debate, will the University now invite Hamas leader Khaled Meshal -- perhaps by video link -- to lecture on leadership to its students, and offer him a large honorarium? Can we soon expect Sudan's President Omar Bashir to make an appearance at Mandel Hall?
When I and others verbally confronted Olmert, we stood for academic freedom, human rights, and justice, especially for hundreds of thousands of students deprived of those same rights by Olmert's actions.
During Israel's attack on Gaza last winter, schools and universities were among the primary targets. According to the Goldstone report, Israeli military attacks destroyed or damaged at least 280 schools and kindergartens. In total, 164 pupils and 12 teachers were killed, and 454 pupils and five teachers injured.
After the bombing, Olmert and Israel continued their attack on academic freedom, blocking educational supplies from reaching Gaza. Textbooks, notebooks, stationery and computers are among the forbidden items. In September, Chris Gunness, spokesman for UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestine refugees, publicly appealed to Israel to lift its ban on books and other supplies from reaching Gaza's traumatized students.
Israel destroyed buildings at the Islamic University and other universities. According to the Goldstone report, these "were civilian, educational buildings and the Mission did not find any information about their use as a military facility or their contribution to a military effort that might have made them a legitimate target in the eyes of the Israeli armed forces."
Gaza's university students -- 60 percent of them women -- study all the things that students do at the University of Chicago. Their motivations, aspirations, and abilities are just as high, but their lives are suffocated by unimaginable violence, trauma, and Israel's blockade, itself a war crime. Olmert is the person who ordered these acts and must be held accountable.
Crimes against humanity are defined as "crimes that shock the conscience." When the institutions with the moral and legal responsibility to punish and prevent the crimes choose complicit silence -- or, worse, harbor a suspected war criminal, already on trial for corruption in Israel, and present him to students as a paragon of "leadership" -- then disobedience, if that is what it takes to break the silence, is an ethical duty. Instead of condemning them, the University should be proud that its students were among those who had the courage to stand up.
For the first time in recorded history, an Israeli prime minister was publicly confronted with the names of his victims. It was a symbolic crack in the wall of impunity and a foretaste of the public justice victims have a right to receive when Olmert is tried in a court of law.
Co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah is author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse. This article was originally published in the University of Chicago's Chicago Maroon newspaper
 |
| Protesters demonstrated in the rain outside of the University of Chicago lecture hall where activists inside disrupted Olmert's speech, 15 October 2009. (Maureen Clare Murphy) |
If former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had merely been a diplomat or an academic offering a controversial viewpoint, then interrupting his 15 October speech at University of Chicago's Mandel Hall would certainly have been an attempt to stifle debate (Noah Moskowitz, Meredyth Richards and Lee Solomon, "The importance of open dialogue," Chicago Maroon, 19 October 2009). Indeed, I experienced exactly such attempts when my own appearance at Mandel Hall last January, with Professor John Mearsheimer and Norman Finkelstein, was constantly interrupted by hecklers.
But confronting a political leader suspected of war crimes and crimes against humanity cannot be viewed the same way.
The report of the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict last winter, headed by Judge Richard Goldstone, found that Israel engaged in willful, widespread and wanton destruction of civilian property and infrastructure, causing deliberate suffering to the civilian population. It found "that the incidents and patterns of events considered in the report are the result of deliberate planning and policy decisions" and that many may amount to "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity." If that proves true, then the individual with primary responsibility is Ehud Olmert, who, as prime minister and the top civilian commander of Israel's armed forces, was involved in virtually every aspect of planning and execution.
The killings of more than 3,000 Palestinians and Lebanese during Olmert's three years in office are not mere differences of opinion to be challenged with a polite question written on a pre-screened note card. They are crimes for which Olmert is accountable before international law and public opinion.
Israel, unlike Hamas (also accused of war crimes by Goldstone), completely refused to cooperate with the Goldstone Mission. Instead of accountability, Olmert is, obscenely, traveling around the United States offering justifications for these appalling crimes, collecting large speaking fees, and being feted as a "courageous" statesman.
In their 20 October email to the University of Chicago community, President Robert Zimmer and Provost Thomas Rosenbaum condemned the "disruptions" during Olmert's speech. "Any stifling of debate," they wrote, "runs counter to the primary values of the University of Chicago and to our long-standing position as an exemplar of academic freedom."
Was it in order to promote debate that the University insisted on pre-screening questions and imposed a recording ban for students and media? In the name of promoting debate, will the University now invite Hamas leader Khaled Meshal -- perhaps by video link -- to lecture on leadership to its students, and offer him a large honorarium? Can we soon expect Sudan's President Omar Bashir to make an appearance at Mandel Hall?
When I and others verbally confronted Olmert, we stood for academic freedom, human rights, and justice, especially for hundreds of thousands of students deprived of those same rights by Olmert's actions.
During Israel's attack on Gaza last winter, schools and universities were among the primary targets. According to the Goldstone report, Israeli military attacks destroyed or damaged at least 280 schools and kindergartens. In total, 164 pupils and 12 teachers were killed, and 454 pupils and five teachers injured.
After the bombing, Olmert and Israel continued their attack on academic freedom, blocking educational supplies from reaching Gaza. Textbooks, notebooks, stationery and computers are among the forbidden items. In September, Chris Gunness, spokesman for UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestine refugees, publicly appealed to Israel to lift its ban on books and other supplies from reaching Gaza's traumatized students.
Israel destroyed buildings at the Islamic University and other universities. According to the Goldstone report, these "were civilian, educational buildings and the Mission did not find any information about their use as a military facility or their contribution to a military effort that might have made them a legitimate target in the eyes of the Israeli armed forces."
Gaza's university students -- 60 percent of them women -- study all the things that students do at the University of Chicago. Their motivations, aspirations, and abilities are just as high, but their lives are suffocated by unimaginable violence, trauma, and Israel's blockade, itself a war crime. Olmert is the person who ordered these acts and must be held accountable.
Crimes against humanity are defined as "crimes that shock the conscience." When the institutions with the moral and legal responsibility to punish and prevent the crimes choose complicit silence -- or, worse, harbor a suspected war criminal, already on trial for corruption in Israel, and present him to students as a paragon of "leadership" -- then disobedience, if that is what it takes to break the silence, is an ethical duty. Instead of condemning them, the University should be proud that its students were among those who had the courage to stand up.
For the first time in recorded history, an Israeli prime minister was publicly confronted with the names of his victims. It was a symbolic crack in the wall of impunity and a foretaste of the public justice victims have a right to receive when Olmert is tried in a court of law.
Co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah is author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse. This article was originally published in the University of Chicago's Chicago Maroon newspaper
Israeli army force international activists out of the groves during olive harvest in Kafr Qalil
International Solidarity Movement - 21 October 2009
On Wednesday, 21 October 2009, several international activists accompanied Kafr Qalil farmers for the olive harvest in their land. The olive fields of the village of Kafr Qalil, in the Nablus region, are close to the illegal Israeli settlements of Bracha and Yizhar. During the olive harvest there is a potential threat of settlers coming to the olive fields and harassing the farmers, so the farmers feel safer with an international presence.
Today, the soldiers presented documents written in Hebrew and Arabic which they claimed to be an order stating that the area was prohibited for internationals to enter. They said that they would call the police to come and arrest the activists if they did not leave the area. They also threatened to interrupt the harvest and force the farmers to leave their land if the activists came back, and said that this had been done in other areas in the past. When the activists questioned why internationals are not allowed to accompany the farmers on their land, they were told that their presence would bother the settlers. Considering the threats, two activists left the area at 8 am, only two hours after the harvesting started. Two other activists that were higher up on the hill were not approached by the soldiers and were able to remain until the end of the day.
The olive groves are in an area declared a closed military zone, so the farmers are not allowed to access their land without a permit. Yesterday, the Israeli military called the village of Kafr Qalil and told them that they will be permitted to access their land for four days during the olive harvest. Some of the farmers need a week to pick their olives.
The restricted access to the olive fields during the rest of the year results in thistles and weeds growing all over the olive fields. Normally, farmers would keep these away in order to improve the conditions for the trees and make the olive harvest easier.
The farmers said that they were attacked by settlers during the olive harvest last year, while the Israeli soldiers that were supposed to protect the farmers just observed without intervening. In the fields, there are a number of scorched olive trees that were set on fire by settlers two years ago.
October 20, 2009
Olmert visit sparks Palestine movement at US university
Emily Ratner writing from New Orleans, US, Live from Palestine, 20 October 2009
On 13 October, Tulane University, an elite university in the southern United States, hosted former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as a featured speaker. Forced from office due to corruption charges and under indictment in his own country, Olmert's speaking engagements at respected American universities should at the very least raise questions as to the propriety of such events. That he and members of his military and political cabinet have been accused of war crimes during the 2006 Israeli invasion of Lebanon and last winter's invasion of Gaza requires people of good conscience to raise their voices in dissent. In response to his visit, a coalition of students, teachers, activists and community members -- Muslims, Jews, Christians, Palestinians and their allies -- rallied in opposition and protest inside and outside the event. Despite much hostility, they also found a great deal of support and more momentum for their organizing efforts.
