Meshal: Most Palestinians, from elites to regular people, reject the talks
August 31, 2010
Excerpted from an interview by Shamine Narwani of Hamas leader Khaled Meshal in Damascus:
KM: These negotiations are taking place for American and Israeli considerations, calculations and interests only. There are no interests at all for us as Palestinians or Arabs. That’s why the negotiations can only be conducted under American orders, threats and pressure exerted on the PA and some Arab countries.
The negotiations are neither supported nationally nor are they perceived as legitimate by the authoritative Palestinian institutions. They are rejected by most of the Palestinian factions, powers, personalities, elites, and regular people — that is why these “peace talks” are destined for failure.
This represents a perfect example of how the US administration deals with the Arab-Israeli conflict — how American policy appears to be based on temporary troubleshooting instead of working toward finding a real and lasting solution.
Consecutive US administrations have adopted this same policy of “managing conflict” instead of “resolving conflict.” This can be useful for American tactical and short-term purposes, but it is very dangerous on the long-term and the strategic levels. This approach will ultimately prove catastrophic for the region.
SN: There is debate about whether Hamas accepts the premise of a two-state solution — your language seems often vague and heavily nuanced. I want to ask if you could clarify, but I am also curious as to whether it is even worth accepting a two-state solution today when there has been so much land confiscation and settlement activity by Israel in the West Bank and East Jerusalem?
KM: Hamas does accept a Palestinian state on the lines of 1967 — and does not accept the two-state solution.
SN: What is the difference between the two?
KM: There is big difference between these two. I am a Palestinian. I am a Palestinian leader. I am concerned with accomplishing what the Palestinian people are looking for — which is to get rid of the occupation, attain liberation and freedom, and establish the Palestinian state on the lines of 1967. Talking about Israel is not relevant to me — I am not concerned about it. It is an occupying state, and I am the victim. I am the victim of the occupation; I am not concerned with giving legitimacy to this occupying country. The international community can deal with this (Israeli) state; I am concerned with the Palestinian people. I am as a Palestinian concerned with establishing the Palestinian state only.
SN: Can you clarify further? As a Palestinian leader of the Resistance you have to give people an idea of what you aspire to — and how you expect to attain it?
KM: For us, the 20 years of experience with these peace negotiations — and the failure of it — very much convinces us today that the legitimate rights of Palestinians will be only be gained by snatching them, not by being gifted with them at the negotiating table. Neither Netanyahu nor any other Israeli leader will ever simply gift us a Palestinian state. The Palestinian Authority has watered down all its demands and is merely asking for a frame of reference to the 1967 borders in negotiations, but Netanyahu has repeatedly refused to accept even this most basic premise for peace. Nor will America or the international community gift us with a state — we have to depend on ourselves and help ourselves.
As a Palestinian leader, I tell my people that the Palestinian state and Palestinian rights will not be accomplished through this peace process — but it will be accomplished by force, and it will be accomplished by resistance. I tell them that through this bitter experience of long negotiations with the Israelis, we got nothing — we could not even get the 1967 solution. I tell them the only option in front of us today is to take this by force and by resistance. And the Palestinian people today realize this — yes, it has a steep price, but there is no other option for the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people tried the peace process option but the result was nothing.
What the wall has done
Jamal Juma’, The Electronic Intifada, 31 August 2010
 |
Palestinian women walk past Israel’s wall in the West Bank. (Luay Sababa/MaanImages) |
Israel began constructing the wall in June 2002 following its invasion of cities in the West Bank, which it dubbed “Operation Defensive Shield.” In retrospect, the invasion appears to have been a prelude to the construction of the wall and no one recognized the significance of the invasion’s code name at the time. The immense scale of the 2002 invasion — characterized by the destruction of Palestinian civilian infrastructure, mass arrests, assassinations and massacres — ensured that the construction of the wall would commence with as little resistance as possible.
Accompanied by hundreds of military checkpoints, the wall solidified the dismemberment of the West Bank’s major population centers into Bantustans, separated from each other and segregated from occupied East Jerusalem. Israel’s actions were intended to enhance its control over the Palestinian people and block the establishment of a Palestinian state. The wall intentionally blurs the “Green Line,” the internationally-recognized armistice line between Israel and the occupied West Bank, thus overriding international law and United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to the occupied Palestinian territories (OPT). Instead of relying on international law, Israel has substituted negotiations over “disputed” territories for which it sets the terms under an American shield.
Today, Israel’s “facts on the ground” clearly display the realities of its system of apartheid:
- The wall, which will reach 810 kilometers in length, isolates 46 percent of the occupied West Bank and divides it into three large cantons and 22 small Bantustans. It cements Israel’s control over 82-85 percent of Palestinian water resources in the OPT.
- A 1,400 kilometer road network is dedicated exclusively to Israelis and separated from Palestinian roads by 48 tunnels.
- Thirty-four military checkpoints control the movement of people and goods between the different cantons and the movement of commercial traffic with Israel and the outside world.
- Industrial zones, agricultural areas and crafts workshops have been established along the wall. These Israeli, joint and international ventures aim to transform the Palestinian people into a cheap labor force dependent on the Israeli economy. Raw materials and exports are entirely Israeli while the capital is international, Israeli and Palestinian.
Palestinian civil society’s response
Grassroots and peaceful resistance against the wall started three months after construction began. The delay was due in large part to the impact of the 2002 invasion on Palestinian society. Popular committees were formed in the villages and cities of the northern West Bank where the first stage of the wall was under construction. Activists organized events, documented damages and violations and organized international campaigns, communicating and coordinating with international solidarity activists who formed human shields at key areas around the West Bank. Dozens of rallies and activities were organized in the towns and villages across the northern and central West Bank. These protests occurred throughout the week and were coordinated with visits by international solidarity activists.
The demonstrations and other events attracted international attention. The images of the wall and its route, which clearly showed the extent of Israel’s theft of vast agricultural lands and water resources as well as the immense environmental and agricultural destruction, shocked observers around the world. However, the Palestinian Authority (PA) remained indifferent to these activities, angering many Palestinians. The PA’s silence was particularly glaring given the numerous letters and appeals by farmers, local councils and popular committees for a response. Eventually, the indifference of the elected leadership raised questions and cast doubts among Palestinians and two rallies were organized outside the prime minister’s office to protest this stance.
Following the 2003 conference convened by the UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People in New York, the Grassroots Palestinian Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign met with Nasser al-Qidwa, the Palestine Liberation Organization’s (PLO) permanent observer at the UN. The Grassroots Campaign provided al-Qidwa with a detailed power point presentation about the wall and its consequences for the “peace process.” Al-Qidwa took action and coordinated with international organizations, seeking information from the committees, civil and formal institutions, and international institutions that monitored Israel’s violations in the OPT.
In December 2003, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution to refer the case to the ICJ to seek its opinion about the legal consequences of Israel’s construction of the wall. Prior to the 14 February 2004 ICJ meeting, peaceful popular marches across the occupied West Bank increased and were met with violence and repression by the Israeli army. Five Palestinians were killed and hundreds were wounded in the villages northwest of Jerusalem, specifically from Beit Duqqu and Biddu. In anticipation of the ICJ meeting, Israel altered the route of the wall in Baqa al-Sharqiya in the Tulkarem Governorate and Beit Sourik and Qatana in the Jerusalem Governorate, restoring thousands of dunums of land it had previously confiscated (a dunum equals approximately 1,000 square meters). Meanwhile, the Israeli high court issued a ruling stating that the army should take the “human impact” of the wall on Palestinians into consideration.
Before the ICJ was due to announce its ruling in July 2004, then member of the Israeli Knesset Dr. Azmi Bishara organized a sit-in in cooperation with the Grassroots Campaign. A tent was erected at the northern entrance to Jerusalem and stood for ten days, attracting hundreds of solidarity delegations and popular committees from across historic Palestine as well as foreign and international organizations, diplomatic missions and dozens of media outlets. The tent was packed with hundreds of people around the clock and lectures and presentations were organized. However, the PA abruptly and violently shut down the tent. The PA claimed that the tent was no longer needed after the ICJ passed its ruling on 9 July 2004. In reality, the tent was becoming a source of embarrassment to the PA because it was attracting attention in the media and the public.
The ICJ opinion and its implications
The ICJ’s advisory opinion was a great boost to the Palestinian people, particularly those living in the villages, cities and communities closest to the path of the wall.
The ICJ also found — by a vote of 13-2 — that the international community was obliged not to recognize the situation resulting from the construction of the wall or to provide assistance to maintaining the status quo. It is interesting to recall that a similar conclusion over three decades ago with regard to South Africa’s occupation of South West Africa led to sanctions against the apartheid state.