Although outnumbered, we were more powerful than the war criminal and his Mossad protectors and stronger than his security checkpoints and his electronically amplified lies. We strapped red tape to our bodies and stashed fake-bloodied clothes in our packs. Those of us who had the required documents, who had student IDs from New Orleans universities, passed through the checkpoints while our barred friends and allies gathered outside, armed with truths painted on poster board and voices amplified by our growing numbers. With less than two weeks' notice, we had formed a broad coalition that planned a multi-phased action to reclaim the same campus that is home to TIPAC (the Tulane-Israel Public Affairs Committee). In 2007, the university hosted conservative commentator Ann Coulter for "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week" in 2007 and had invited Olmert for a brief respite from international and Israeli courts. As Tulane University constructed a safe-haven and solicited interviews and meetings on behalf of its delinquent guest, dozens of our neighbors began to organize. And scores more responded to the call for action.
Tulane has long been an unwelcoming environment to our broader community, as well as to Muslim and Arab students. Olmert's strategists and local friends chose the city's most Zionist and "secure" nonreligious institution for his visit, and many activists questioned the wisdom of challenging a hostile student body and a sometimes even more hostile private police force. Tulane voices have been almost entirely absent in a great many community dialogues and meetings about Palestine solidarity work, and the prospect of initiating a campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions on Tulane's campus has always seemed laughable. But New Orleans is a city where so many feel linked to the Palestinian struggle through shared themes like the experience of diaspora, the right of return and near-daily racist violence and oppression by police and military authorities. There is no space in our city where Israeli war criminals will not be challenged.
Tulane was as hostile an environment as we expected. Hundreds of Tulane students showed up to hear Olmert speak, and many laughed and applauded when he made jokes about the comments of overwhelmed Palestinians who threw up their hands in exasperation at his remarks (i.e., lies) and walked out of the building. Many of our own group were only kept silent by the red tape we'd hidden on our bodies and then used to cover our mouths when Olmert first walked onto the stage. Scrawled on the tape were words that enumerated some of Olmert's administration's crimes, such as "human shields," "illegal settlements," "white phosphorous" and "occupation."
We breathed deeply and sat through an onslaught of racist lies about our Palestinian friends and family, until Olmert began to talk about the mistake Israel had made in "withdrawing" from Gaza. Then, one by one, our jaws aching from biting down on our testimonials of what we have seen with our own eyes and what our families and friends continue to suffer, we rose from our seats throughout the auditorium, slowly made our way to the aisle, and walked out.
Olmert's audience became our own for a moment. They gasped and whispered as more than 20 individuals stood glaring at Olmert and his guards and then marched out of the auditorium. As we left, we heard the chants of our friends, and breathed freely for what felt like the first time in over an hour. The hostility inside was palpable, but we were embraced by our friends outside whose numbers had easily tripled since we'd last seen them. They'd been shouting for two hours now, competing with calls of "Heil Hitler" and "Palestinians are Nazis" from students passing by. A Muslim woman in a hijab (headscarf) was hit with plates of food thrown from an adjacent third floor balcony while campus police looked on.
Within 20 minutes we'd set up the next phase of our action: four persons dressed in bloodied clothes laid down on the ground in front of the auditorium, and we placed cardboard grave markers with the numbers of massacred Palestinians and Lebanese around them. As students began to flow out of the auditorium, we handed out fliers detailing Olmert's war crimes and tried to stop passersby from spitting on our friends on the ground. We were mostly successful, and prevented a student from urinating on one of the participants.
We were not at all surprised by the hostility we faced, but we were surprised by the positive responses of far more Tulane students than we expected. Members of Tulane Amnesty International, Tulane American Socialist Students United and individual undergraduate and graduate students were active in every phase. They were joined by students from the General Union of Palestine Students and Amnesty International of University of New Orleans and students from Loyola University. As a result of this action, the challenges we face in our local solidarity work seem more surmountable. Indeed, Olmert's visit marked the beginning of Tulane's Palestine solidarity movement.
Emily Ratner is an organizer and mediamaker based in New Orleans. She is a member of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, and a graduate of Tulane University (class of 2007). In June, she joined a New Orleans delegation to Gaza. She can be reached at emily A T nolahumanrights D O T org.
Source
 |
| Activists stage a sit-in to protest former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's visit to Tulane University. (Abdul Aziz/Penta Press) |
On 13 October, Tulane University, an elite university in the southern United States, hosted former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as a featured speaker. Forced from office due to corruption charges and under indictment in his own country, Olmert's speaking engagements at respected American universities should at the very least raise questions as to the propriety of such events. That he and members of his military and political cabinet have been accused of war crimes during the 2006 Israeli invasion of Lebanon and last winter's invasion of Gaza requires people of good conscience to raise their voices in dissent. In response to his visit, a coalition of students, teachers, activists and community members -- Muslims, Jews, Christians, Palestinians and their allies -- rallied in opposition and protest inside and outside the event. Despite much hostility, they also found a great deal of support and more momentum for their organizing efforts.
Although outnumbered, we were more powerful than the war criminal and his Mossad protectors and stronger than his security checkpoints and his electronically amplified lies. We strapped red tape to our bodies and stashed fake-bloodied clothes in our packs. Those of us who had the required documents, who had student IDs from New Orleans universities, passed through the checkpoints while our barred friends and allies gathered outside, armed with truths painted on poster board and voices amplified by our growing numbers. With less than two weeks' notice, we had formed a broad coalition that planned a multi-phased action to reclaim the same campus that is home to TIPAC (the Tulane-Israel Public Affairs Committee). In 2007, the university hosted conservative commentator Ann Coulter for "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week" in 2007 and had invited Olmert for a brief respite from international and Israeli courts. As Tulane University constructed a safe-haven and solicited interviews and meetings on behalf of its delinquent guest, dozens of our neighbors began to organize. And scores more responded to the call for action.
Tulane has long been an unwelcoming environment to our broader community, as well as to Muslim and Arab students. Olmert's strategists and local friends chose the city's most Zionist and "secure" nonreligious institution for his visit, and many activists questioned the wisdom of challenging a hostile student body and a sometimes even more hostile private police force. Tulane voices have been almost entirely absent in a great many community dialogues and meetings about Palestine solidarity work, and the prospect of initiating a campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions on Tulane's campus has always seemed laughable. But New Orleans is a city where so many feel linked to the Palestinian struggle through shared themes like the experience of diaspora, the right of return and near-daily racist violence and oppression by police and military authorities. There is no space in our city where Israeli war criminals will not be challenged.
Tulane was as hostile an environment as we expected. Hundreds of Tulane students showed up to hear Olmert speak, and many laughed and applauded when he made jokes about the comments of overwhelmed Palestinians who threw up their hands in exasperation at his remarks (i.e., lies) and walked out of the building. Many of our own group were only kept silent by the red tape we'd hidden on our bodies and then used to cover our mouths when Olmert first walked onto the stage. Scrawled on the tape were words that enumerated some of Olmert's administration's crimes, such as "human shields," "illegal settlements," "white phosphorous" and "occupation."
We breathed deeply and sat through an onslaught of racist lies about our Palestinian friends and family, until Olmert began to talk about the mistake Israel had made in "withdrawing" from Gaza. Then, one by one, our jaws aching from biting down on our testimonials of what we have seen with our own eyes and what our families and friends continue to suffer, we rose from our seats throughout the auditorium, slowly made our way to the aisle, and walked out.
Olmert's audience became our own for a moment. They gasped and whispered as more than 20 individuals stood glaring at Olmert and his guards and then marched out of the auditorium. As we left, we heard the chants of our friends, and breathed freely for what felt like the first time in over an hour. The hostility inside was palpable, but we were embraced by our friends outside whose numbers had easily tripled since we'd last seen them. They'd been shouting for two hours now, competing with calls of "Heil Hitler" and "Palestinians are Nazis" from students passing by. A Muslim woman in a hijab (headscarf) was hit with plates of food thrown from an adjacent third floor balcony while campus police looked on.
Within 20 minutes we'd set up the next phase of our action: four persons dressed in bloodied clothes laid down on the ground in front of the auditorium, and we placed cardboard grave markers with the numbers of massacred Palestinians and Lebanese around them. As students began to flow out of the auditorium, we handed out fliers detailing Olmert's war crimes and tried to stop passersby from spitting on our friends on the ground. We were mostly successful, and prevented a student from urinating on one of the participants.