In addition, the court called for all parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to compel Israel to implement its decision and reaffirmed the applicability of the Geneva Conventions to the OPT. By a vote of 14-1, the ICJ called on the UN to “consider what further action is required to bring to an end the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the Wall and the associated regime.”
After it was referred to the UN, an overwhelming majority of members of the UN General Assembly endorsed the ICJ’s opinion. However, over six years later, the UN Security Council has yet to review the advisory opinion.
The advisory opinion has had implications at both the official and popular levels. In spite of the victory at the ICJ, PA officials have deliberately disregarded the advisory opinion. Each year they justify their negligence by maintaining that the political circumstances are unfavorable and that the Europeans and the Americans would not support their request to resort to the UN Security Council. While it is evident that there is considerable pressure from Israel and the US, the PA has not utilized the advisory opinion as an effective bargaining chip. Instead of relying on international law it has continued to bet on the negotiations sponsored by successive American administrations. Thus, the PA is caught in a vicious cycle: the very negotiations that they rely on for international recognition are used by the US and Israel to pressure them to abandon Palestinian rights.
The PA’s approach has had implications internationally. Because it represents the “official” Palestinian position, no nation — however friendly to the Palestinian people — is able to advocate forcefully on behalf of the Palestinians or its leadership. In other words, they cannot be “more Palestinian than the Palestinians.”
By contrast, the popular position has been and remains well ahead of the official position. From the earliest days of the wall’s construction, the Palestinian public recognized it as a colonial and racist project aimed at imposing a new geopolitical and security reality on the ground that would dramatically alter the West Bank and tighten Israel’s grip. Therefore, the strategy underpinning popular action was based on resisting Israel’s goals on the ground, creating broad international support with solidarity movements, and demanding the enforcement of international law and resolutions.
That popular resistance soon included moves toward boycotting Israel. Since 2003, civil society activists, including the Grassroots Campaign and the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel have worked for an international boycott against Israel. The ICJ’s advisory opinion not only reinforced the Palestinian boycott efforts but also enabled Palestinian civil society to continue pressuring the PA to challenge Israel in international forums. Moreover, international solidarity movements began to base their demands for dismantling the Wall and settlements and ending the occupation on the ICJ’s advisory opinion.
On the first anniversary of the ICJ opinion the Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) was launched by 171 Palestinian coalitions, associations, trade unions and organizations within and outside historic Palestine. This call, which is the first Palestinian consensus document since the founding of the PLO, seeks to boycott and impose sanctions against Israel to ensure its compliance with international law. Over the past five years, the BDS movement has grown in size and strength around the world and has become the international reference point for all solidarity initiatives and movements globally. The BDS call has been followed by subsequent declarations such as the 2009 Kairos Document issued by a coalition of Palestinian churches that called on churches around the world to boycott Israel. Moreover, these actions by Palestinian civil society were welcomed by international solidarity groups who were eager for a nonofficial Palestinian grassroots initiative.
The popular resistance embodied by the BDS movement and the weekly protests against the wall are the foundation upon which international solidarity is built. These grassroots efforts have pushed the confrontation with Israel’s occupation to a vital battleground: the international arena with its media, civil and official institutions, organizations, trade unions, activists, universities and even the private sector. The impact and implications of these efforts has not gone unnoticed. A recent report by the Reut Institute, an Israeli think-tank, argued that BDS represented a strategic threat to Israel.
Recommendations
These recommendations stem from the experience of the past eight years of struggle against the wall.
- The PA must end its compliance with US dictates and fully engage in the international battle against Israel as an occupying state, demanding that the UN Security Council and General Assembly implement the ICJ’s advisory opinion as well as other relevant resolutions.
- Greater coordination and organization of the BDS movement is needed internationally in order to maintain pressure on Israel.
- Within the Arab world, it is crucial to revive the Arab Boycott Committee, bringing more Arab grassroots organizations and unions on board with the BDS movement and pressuring the Arab League to withdraw its support for negotiations until the ICJ ruling is implemented in full.
- Grassroots resistance needs to be expanded to include all contact points along the wall and alongside Israeli settlements. At the same time all forms of formal and popular normalization must be stopped.
- The Palestinian citizens of Israel must resort to international judicial means to end the racism and discrimination they have been suffering for more than six decades.
- This is the way to end Israel’s occupation, dismantle the wall and destroy the deep-seated racist mentality of Israel’s leaders. This is the way to make Israel recognize that it is part of rather than above the international community.
Jamal Juma’ is a founding member of the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees, the Palestinian Association for Cultural Exchange and the Palestinian Environmental NGO Network. Since 2002, he has been the coordinator of the Palestinian Grassroots Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign.
This article was originally published by Al-Shabaka, The Palestinian Policy Network
Diana Buttu: direct talks bound to fail
Interview, The Electronic Intifada, 30 August 2010
 |
Diana Buttu |
As US officials arrived in Jerusalem last week to meet with Palestinian Authority and Israeli government officials, Nora Barrows-Friedman interviewed Ramallah-based lawyer and former PLO advisor Diana Buttu about this week’s US-brokered direct talks between the two parties for The Electronic Intifada.
Nora Barrows-Friedman: What are the realistic expectations for an outcome of the direct talks, as Israel continues to confiscate Palestinian land and expand illegal settlements, and as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announces that it is the Palestinian preconditions that threaten to sabotage the talks?
Diana Buttu: The funny thing about Netanyahu’s statement on preconditions is that the preconditions are actually Israeli, rather than the other way around. They’re making it a precondition that Palestinians have to accept that Israel is going to continue its settlement activity. And if the Palestinian side says no to settlement activity, then somehow that is a precondition, and the world is not into that.
The big problem is that while there is this announcement of negotiations, here on the ground [in the occupied West Bank], there is nobody who is greeting this announcement with any happiness, because we have been here before. We know what has happened in the past, and we know what is going to happen. And so, if anything, the direct talks are going to be a direct failure. Unless there is a very strong stance by the international community to stop Israel in its settlement activity, in home demolitions and in setting forth a terms of reference — that Israel is going to abide by the 1967 borders — then the talks are doomed to fail. We have been down this path before.
NBF: What is your response to how the PLO approved the talks, even though none of the non-Fatah parties approve of them? How did this happen, and what has the response been from the opposing parties?
DB: In terms of the PLO’s response, this is not new. [Palestinian Authority President] Mahmoud Abbas is the same man who hijacked Palestinian elections a year and a half ago, when he unilaterally declared that his term was extended. This is the same man who has failed to hold the Palestinian Legislative Council elections. This is the same individual who has canceled the municipal elections, all under the guise of, “oh, this is too difficult right now.”
So it is not at all surprising that Mahmoud Abbas, speaking on behalf of Mahmoud Abbas, comes forward and declares that the PLO has accepted such talks when they haven’t. And declares that the Palestinian people are welcoming such talks when they are not. And has the audacity to speak on behalf of Palestine and the Palestinians when he is neither elected nor legitimate any longer, and has not even bothered to ascertain the opinion of other organizations, other factions that are members of the PLO.
NBF: Will this further split and antagonize the political factions against each other, or are we seeing more unity taking place?
DB: That is the one thing that is becoming interesting out of all of this — this is no longer the isolation of Hamas. It’s becoming the isolation of Fatah, in that you see all the political factions lining up on one side, and Fatah lining up on another side.
This is not where the situation was a few years ago, or even a decade ago when the majority of Palestinian factions were, in some way, shape or form, in favor of Oslo or in favor of the negotiations process. Today, it is exactly the opposite. So, if anything, Fatah has marginalized itself, and is becoming increasingly more marginalized.
The problem is that there is no way to translate that into any real change, because of Fatah holding the key, because of its inability to hold elections, with its refusal to listen to the factions. What it simply means is that we have this rogue party that is acting on behalf of its own interests and not the interests of the Palestinian people. That is going to continue to dictate the future of Palestine.
Unless this dissent transforms itself into a real push for internal change, then I fear [Fatah is] going to continue going down this path of isolating itself and marginalizing itself, and holding Palestinians hostage to its lack of vision and lack of strategy for Palestine.
NBF: You attended a press conference on 23 August given by PA spokesperson Saeb Erekat. What was revealed in the press conference, and what are most Palestinians concerned or skeptical about in relation to the talks and what is happening on the ground?
DB: There are two things that were revealed during the press conference. The first was that Erekat was unable to explain to journalists or to the Palestinian people what had changed, why they’re entering into negotiations now. He kept referring to pithy Quartet statements — no one really cares what the Quartet says or does, because they don’t really do anything — and he kept referring to the international community and its support for the peace process. But there was nothing that he could point to to explain why now is the time for direct talks.
In other words, there was nothing that he could say — neither in the form of guarantees, nor in assurances, nor in the form of a settlement freeze, or anything that he could take to the Palestinian people and sell. It simply was the result of their utter incompetence. There was no way to explain why they were going to negotiations.