We were not at all surprised by the hostility we faced, but we were surprised by the positive responses of far more Tulane students than we expected. Members of Tulane Amnesty International, Tulane American Socialist Students United and individual undergraduate and graduate students were active in every phase. They were joined by students from the General Union of Palestine Students and Amnesty International of University of New Orleans and students from Loyola University. As a result of this action, the challenges we face in our local solidarity work seem more surmountable. Indeed, Olmert's visit marked the beginning of Tulane's Palestine solidarity movement.
Emily Ratner is an organizer and mediamaker based in New Orleans. She is a member of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, and a graduate of Tulane University (class of 2007). In June, she joined a New Orleans delegation to Gaza. She can be reached at emily A T nolahumanrights D O T org.
Source
October 17, 2009
Iran steps in as demining work slows in Lebanon
By Abigail Fielding-Smith
- October 17, 2009 12:15AM UAE
A team of deminers from the Mine Action Group clear a field covered in unexploded cluster munitions outside the southern Lebanon town of Nabatiyeh earlier this week. The NGO has been forced to reduce its teams from 14 to 10 because of a lack of funds. Mitchell Prothero / The National
NABATIYEH, SOUTH LEBANON // In a sun-bleached, breeze-block town just outside of Nabatiyeh in south Lebanon, a new-looking billboard has been erected.
It announces the headquarters of a recently established non-governmental group called the Peace Generation Organisation for Demining (PGOD). In the corner of the billboard is a discreet representation of the Iranian flag. Although the organisation is Lebanese, the director of PGOD, Mahmoud Rahhal, confirmed that “most” of the group’s funding comes from their partner organisation, ISOP, an Iranian demining company, which also provides supervision and training expertise.
Iran, along with the Arab Gulf states, has played a conspicuous role in the reconstruction effort in south Lebanon following the 2006 war with Israel, and the Iranian flag is a common sight on rebuilt roads around the south.
This appears to be the first time, however, that Iranian money has been involved in the effort to remove the estimated 1.4 million unexploded cluster bombs dropped by Israel in the last 72 hours of the conflict. Up until now the clearance project has been funded by various sources worldwide, including the UAE, which was already contributing US$50 million (Dh183.5m) to landmine removal efforts in the south before the 2006 war and gave a further $20m to a programme which finished in 2007.
Iranian influence in Lebanon is a highly sensitive issue. In a recent speech, Hizbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah admitted for the first time that the Shia military group, which is also a political party, receives military and financial assistance from the Islamic republic.
PGOD implied their own close relationship with Hizbollah when they invited a senior party official to a press conference explaining their mission earlier this month, and they have a picture of Nasrallah in their publicity brochure.
In recent years, Iran and Syria on one side, and the West and “moderate” Sunni Arab states on the other have played out their power struggles by proxy in Lebanon through the political battle between the government and the Hizbollah-dominated opposition.
Deminers from the Mine Action Group use metal detectors, trowels and spray paint to clear munitions from the 2006 war with Israel. Michael Prothero / The National
Both the Gulf Arab states and Iran poured aid money into the south after the 2006 war, in a highly politicised reconstruction effort characterised by policy analysts as a competition for legitimacy. According to a forthcoming book by Amal Saad Ghorayeb, the then-Sinioria government was initially reluctant to assign large-scale reconstruction projects to Iran for fear of expanding Iranian influence, but the sheer quantity of money Iran was willing to spend (estimated at over $600m in total) gave it a pre-eminent role in the reconstruction effort.
Although PGOD’s money does not come from the Iranian government, the involvement of an Iranian-linked NGO in the cluster bomb clearance effort is potentially more controversial than Iran’s role in rebuilding infrastructure because of the military aspects of the operation: it involves co-ordinating with the Lebanese army, handling explosives, and sometimes working in areas south of the Litani river, from which Hizbollah was obliged to withdraw any military presence under the terms of the 2006 ceasefire.
According to Timur Goksel, a former official with Unifil, there are “no security implications” to any organisation being involved in cluster bomb removal.
All demining agencies are under the supervision of the Lebanese authorities, who decide which areas of land are going to be worked by which organisations.
Nonetheless, the perception problem remains. PGOD has aroused intense, if unsubstantiated suspicion in certain quarters, with some people suggesting they are not solely here for the purpose of demining.
It is unclear why the Lebanese authorities appear to have changed their attitude towards allowing Iranian funding in the cluster bomb removal programme, but one explanation is that the western NGOs are experiencing serious donor fatigue, and there remains an estimated 16.5 square kilometres of contaminated land still to be cleared.
The Lebanese Mine Action Centre (LMAC), the main national co-ordinating body for mine-clearance activities, had initially estimated that cluster bomb removal would be completed by the middle of this year, a projection which funding shortfalls are now forcing it to revise.
The unexploded munitions scattered across the south Lebanon countryside have claimed 349 casualties since the end of the war. The majority of them are children, who are attracted to the munitions as playthings – one type has white ribbons, and another looks like a white tennis ball.
Although casualty rates have been declining, much of the land which remains to be cleared is agricultural, and its ongoing contamination affects livelihoods.
In the past year, funding scarcity has forced the largest NGO, Mines Advisory Group (MAG), to reduce its teams from 14 to 10, slowing the rate of clearance, and the Swedish Rescue Services Agency (SRSA) has had to close its operations down altogether, making around 50 local staff unemployed.
“I was very disappointed to have to close the programme down,” said David Alderson, the former programme and operations manager for SRSA, who lost part of his leg during a clearance operation here in 2006.
“I knew there was still work to be done but I just couldn’t get funding.”
Christina Bennike, the project manager for MAG, which has succeeded in clearing 13 square kilometres since 2006, says she can only guarantee the existence of her reduced teams for another few months.
“We have secure funding up until the end of March, we can’t say for sure after that, no one knows.”
The NGOs cite various reasons for the funding slowdown, including the global recession and Lebanon’s relatively low scoring on other humanitarian priority indicators such as poverty.
In contrast to the western NGOs, PGOD appears to be in a much more secure position. “We are getting more funds, we are comfortable in our objectives,” said Mr Rahhal, who estimates that 90 per cent of his local staff previously worked for the western demining agencies.
Mr Rahhal, a Lebanese engineer who spent 25 years working in the humanitarian sector, stresses that his group is working in a spirit of co-operation with the other agencies, striving towards the same shared goals: “our right to live well, in our country, and have a good harvest.” Lebanese authorities and members of the demining community have expressed their appreciation for the extra two battlefield clearance teams provided by PGOD, which supplement the 16 western NGO teams and three Unifil ones.
“We are not competing with anyone,” said Mr Rahhal, “but if [the other NGOS] leave and our budget allows it, we will do more.”
Source
October 16, 2009
EI exclusive video: Protesters shout down Ehud Olmert in Chicago
Maureen Clare Murphy, The Electronic Intifada, 16 October 2009
Approximately 30 activists -- mainly students from area universities -- disrupted a lecture given in Chicago by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert yesterday which was hosted by the University of Chicago's Harris School of Public Policy. While Olmert's speech was disrupted inside the lecture hall, approximately 150 activists protested outside the hall in the freezing rain.
Protesters inside the hall read off the names of Palestinian children killed during Israel's assault on Gaza last winter. They shouted that it was unacceptable that the war crimes suspect be invited to speak at a Chicago university when his army destroyed a university in Gaza in January. They reminded the audience of the more than 1,400 Palestinians killed during the Gaza attacks and the more than 1,200 killed during Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 2006. Both invasions happened during Olmert's premiership.
With interventions coming every few minutes throughout his appearance, Olmert had difficulty giving his speech and often appeared frustrated. At one point he appealed for "just five minutes" to speak without being interrupted.
The demonstration was mobilized last week after organizers learned of the lecture, paid for by a grant provided by Jordan's King Abdullah II. Within hours an appeal was issued, urging those concerned with Palestinian rights to call the university and demand that the lecture be canceled. The call was put out by major community organizations such as the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC)-Chicago, American Muslims for Palestine and the United States Palestine Community Network, as well as solidarity organizations al-Awda, the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, the International Solidarity Movement, the Palestine Solidarity Group-Chicago and area campus groups such as Students for Justice in Palestine chapters at DePaul University and the University of Illinois at Chicago, as well as the Arab Student Union at Moraine Valley.
The security presence at the lecture was severe with university police, the US Secret Service and Israeli security present -- many of them visibly armed -- with Israeli security checking in those who had registered in advance to attend the lecture. Video and photography was banned inside the hall and media were not allowed to cover the lecture. Despite these restrictions, activists managed to take video inside the hall and drop an eight-foot-long banner from the mezzanine that read "Goldstone" in both English and Hebrew, referring to the recently published UN report investigating violations of international law during the Gaza invasion. One activist was arrested and put in a headlock by a police officer, witnesses said, and released around midnight. Approximately 30 supporters waited for him at the police station while he was detained.