The second thing that came out during the press conference, and this was clear to the journalists who were present, is that this is a leadership of lies. If this leadership had come forward and said, “we are under tremendous amounts of international pressure, both financially and politically” (which we know is the case), then at least we would have been able to give them credit for that. Erekat didn’t say that. Moreover, if this was the same individual who came forward and said they would halt negotiations, unequivocally, in the event that Israel does not impose a complete settlement freeze — not a partial freeze, not a moratorium — and a complete halt to home demolitions, then at least we would have been able to feel that this is a leadership that is responsive, a leadership that is honest.
Instead, Erekat came forward and said that there are going to be no negotiations. In fact, he used the phrase that Netanyahu will have chosen — no negotiations — in the event that settlements and home demolitions continue. What we know is the opposite. If they have not pressed for a complete settlement freeze now, if they have not pressed for a halt in home demolitions and land confiscation now, then the PA has to explain to us that somehow, magically, on 26 September — when the so-called settlement moratorium has expired — that suddenly the Palestinian Authority and the PLO are going to get a backbone?
So rather than him making these slogans and statements, we wanted to hear the truth. And instead we are faced with a leadership that lies. It lied about the pressure that has been put upon the PLO in order to enter into negotiations, and it will be proven on 26 September that the same leadership is going to — once again — lie to us about halting negotiations if there is no settlement freeze.
NBF: What are your major concerns about the Palestinian political atmosphere right now?
DB: The major concern is that we all know that this is going to fail. It doesn’t require anyone with any particular knowledge or foresight to realize that these talks are going to fail. The real question is what is going to come afterwards, and here is where I’m most concerned. For the past 17 years, the PLO, and in particular, Fatah, has had one strategy and only one strategy: negotiations, negotiations, negotiations.
And they have had only one strategy as regards to themselves, and that is survival. We are now at a stage where we are seeing that this is going to be — and I really hope that it is — the final blow to the logic and the ideology of negotiations, that people somehow have to negotiate their freedom.
The real question is, what is this leadership going to do? Is this leadership going to continue to hold us hostage to this tired, visionless lack of strategy? Or is something different going to come?
I’m not concerned with the talks, we know they are going to fail. My bigger concern is about what is going to happen once the talks fail, and is there going to be anybody who is going to come forward with a different plan, a different strategy, a different vision? And that is my fear. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.
Photo courtesy of Diana Buttu.
See also:
Silwan residents say settlers provoked clash
Ma’an – 26/08/2010
JERUSALEM — Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem’s Silwan neighborhood said settlers attempted to enter the Al-Ein Mosque early Thursday morning, sparking skirmishes that lasted until after sunrise.
Israeli forces arrived as locals said they were attempting to drive the settlers out of the mosque area. Two settler cars were torched, and several windshields smashed in the violence.
The incoming border police force was described as “massive,” and said to have been firing tear-gas canisters and rubber-coated bullets toward Palestinians.
Firefighters called to put out the car blazes were reportedly confronted by angered residents in the area, Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz reported. According to the newspaper, four cars and two motorcycles were set alight.
A 22-year-old settler was said to have been injured, and the paper quoted a settler leader from the area, denying claims that an attempt to gain access to the mosque had caused the clash.
Israeli police said they were looking into the incident.
In the West Bank, three recent incidents of settlers vandalizing mosques have put residents on edge. In December, a Yasuf village mosque was torched and 12 settlers from the Yizhar settlement detained for their role in the incident. Also in the Nablus region, settlers torched a second mosque in May, Al-Lubban Ash-Sharqiya villagers said settlers drove up to the mosque, gathered flammables, and set them alight.
In June, officials from the Islamic Waqf said a recent wave of settlers moving into Jaffa, a Palestinian city now south of Tel Aviv, attempted to set ablaze the Jaffa Mosque as it was undergoing repairs.
PA security subdues opposition to direct talks with Israel
Palestine Information Center – 26/08/2010
RAMALLAH — The Palestinian Authority’s security militias on Wednesday used excessive force to prevent dozens of Palestinians in Ramallah from participating in a conference opposing the US-sponsored direct talks with the Israeli occupation state.
The militias violently stormed the building where the press conference was supposed to be held and embarked on beating the participants.
They also beat two cameramen working for the local Al-Watan TV before confiscating their equipment.