Towards the end of the lecture, Olmert put his hand over his brow and squinted to search out the source of the shout, "There's no discussion with a war criminal -- the only discussion you should be having is in court!" That call was made by Ream Qato, who graduated from the university in 2007, and added, "You belong in the Hague!" Qato told The Electronic Intifada that yesterday's protest "Set the stage for University of Chicago students and students in the Chicago area ... no one should be afraid of speaking out against someone." She added that the demonstration was significant because "The Palestinian community [in Chicago] for the first time went to a university campus to protest."
Second-year medical student Afshan Mohiuddin was removed from the hall after she voiced her disapproval at the Harris School dean's on-stage assertion that Olmert was invited to express his views. "He can do that at the International Court of Justice, not at this university," Mohiuddin shouted, adding, "[Olmert] belongs in a cage, not on a stage!"
Mohiuddin told The Electronic Intifada that "it was ironic that they searched us [instead of him]," considering that Olmert is suspected of war crimes. She added, "As a University of Chicago student I was upset with the lack of commotion on behalf of the student body before the event ... No one has protested the event."
Mohiuddin's frustration was echoed in a commentary published by the University of Chicago's student publication The Chicago Maroon earlier this week, in which third-year student Nadia Marie Ismail decried the lack of protest by the university community towards the Olmert speech. She contrasted this silence with the pressure the Center for Middle Eastern Studies faced after a lecture earlier this year by The Electronic Intifada's Ali Abunimah (who was the first to disrupt Olmert's speech yesterday), University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer and Norman Finkelstein, whose lost bid for tenure at DePaul University is attributed to outside pressure by Israel government apologists. "[T]hat University center was put under unprecedented pressure for weeks before and months after the event, with claims that University centers and schools should not host 'one-sided' speakers," Ismail wrote.
Olmert's lecture in Chicago was one of several scheduled throughout the United States. His speech at the University of Kentucky the previous day was disrupted by activists and met with a protest outside. These demonstrations are part of a wave of notched-up dissent towards Israeli officials implicated in war crimes and racist policy. In 2003, former Israeli minister Natan Sharansky was greeted with a pie in the face by an activist at Rutgers University in New Jersey. Last year at the UK's Oxford University, a speech by Israeli President Shimon Peres was drowned out by protesters outside while students inside the hall disrupted his talk.
One of the organizers of the protest, Hatem Abudayyeh, National Coordinating Committee member of the United States Palestine Community Network, hoped for a larger count of protesters despite the adverse weather. However, he said, "The fact that there's people around the world who know about it, the fact that PACBI [the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel] sent us a letter of support and endorsement of our action, the fact that there was coordination with the outside protest and the inside disruption -- all of these components and aspects of the action made it one of the more successful ones that we've done."
He added, "There is real change happening, whether it's the international response to the Lebanon war or the international response to the Gaza war. The US is the most powerful country in the world, Israel is a powerful military as well, but the Palestinians have the world on their side."
Video shot and produced by The Electronic Intifada.
Maureen Clare Murphy is Managing Editor of The Electronic Intifada and an activist with the Palestine Solidarity Group-Chicago, which co-sponsored the demonstration.
Approximately 30 activists -- mainly students from area universities -- disrupted a lecture given in Chicago by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert yesterday which was hosted by the University of Chicago's Harris School of Public Policy. While Olmert's speech was disrupted inside the lecture hall, approximately 150 activists protested outside the hall in the freezing rain.
Protesters inside the hall read off the names of Palestinian children killed during Israel's assault on Gaza last winter. They shouted that it was unacceptable that the war crimes suspect be invited to speak at a Chicago university when his army destroyed a university in Gaza in January. They reminded the audience of the more than 1,400 Palestinians killed during the Gaza attacks and the more than 1,200 killed during Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 2006. Both invasions happened during Olmert's premiership.
With interventions coming every few minutes throughout his appearance, Olmert had difficulty giving his speech and often appeared frustrated. At one point he appealed for "just five minutes" to speak without being interrupted.
The demonstration was mobilized last week after organizers learned of the lecture, paid for by a grant provided by Jordan's King Abdullah II. Within hours an appeal was issued, urging those concerned with Palestinian rights to call the university and demand that the lecture be canceled. The call was put out by major community organizations such as the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC)-Chicago, American Muslims for Palestine and the United States Palestine Community Network, as well as solidarity organizations al-Awda, the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, the International Solidarity Movement, the Palestine Solidarity Group-Chicago and area campus groups such as Students for Justice in Palestine chapters at DePaul University and the University of Illinois at Chicago, as well as the Arab Student Union at Moraine Valley.
The security presence at the lecture was severe with university police, the US Secret Service and Israeli security present -- many of them visibly armed -- with Israeli security checking in those who had registered in advance to attend the lecture. Video and photography was banned inside the hall and media were not allowed to cover the lecture. Despite these restrictions, activists managed to take video inside the hall and drop an eight-foot-long banner from the mezzanine that read "Goldstone" in both English and Hebrew, referring to the recently published UN report investigating violations of international law during the Gaza invasion. One activist was arrested and put in a headlock by a police officer, witnesses said, and released around midnight. Approximately 30 supporters waited for him at the police station while he was detained.
Towards the end of the lecture, Olmert put his hand over his brow and squinted to search out the source of the shout, "There's no discussion with a war criminal -- the only discussion you should be having is in court!" That call was made by Ream Qato, who graduated from the university in 2007, and added, "You belong in the Hague!" Qato told The Electronic Intifada that yesterday's protest "Set the stage for University of Chicago students and students in the Chicago area ... no one should be afraid of speaking out against someone." She added that the demonstration was significant because "The Palestinian community [in Chicago] for the first time went to a university campus to protest."
 |
| Approximately 150 protesters demonstrated outside the University of Chicago hall where former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was speaking. (Maureen Clare Murphy) |
Second-year medical student Afshan Mohiuddin was removed from the hall after she voiced her disapproval at the Harris School dean's on-stage assertion that Olmert was invited to express his views. "He can do that at the International Court of Justice, not at this university," Mohiuddin shouted, adding, "[Olmert] belongs in a cage, not on a stage!"
Mohiuddin told The Electronic Intifada that "it was ironic that they searched us [instead of him]," considering that Olmert is suspected of war crimes. She added, "As a University of Chicago student I was upset with the lack of commotion on behalf of the student body before the event ... No one has protested the event."
Mohiuddin's frustration was echoed in a commentary published by the University of Chicago's student publication The Chicago Maroon earlier this week, in which third-year student Nadia Marie Ismail decried the lack of protest by the university community towards the Olmert speech. She contrasted this silence with the pressure the Center for Middle Eastern Studies faced after a lecture earlier this year by The Electronic Intifada's Ali Abunimah (who was the first to disrupt Olmert's speech yesterday), University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer and Norman Finkelstein, whose lost bid for tenure at DePaul University is attributed to outside pressure by Israel government apologists. "[T]hat University center was put under unprecedented pressure for weeks before and months after the event, with claims that University centers and schools should not host 'one-sided' speakers," Ismail wrote.
Olmert's lecture in Chicago was one of several scheduled throughout the United States. His speech at the University of Kentucky the previous day was disrupted by activists and met with a protest outside. These demonstrations are part of a wave of notched-up dissent towards Israeli officials implicated in war crimes and racist policy. In 2003, former Israeli minister Natan Sharansky was greeted with a pie in the face by an activist at Rutgers University in New Jersey. Last year at the UK's Oxford University, a speech by Israeli President Shimon Peres was drowned out by protesters outside while students inside the hall disrupted his talk.
One of the organizers of the protest, Hatem Abudayyeh, National Coordinating Committee member of the United States Palestine Community Network, hoped for a larger count of protesters despite the adverse weather. However, he said, "The fact that there's people around the world who know about it, the fact that PACBI [the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel] sent us a letter of support and endorsement of our action, the fact that there was coordination with the outside protest and the inside disruption -- all of these components and aspects of the action made it one of the more successful ones that we've done."
He added, "There is real change happening, whether it's the international response to the Lebanon war or the international response to the Gaza war. The US is the most powerful country in the world, Israel is a powerful military as well, but the Palestinians have the world on their side."
Video shot and produced by The Electronic Intifada.
Maureen Clare Murphy is Managing Editor of The Electronic Intifada and an activist with the Palestine Solidarity Group-Chicago, which co-sponsored the demonstration.
October 15, 2009
Turkey-Israel Rift Good for Palestine
by Mel Frykberg, October 15, 2009
RAMALLAH – Turkey’s cooling relationship with Israel comes in tandem with its improving relations with the Arab and Muslim world, and this development is expected to impact positively on Palestinian politics.
"The Turks appear to be implementing a major policy shift in the region as they look towards the East as a possible alternative to relations with the West, particularly in light of difficulties joining the European Union (EU)," says Dr. Samir Awad from Birzeit University near Ramallah.
"Turkey’s increasingly strained relations with Israel and its growing sympathy for the Palestinian cause may well have a strong influence on the Europeans, the Americans and the Arab countries," Awad told IPS.
"Turkey, a secular Muslim country has strong ties with the Muslim and Arab world. At the same time it has strong relations with the U.S., which considers it a regional and strategic ally. It is also somewhat respected by the West for being secular and having a democracy, albeit a flawed one."
Turkish-Israeli relations plummeted when Turkey excluded Israel from a joint military drill that was to be held with other members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). This caused consternation in Israeli diplomatic and government circles, which consider Turkey Israel’s strongest Muslim ally in the region.
To make things worse for the Israelis, Syria announced Tuesday that it would hold an even larger joint military maneuver with Turkey. A joint military exercise between the two countries was held earlier this year.
Israel’s extensive bombardment of Gaza at the beginning of the year marked a turning point. The Turkish government has had to answer to public opinion, which struggled to stomach Israel’s military assault on the coastal territory. Even the Turkish military, which has had strong ties with the Israeli military, couldn’t look away.
Recent developments under Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing government including greater Judaization of East Jerusalem, infringements on Muslim worship at the Al-Aqsa mosque, and continued settlement building have only cemented Turkey’s position.
Anat Lapidot-Firilla from Jerusalem’s Hebrew University argued in the Israeli daily Haaretz that Turkey sees itself as a possible leader of the Sunni Muslim world.
Turkey "assumes a burden inherited from its Ottoman Empire forbears, a mission that includes fostering regional peace and stability as well as economic prosperity," said Lapidot-Firilla.
Turkey has had strong ties with the Israelis politically and militarily, and the downgrading of relations adds to an international momentum building up against Israel in light of its policies against the Palestinians and the slaughter in Gaza.
"The Turks could bring pressure to bear on the Israelis to moderate their treatment of the Palestinians as Israel values its strategic relations with Turkey. The Palestinians can only benefit from this," Awad told IPS.
"Turkey could also exert influence on the Americans to lean on their Israeli ally," says Awad. The U.S. regards Turkey as a bulwark against what it sees as a crescent of extremism that includes Iran, Iraq, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas.
"It is also feasible that the Turks could lean on the leaders of the Arab world to give more than just lip service to the Palestinian cause. The Turks have set a moral example by taking diplomatic action against Israel, which is more than Egypt and Jordan, which both have peace treaties with Israel, have done," adds Awad.
Turkey plans to sponsor a number of pro-Palestinian resolutions in both regional and international forums.
These include the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly, and the Human Rights Council in Geneva. Turkey also attended a recent meeting of the Organization of Islamic Countries and a session of the Arab League, and Israel inevitably was on the agenda.
"While Turkey has previously supported pro-Palestinian resolutions in these forums, I think they will be more vocal in the future and lobby even harder," says Awad.
Finally, the Turks could help bring pressure on forthcoming Palestinian unity talks in Cairo, as Hamas and Fatah appear unable to bridge the divide on their own.
October 14, 2009
Palestinian human rights activist being held without charges in indefinite solitary confinement
Youth holding a photo of Othman at the weekly protest against the Wall in Nil’in.
Here is an update on the case of Mohammad Othman, a Palestinian human rights activist who was detained over three weeks ago by Israel as he returned home from Norway where he had been discussing the boycott, divestment and sanction movement.
On Thursday, October 8, at the second hearing in Salem military court, the prosecution had still not been able to provide any charges against Mohammad. The judge prolonged Mohammad’s detention for a further 12 days. Addameer attorneys appealed this decision and the judge rescheduled the date for the hearing for this wednesday, 14 October 2009. The hearing is due to take place at the Military Court of Appeals in Ofer.
According to Addameer attorneys who represent Mohammad, he is still held in solitary confinement and is being interrogated daily about his trips to Europe and contacts with European organizations. Mohammad has been repeatedly cursed at during long interrogation sessions, which at times lasted from 8:00 am until midnight. However, in neither of these sessions were suspicions against Mohammad made clear to him and he still ignores the reason for his arrest. During one of these sessions, an Israeli interrogator threatened to hurt Mohammad’s sister. “Stop the Wall Campaign” contends that psychological pressure is an often used Israeli technique to coerce a detainee into confessions.
During his solitary confinement Mohammad has been held in a two-square meter windowless cell. You can follow Mohammad’s case on this website.
Also, if you’re in New York you can join Adalah-NY and the New York Campaign for the Boycott of Israel on Saturday October 17th, 1- 3 PM for a protest in support of Mohammad at Lev Leviev’s store in Manhattan. You can find more information on the protest here.
Related Post
Jaffa-based Palestinian activist facing indefinite home detention for political activitySource
Turkey boosts ties with Syria amid renewed Israel row
By Rim Haddad
Agence France Presse
October 14, 2009
ALEPPO, Syria: Turkey boosted its ties with Syria on Tuesday at the first meeting of a newly formed cooperation council, only days after Ankara’s relations with Damascus foe Israel took a downturn. The foreign, defense, interior, economy, oil, electricity, agriculture and health ministers of the two countries attended the strategic talks in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo.
Their agenda called for a series of meetings between respective ministers in their fields and the signing of diplomatic and economic agreements.
The foreign ministers signed a deal on scrapping visa requirements for each other’s nationals.
Turkish-Syrian relations have improved after decades of mistrust based on Ankara’s accusations that Damascus supported Turkey’s banned Kurdistan Workers’ Party.
But Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem told a news conference with Turkish counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu that Damascus regarded the PKK as a “terrorist organization banned” in his country.
Turkey’s ties with Israel took a turn for the worse on Sunday when Israel announced Ankara had decided to exclude it from the “Anatolian Eagle” joint military exercises.
The move came after Syria and Turkey signed an agreement in Istanbul last month to establish the cooperation council as part of efforts to forge closer links. Under the accord, the council will meet once a year.
The air force exercises involving Turkey, Israel and members of the NATO military alliance had been due to be held near Konya in central Turkey from October 12 to 23.
On Tuesday, Israeli Vice Premier Silvan Shalom urged Turkey “to come to its senses” following the spike in tensions between the two allies.
“Turkey is an important Muslim state sharing strategic ties with Israel. I hope the Turks come to their senses and realize that the relationship between the two states is in their interest no less than ours,” he said.
“The deterioration of ties with Turkey in recent days is regrettable,” Shalom said.
In contrast,Moallem said “it is natural that we would welcome” Ankara’s decision to exclude Israel from the maneuvers.
“The Turkish decision was taken because of Turkey’s position toward the Israeli aggression against the Gaza Strip” between last December and January, he said.
Damascus “welcomes the cancellation, because Israel always attacks the Palestinian people, maintains an embargo on Gaza and rejects any Turkish effort to resume peace talks” between Syria and Israel, Moallem added.
Syria and Israel began indirect peace talks through Turkey in May 2008.
But they were suspended last December after Israel launched a 22-day war on the Gaza Strip that killed more than 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis.
In Aleppo, Davutoglu underlined the importance of the Aleppo meeting for the two Muslim neighbors. “Turkey is the gateway for Syria to Europe just as Syria is the gateway for Turkey to the Arab world.” – AFP
Agence France Presse
October 14, 2009
ALEPPO, Syria: Turkey boosted its ties with Syria on Tuesday at the first meeting of a newly formed cooperation council, only days after Ankara’s relations with Damascus foe Israel took a downturn. The foreign, defense, interior, economy, oil, electricity, agriculture and health ministers of the two countries attended the strategic talks in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo.
Their agenda called for a series of meetings between respective ministers in their fields and the signing of diplomatic and economic agreements.
The foreign ministers signed a deal on scrapping visa requirements for each other’s nationals.
Turkish-Syrian relations have improved after decades of mistrust based on Ankara’s accusations that Damascus supported Turkey’s banned Kurdistan Workers’ Party.
But Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem told a news conference with Turkish counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu that Damascus regarded the PKK as a “terrorist organization banned” in his country.
Turkey’s ties with Israel took a turn for the worse on Sunday when Israel announced Ankara had decided to exclude it from the “Anatolian Eagle” joint military exercises.
The move came after Syria and Turkey signed an agreement in Istanbul last month to establish the cooperation council as part of efforts to forge closer links. Under the accord, the council will meet once a year.
The air force exercises involving Turkey, Israel and members of the NATO military alliance had been due to be held near Konya in central Turkey from October 12 to 23.
On Tuesday, Israeli Vice Premier Silvan Shalom urged Turkey “to come to its senses” following the spike in tensions between the two allies.
“Turkey is an important Muslim state sharing strategic ties with Israel. I hope the Turks come to their senses and realize that the relationship between the two states is in their interest no less than ours,” he said.
“The deterioration of ties with Turkey in recent days is regrettable,” Shalom said.
In contrast,Moallem said “it is natural that we would welcome” Ankara’s decision to exclude Israel from the maneuvers.
“The Turkish decision was taken because of Turkey’s position toward the Israeli aggression against the Gaza Strip” between last December and January, he said.
Damascus “welcomes the cancellation, because Israel always attacks the Palestinian people, maintains an embargo on Gaza and rejects any Turkish effort to resume peace talks” between Syria and Israel, Moallem added.
Syria and Israel began indirect peace talks through Turkey in May 2008.
But they were suspended last December after Israel launched a 22-day war on the Gaza Strip that killed more than 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis.
In Aleppo, Davutoglu underlined the importance of the Aleppo meeting for the two Muslim neighbors. “Turkey is the gateway for Syria to Europe just as Syria is the gateway for Turkey to the Arab world.” – AFP
October 13, 2009
Egypt media group agrees on Israel boycott
Haaretz 28/09/2009
The London-based Arabic-language daily A Sharq al Awsat reported Monday that the board of directors of the powerful Egyptian media group Al-Ahram had decided to boycott Israel and Israelis of all positions.
The Al-Ahram group is considered the most powerful media body in Egypt. Al-Ahram publishes newspapers considered to be the official mouthpiece of the Egyptian government.
The boycott, approved by a majority of nine board members over six following a heated debate, includes a ban on meeting with and interviewing Israelis, and a ban on participation in events (seminars, conferences, lectures) in which Israelis are taking part.
According to the report, the board of directors also banned Israelis from entering the building housing the Al-Ahram offices. The ban includes Israeli diplomats stationed in Egypt.
During the same meeting, it was decided to take action on the matter of Dr. Hala Moustafa, the editor of Al-Ahram’s Democracy magazine, after she stirred anger and disapproval earlier this month when she met with Israeli ambassador Shalom Cohen.
A statement regarding the board’s decision has been personally delivered to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.
A senior editor at the Al-Ahram daily said that the Al-Ahram group has always been a supporter of dialogue, and an opponent of discrimination, including discrimination against Israel, but the fact that Israel has “gone against peace and elected an extremist government which opposes peace and supports killing and destruction” had changed the group’s outlook.
He added that the group will work toward preventing “normalization” and contact with the Israelis until the achievement of a lasting and just peace, “which means Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied territories.”
Dr. Moustafa said Monday that she had yet to receive any notice regarding the board’s decision. However, it is believed that an investigation against her will begin Tuesday. Moustafa said that she will defend her stance and argue that Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty and as such, a meeting with Israel’s ambassador is not a violation of Egyptian law.
The London-based Arabic-language daily A Sharq al Awsat reported Monday that the board of directors of the powerful Egyptian media group Al-Ahram had decided to boycott Israel and Israelis of all positions.
The Al-Ahram group is considered the most powerful media body in Egypt. Al-Ahram publishes newspapers considered to be the official mouthpiece of the Egyptian government.
The boycott, approved by a majority of nine board members over six following a heated debate, includes a ban on meeting with and interviewing Israelis, and a ban on participation in events (seminars, conferences, lectures) in which Israelis are taking part.
According to the report, the board of directors also banned Israelis from entering the building housing the Al-Ahram offices. The ban includes Israeli diplomats stationed in Egypt.
During the same meeting, it was decided to take action on the matter of Dr. Hala Moustafa, the editor of Al-Ahram’s Democracy magazine, after she stirred anger and disapproval earlier this month when she met with Israeli ambassador Shalom Cohen.
A statement regarding the board’s decision has been personally delivered to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.
A senior editor at the Al-Ahram daily said that the Al-Ahram group has always been a supporter of dialogue, and an opponent of discrimination, including discrimination against Israel, but the fact that Israel has “gone against peace and elected an extremist government which opposes peace and supports killing and destruction” had changed the group’s outlook.
He added that the group will work toward preventing “normalization” and contact with the Israelis until the achievement of a lasting and just peace, “which means Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied territories.”
Dr. Moustafa said Monday that she had yet to receive any notice regarding the board’s decision. However, it is believed that an investigation against her will begin Tuesday. Moustafa said that she will defend her stance and argue that Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty and as such, a meeting with Israel’s ambassador is not a violation of Egyptian law.
FIFA urged to give the red card to Israel
Press release, various undersigned, 13 October 2009
The following press release was issued on 7 October 2009:
FIFA's declared mission to use football to bring about "a better world" requires that clear signals be given to the apartheid state, Israel. The undersigned organizations call on FIFA to tell Israel it is off-side and to show it a red card for the World Cup.
Three Palestinian football players from the national team were killed during the Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip earlier this year. Because of the Israeli blockade and travel restrictions, the Palestinian national team there cannot practice with their teammates in the West Bank in their native land. They can only rarely take part in international competitions.
Palestinian athletes suffer constant discrimination and violent assaults. This is part of Israel's decades-long refusal to guarantee the Palestinians their rights, freedom, dignity and their physical and spiritual integrity. This policy should be called apartheid. It is not only a violation of international law, but also of FIFA's regulations against discrimination, and of the Olympic Charter.
South Africa's exclusion from the world sports community until 1991 helped to bring about the end of racial separation in that country. Now, almost 20 years later, the World Cup will be hosted by South Africa in 2010. Decency, dignity and sporting fair play towards the hosts and the participating teams demand that Israel be subjected to the same sanctions. Numerous organizations and personalities in Israel and world-wide hope that increased pressure on Israel will induce it to respect the rights of the Palestinians. This is a prerequisite for peace.
We challenge FIFA to live up to the letter and the spirit of its statutes and to seize this opportunity to prove to the world that it stands for a more just world by sending Israel an unmistakeable threat of exclusion. This would be an important victory for human rights -- not only for the Palestinian people, but also for the international football community.
No to apartheid!
Undersigned organizations: Basler Frauenvereinigung fuer Frieden und Fortschritt (BFFF), Bewegung fuer den Sozialismus (BFS/MPS), Collectif Judeo Arabe et Citoyen pour la Paix de Strasbourg, Collectif Urgence Palestine Vaud, Collectif Urgence Palestine Neuchatel, Frauen fuer den Frieden Region Basel, Frauen fuer den Frieden Region Biel, Gerechtigkeit und Frieden in Palaestina (GFP) Bern, Gesellschaft Schweiz-Palaestina (GSP/ASP), International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN) France, Juedische Stimme fuer gerechten Frieden in Nahost (EJJP Deutschland), Kampagne Olivenoel, Neue PdA Basel, Mahnwache Bern, Palaestina-Solidaritaet Basel, Palaestina-Solidaritaet Zuerich, Sozialistische Alternative (SoAL) Basel, Union Juive Francaise pour la Paix (UJFP)
Source
The following press release was issued on 7 October 2009:
FIFA's declared mission to use football to bring about "a better world" requires that clear signals be given to the apartheid state, Israel. The undersigned organizations call on FIFA to tell Israel it is off-side and to show it a red card for the World Cup.
Three Palestinian football players from the national team were killed during the Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip earlier this year. Because of the Israeli blockade and travel restrictions, the Palestinian national team there cannot practice with their teammates in the West Bank in their native land. They can only rarely take part in international competitions.
Palestinian athletes suffer constant discrimination and violent assaults. This is part of Israel's decades-long refusal to guarantee the Palestinians their rights, freedom, dignity and their physical and spiritual integrity. This policy should be called apartheid. It is not only a violation of international law, but also of FIFA's regulations against discrimination, and of the Olympic Charter.
South Africa's exclusion from the world sports community until 1991 helped to bring about the end of racial separation in that country. Now, almost 20 years later, the World Cup will be hosted by South Africa in 2010. Decency, dignity and sporting fair play towards the hosts and the participating teams demand that Israel be subjected to the same sanctions. Numerous organizations and personalities in Israel and world-wide hope that increased pressure on Israel will induce it to respect the rights of the Palestinians. This is a prerequisite for peace.
We challenge FIFA to live up to the letter and the spirit of its statutes and to seize this opportunity to prove to the world that it stands for a more just world by sending Israel an unmistakeable threat of exclusion. This would be an important victory for human rights -- not only for the Palestinian people, but also for the international football community.
No to apartheid!
Undersigned organizations: Basler Frauenvereinigung fuer Frieden und Fortschritt (BFFF), Bewegung fuer den Sozialismus (BFS/MPS), Collectif Judeo Arabe et Citoyen pour la Paix de Strasbourg, Collectif Urgence Palestine Vaud, Collectif Urgence Palestine Neuchatel, Frauen fuer den Frieden Region Basel, Frauen fuer den Frieden Region Biel, Gerechtigkeit und Frieden in Palaestina (GFP) Bern, Gesellschaft Schweiz-Palaestina (GSP/ASP), International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN) France, Juedische Stimme fuer gerechten Frieden in Nahost (EJJP Deutschland), Kampagne Olivenoel, Neue PdA Basel, Mahnwache Bern, Palaestina-Solidaritaet Basel, Palaestina-Solidaritaet Zuerich, Sozialistische Alternative (SoAL) Basel, Union Juive Francaise pour la Paix (UJFP)
Source
October 11, 2009
Mercenaries and paramilitaries arrive in Honduras
By Honduras Delegation
Press Release
Saturday, Oct 10, 2009
The situation is grave in Tegucigalpa. According to a message from the organization, Pastors for Peace, Radio Globo from Honduras is reporting that snipers are shooting into the Brazilian Embassy where President Zelaya and hundreds of supporters have taken refuge. There is no word yet on injuries.
|
The following is a report from the delegation of U.S. activists in Honduras, who will be holding a news conference today, October 9, at 5pm EST at the offices of the Bottlers’ Union, a center in Tegucigalpa of the National Front for Resistance Against the Coup:
In the last 24 hours, the situation in Honduras has reached a profound level of urgency. The illegal, de facto Micheletti regime is clearly reaching a point of desperation—and there is a serious danger in this, as the rightwing can and will do anything when they are desperate.
Last night, we received word that at the Brazilian embassy, where President Manuel Zelaya has been seeking refuge, two scaffolds had been erected and two snipers placed on them—one from the Honduran police and one from the Honduran army. Heavy military activity was also occurring on the ground around the embassy, with military convoys placed at strategic places all around the windows and doors of the embassy. The fear is that an assassination attempt on Zelaya’s life may be carried out soon.
Another alarming report relayed to us today from Honduran human rights leaders is of the presence of 120 paramilitaries—experts in killing—from other Latin American countries in Honduras. Many of these paramilitaries have been trained at the School of the Americas based in Georgia.
Today while we were in a meeting, the human rights leader we were meeting with received a phone call that police at the pedagogical university had given protesters there 10 minutes to disperse or face dire consequences. Military convoys had been brought in to surround the protesters.
As this email is being written, members of the U.S. Delegation in Solidarity with the Honduras Resistance are at the U.S. embassy, attempting to meet with representatives there to alert them of the situation and demand the discontinuation of U.S. aid to the de facto regime, a freeze on the assets of the golpista government members, and the abandonment of any electoral process that doesn’t first involve the restitution of President Zelaya, as is the will of the Honduran people.
|
That’s why it is so important for us to support the Delegation in Solidarity with the Honduran Resistance. The corporate media is echoing the coup government’s press releases claiming that martial law has been lifted and civil liberties restored, and ignoring the fact that repression is intensifying. We need you to help get the word out.
What you can do now:
Call – Honduras Desk, U.S. State Department 202-647-3482
State Department Main Switchboard 202-647-4000
White House 202-456-1111
OAS Washington Office 202-458-3000
Demand an end to the attacks on Zelaya and Honduran activists. Demand a restoration of civil liberties in Honduras.
Sign the Petition – Demand safe passage for the U.S. delegation.
Hezbollah Welcomes Saudi-Syrian Summit's Positive Outcome
Al-Manar
10/10/2009
Hezbollah hailed on Saturday the "positive" outcome of the Saudi-Syrian summit that joined Syrian President Bachar al-Assad with Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz at the Syrian capital Damascus on Wednesday and Thursday.
In a statement it released, Hezbollah welcomed the convening of the summit as well as its positive results, urging everyone to enhance the Arab-Arab path and push inter-Arab convergence towards new horizons of joint action to serve Arab and Muslim issues, positively impacting Lebanon and the Lebanese.
The Resistance party emphasized the "exceptional importance" of the summit's timing as a reconsideration of Arab issues in this critical phase, particularly in light of the major challenges facing our Arab and Muslim worlds, with the continued Israeli aggressions against Palestine and Lebanon as well as its escalation against the sanctity of Aqsa Mosque.
While calling for further efforts to serve the nation's issues, Hezbollah concluded its statement by reiterating that the only available option to face the enemy's threats and dangers is to nurture Arab unity and solidarity, and support the nation's right to resist occupation and defend land and its sanctity.
10/10/2009
Hezbollah hailed on Saturday the "positive" outcome of the Saudi-Syrian summit that joined Syrian President Bachar al-Assad with Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz at the Syrian capital Damascus on Wednesday and Thursday.
In a statement it released, Hezbollah welcomed the convening of the summit as well as its positive results, urging everyone to enhance the Arab-Arab path and push inter-Arab convergence towards new horizons of joint action to serve Arab and Muslim issues, positively impacting Lebanon and the Lebanese.
The Resistance party emphasized the "exceptional importance" of the summit's timing as a reconsideration of Arab issues in this critical phase, particularly in light of the major challenges facing our Arab and Muslim worlds, with the continued Israeli aggressions against Palestine and Lebanon as well as its escalation against the sanctity of Aqsa Mosque.
While calling for further efforts to serve the nation's issues, Hezbollah concluded its statement by reiterating that the only available option to face the enemy's threats and dangers is to nurture Arab unity and solidarity, and support the nation's right to resist occupation and defend land and its sanctity.
Turkey bans Israel from international air force drill
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz - October 11, 2009
Turkey announced on Sunday the cancellation of an international air force drill at one of the country's air force bases, which was to include Israeli jets.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been under pressure recently to exclude Israel from the drill, on the grounds that Israel should not be allowed to participate while its planes are bombing the Gaza Strip
Turkey, a secular country ruled by an Islamic-oriented party, had long been Israel's best friend in the Muslim world. But ties have cooled sharply over Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's sharp criticism of Israel's winter war in the Gaza Strip, especially in light of a televised fracas between President Shimon Peres and Erdogan at the Davos Conference this past January.
Foreign Ministry sources said that Turkish military officials had approached the Israel Defense Forces recently with a surprising demand that Israel refrain from participating in the drill, due to the IDF's activity in Gaza. Israeli inquiries on the matter with the Turkish foreign ministry were met with evasive responses.
In light of the Turkish demands, Israel approached U.S. officials stressing that this is an unusual move, which violates the understandings regarding Israel's participation in NATO drills, like the drill in question. Consequently, the U.S. and Italy withdrew their participation from the drill in protest, which led to the cancellation of the entire drill.
Turkey adopted a critical stance on Israel and Erdogan maintained that Israel was carrying out genocide in the Gaza Strip. Since then, the two states have maintained diplomatic and military contacts but have not had any meetings between high-level officials.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu's cancelled his visits to Israel recently after Israel denied his request to visit the Gaza Strip from Israeli territory.
Davutoglu had been invited to take part in the Presidents' Conference, which is scheduled to take place in a few weeks in Jerusalem.
Israeli officials' feared in regard to the visit is that if Davutoglu goes to Gaza, it will become a festive event for Hamas and it will become a media circus with the Turkish FM staying amidst the rubble of buildings destroyed by the IDF during Cast Lead. Officials suspected Davutoglu would also be encouraged to make anti-Israel statements.
Davutoglu was appointed foreign minister only recently, and has sought a role in future peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.
A top Israel official said "Turkish leadership during Operation Cast Lead did not encourage us to agree to this request."
Source
Turkey announced on Sunday the cancellation of an international air force drill at one of the country's air force bases, which was to include Israeli jets.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been under pressure recently to exclude Israel from the drill, on the grounds that Israel should not be allowed to participate while its planes are bombing the Gaza Strip
Turkey, a secular country ruled by an Islamic-oriented party, had long been Israel's best friend in the Muslim world. But ties have cooled sharply over Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's sharp criticism of Israel's winter war in the Gaza Strip, especially in light of a televised fracas between President Shimon Peres and Erdogan at the Davos Conference this past January.
Foreign Ministry sources said that Turkish military officials had approached the Israel Defense Forces recently with a surprising demand that Israel refrain from participating in the drill, due to the IDF's activity in Gaza. Israeli inquiries on the matter with the Turkish foreign ministry were met with evasive responses.
In light of the Turkish demands, Israel approached U.S. officials stressing that this is an unusual move, which violates the understandings regarding Israel's participation in NATO drills, like the drill in question. Consequently, the U.S. and Italy withdrew their participation from the drill in protest, which led to the cancellation of the entire drill.
Turkey adopted a critical stance on Israel and Erdogan maintained that Israel was carrying out genocide in the Gaza Strip. Since then, the two states have maintained diplomatic and military contacts but have not had any meetings between high-level officials.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu's cancelled his visits to Israel recently after Israel denied his request to visit the Gaza Strip from Israeli territory.
Davutoglu had been invited to take part in the Presidents' Conference, which is scheduled to take place in a few weeks in Jerusalem.
Israeli officials' feared in regard to the visit is that if Davutoglu goes to Gaza, it will become a festive event for Hamas and it will become a media circus with the Turkish FM staying amidst the rubble of buildings destroyed by the IDF during Cast Lead. Officials suspected Davutoglu would also be encouraged to make anti-Israel statements.
Davutoglu was appointed foreign minister only recently, and has sought a role in future peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.
A top Israel official said "Turkish leadership during Operation Cast Lead did not encourage us to agree to this request."
Source
October 07, 2009
Volvo providing armored buses for Israeli settlements
Adri Nieuwhof, The Electronic Intifada, 7 October 2009
Following reports published by The Electronic Intifada on the use of Volvo equipment in the demolition of Palestinian houses in 2007, the Volvo Group stated that it did not condone the use of its equipment for such purposes. Claiming to have no control over the use of its products, Volvo affirmed that its Code of Conduct decries unethical behavior. In spite of these claims, The Electronic Intifada has found that through its Volvo Buses branch, the Volvo Group is providing armored buses to transport Israeli settlers in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).
Volvo Buses is co-owner of Merkavim Ltd., an Israeli transport technology company. Another shareholder in the company is Mayer's Cars and Trucks, the exclusive Israeli representative of companies from the Volvo Group. According to Merkavim's website, the company was chosen by Volvo as "its major body builder in the Middle East." However, the Who Profits from the Occupation? project recently reported that Merkavim manufactures an armored version of Volvo's Mars Defender bus for the Israeli public transport company Egged. Egged uses the Mars Defender to provide bus services for illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.
Merkavim proudly announced on its website that the Mars Defender offers protection and ultimate comfort when traveling through war zones or routes susceptible to terrorist attacks. In a promotional video the armored bus is shown driving along Israel's wall in the West Bank and crossing checkpoints (http://www.merkavim.co.il/upload/defender.wmv, accessed 6 October). In another video on Merkavim's homepage, Volvo's Senior Vice-President of Business Region Europe, Lars Blom, declares that "Three core values that are very important to us are quality, environmental care and safety. ... [T]he products we are developing with Merkavim also deliver these three core values plus reliability" (http://www.merkavim.co.il/movies_library/merkavim.wmv, accessed 7 October 2009)
According to Merkavim, in the video promoting the bus, the Mars Defender "looks like any other modern bus," but it is "the world's most armored bus." Indeed, the company calls it "the bus that saves lives!" As the narrator explains that the bus is "designed to safeguard the most precious cargo," the camera pans over Israeli soldiers lining up to board the bus and on patrol with their machine guns at the ready. The video explains that Israel has "adapted its world renowned expertise in military and defense technologies to deal with" the "growing threat" of "terrorists and hostile forces." It adds that Merkavim "blends this state of the art know-how with its own expertise" to produce the Mars Defender. Built on a Volvo chassis, the Mars Defender's sides, front, roof and floor are shielded with steel armored panels and it is fitted with bullet- and explosion-proof armored glass windows as well as "run-flat" tires. According to the company, these safety measures allow the bus to withstand "grenades, car bombs, roadside charges and 7.62 caliber armor-piercing bullets." Merkavim claims that these features are needed because "people trust this bus with their lives."
The 2004 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on Israel's wall in the West Bank confirmed that settlements violate Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 49 explicitly states that the Occupying Power is not allowed to deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies. Bus services with Volvo subsidiary's Mars Defender armored buses facilitate the maintaining of illegal settlements in the OPT.
In its Code of Conduct, the Volvo Group commits itself to support and respect the protection of human rights and to ensure that it is not complicit in human rights abuses. However, by providing construction and transportation equipment that facilitates Israel's occupation, the company violates this Code of Conduct on a daily basis. With increasing calls for boycott of and divestment from companies that support Israel's occupation, Volvo Group can expect activists around the world to put pressure on responsible investors to divest from the company and to call on public bus companies not to buy Volvo buses.
Adri Nieuwhof is a consultant and human rights advocate based in Switzerland.
 |
| Merkavim's promotional video shows Israeli soldiers boarding an armored bus. |
Volvo Buses is co-owner of Merkavim Ltd., an Israeli transport technology company. Another shareholder in the company is Mayer's Cars and Trucks, the exclusive Israeli representative of companies from the Volvo Group. According to Merkavim's website, the company was chosen by Volvo as "its major body builder in the Middle East." However, the Who Profits from the Occupation? project recently reported that Merkavim manufactures an armored version of Volvo's Mars Defender bus for the Israeli public transport company Egged. Egged uses the Mars Defender to provide bus services for illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.
Merkavim proudly announced on its website that the Mars Defender offers protection and ultimate comfort when traveling through war zones or routes susceptible to terrorist attacks. In a promotional video the armored bus is shown driving along Israel's wall in the West Bank and crossing checkpoints (http://www.merkavim.co.il/upload/defender.wmv, accessed 6 October). In another video on Merkavim's homepage, Volvo's Senior Vice-President of Business Region Europe, Lars Blom, declares that "Three core values that are very important to us are quality, environmental care and safety. ... [T]he products we are developing with Merkavim also deliver these three core values plus reliability" (http://www.merkavim.co.il/movies_library/merkavim.wmv, accessed 7 October 2009)
According to Merkavim, in the video promoting the bus, the Mars Defender "looks like any other modern bus," but it is "the world's most armored bus." Indeed, the company calls it "the bus that saves lives!" As the narrator explains that the bus is "designed to safeguard the most precious cargo," the camera pans over Israeli soldiers lining up to board the bus and on patrol with their machine guns at the ready. The video explains that Israel has "adapted its world renowned expertise in military and defense technologies to deal with" the "growing threat" of "terrorists and hostile forces." It adds that Merkavim "blends this state of the art know-how with its own expertise" to produce the Mars Defender. Built on a Volvo chassis, the Mars Defender's sides, front, roof and floor are shielded with steel armored panels and it is fitted with bullet- and explosion-proof armored glass windows as well as "run-flat" tires. According to the company, these safety measures allow the bus to withstand "grenades, car bombs, roadside charges and 7.62 caliber armor-piercing bullets." Merkavim claims that these features are needed because "people trust this bus with their lives."
The 2004 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on Israel's wall in the West Bank confirmed that settlements violate Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 49 explicitly states that the Occupying Power is not allowed to deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies. Bus services with Volvo subsidiary's Mars Defender armored buses facilitate the maintaining of illegal settlements in the OPT.
In its Code of Conduct, the Volvo Group commits itself to support and respect the protection of human rights and to ensure that it is not complicit in human rights abuses. However, by providing construction and transportation equipment that facilitates Israel's occupation, the company violates this Code of Conduct on a daily basis. With increasing calls for boycott of and divestment from companies that support Israel's occupation, Volvo Group can expect activists around the world to put pressure on responsible investors to divest from the company and to call on public bus companies not to buy Volvo buses.
Adri Nieuwhof is a consultant and human rights advocate based in Switzerland.
October 05, 2009
Shalit deal could be last chance for prisoners with Israeli IDs
05/10/2009 18:02Bethlehem – Ma'an – Over the past few days, serious progress has been made on wrapping up a prisoner swap deal between Israel and the captors of soldier Gilad Shalit, and several obstacles have been overcome through negotiations, our sources say.
However, neither side has yet confirmed that Israel approved a list of prisoners submitted by Hamas. The initial list has not included any Palestinian prisoners from inside Israel, or from Jerusalem.
According to the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz, Hamas added 40 new names of prisoners who are also residents of Israel, including Jerusalem. Some of these detainees have been serving time in Israeli jails since before the Oslo Accords.
This new Hamas initiative, according to Haaretz, renews hope that they too could be released given that Israel refused to set them free in the latest prisoner swap deal between Israel and Hizbullah. Israeli authorities once refused even discussing the release of such prisoners, while today observers suggest this latest proposal might be their last chance.
Haaretz quoted Muneer Mansour, a former Palestinian prisoner who was freed in the 1985 prisoner swap between Israel and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, as saying, "Israel's refusal to release prisoners who hold Israeli IDs was overlooked in the 1985 deal, and that could happen again with the Shalit deal."
Mansour added that Israel may find a legal pretext to prevent the release of these Palestinians, however, there are also legal precedents that support the possibility. For example, some of them have spent more than 25 years in custody, and were detained before the Oslo Accords, thus they should have already been freed, or should be released within a few years.
Mansour highlighted that in the 1985 deal, to avoid releasing a prisoner with an Israeli ID, Audi Adeeb, Israel reduced one third of his sentence, and thus he was released as if he had already completed it. "This could be repeated in the Shalit case," Mansour said.
According to Haaretz, 147 Palestinian prisoners hold Israeli IDs, not including prisoners from East Jerusalem. Twenty-two detainees of those 147 were arrested before Oslo, and 21 were serving life sentences. In addition to these, there are 450 prisoners in Israel from East Jerusalem who also hold Israeli IDs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