Wednesday’s press conference was organized by the national conference against direct talks, a coalition consisting of hundreds of political factions, organizations, institutions and figures from the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
The event was supposed to be held simultaneously in the West Bank and Gaza through video conferencing.
A statement issued in the press conference held in Gaza strongly denounced this repressive move and considered it a serious violation of the Palestinian basic law and the national norms.
The participants in Gaza conference declared the launch of a plan to form a popular rallying against the decision to enter into direct negotiations with the occupation state.
Senior official of the popular front for the liberation of Palestine (PFLP) Jamil Al-Majdalawi explained during the conference that a joint committee in the West Bank and Gaza will be formed to follow up this plan and to organize events and protests against the direct negotiations.
The PFLP deplored in a separate statement on Wednesday the intelligence apparatus in the West Bank for sabotaging and disrupting this conference and called for an immediate probe into the incident and punishing the perpetrators.
It also expressed its dismay at this level of degradation which the security apparatuses in the West Bank have stooped to.
For his part, member of Hamas’s political bureau Ezzat Al-Resheq strongly condemned what he described as the brutal attack on national figures opposing the direct talks with Israel and reiterated his call for Abbas to step down from all his posts.
“Not only those who take up arms against the occupation in the West Bank are hunted and targeted by Abbas-Fayyad forces, but everyone having a position opposing the policy of concessions and compromises pursued by the authority in Ramallah against the national cause is also targeted and repressed,” Resheq stated Thursday.
See also:
Hamas: The new arrest campaign in W. Bank a requirement for Washington talks
Palestine Information Center – 25/08/2010
DAMASCUS — The Hamas Movement deplored the Palestinian Authority’s security militias for kidnapping lately dozens of its cadres and senior officials in the West Bank, considering this campaign an urgent requirement for the frivolous talks to be held in Washington.
“This frenzied campaign against our people in the West Bank is an instant requisite ahead of the useless negotiations in Washington, and a bad fruit of the policy and approach of the security coordination with the occupation under the command of US general Keith Dayton, that is intended for protecting the occupation’s security and the settlers’ well-being,” Hamas said in a press release on Tuesday.
Hamas also called on de facto president Mahmoud Abbas and his government to desist from this unpatriotic approach and release all detainees immediately, and held them fully responsible for the detainees’ safety.
For his part, Dr. Ahmed Bahar, the first deputy speaker of the Palestinian legislative council, slammed the raids carried out by these security militias on homes and offices of a number of Hamas lawmakers in the West Bank.
Dr. Bahar also appealed in a statement to the Arab League, the organization of the Islamic conference, all parliaments around the world and human rights organizations to stand by the Jerusalemite officials threatened with expulsion from the holy city and pressure Israel to repeal its unjust decision against them.
The lawmaker condemned, in another context, the Palestine liberation organization for accepting the direct talks with Israelis, stressing that the PLO does not represent the Palestinian people.
In a separate incident, Abbas’s security militias kidnapped on Tuesday Sheikh Yasser Hamad, a senior Hamas official and a member of the municipal council in Qalqiliya city. Hamad is one of more than 60 Palestinians affiliated with Hamas kidnapped lately in the West Bank.
The militias also rounded up a young man called Munder Al-Sha’er from Habla village, south of Qalqiliya, during his visit to the relatives of his wife in Immatin village on Monday.
Sources close to Sha’er said that the detainee suffers from several diseases and spent many years in West Bank and Israeli jails.
Another Palestinian prisoner in Jericho prison was reportedly forced by the militias to shave his beard. Local sources added that the militias transferred him to criminals’ cell in an attempt to damage him psychologically.
10 other Palestinian citizens from Hamas were also kidnapped in the cities of Ramallah, Nablus, Al-Khalil, Qalqiliya, and Bethlehem, according to local sources on Wednesday.
The security militias in Nablus city also kidnapped Ahmed Al-Mash’ati, the commander-general of Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades, the armed wing of the popular front for the liberation of Palestine (PFLP) during his presence in a grocery store at noon Tuesday.
Deputy secretary-general of the PFLP Abdelrahim Malluh denounced in a press statement to the Palestinian information center (PIC) the kidnapping of Mash’ati, saying these security militias turned themselves into a tool to protect the Israeli occupation.
Malluh added that it is reprehensible for any security institution to arrest the Palestinian national figures and resistance fighters in order to guard the Israeli occupation’s security.
In a related context, Palestinian lawmaker Imad Nofal, for his part, strongly denounced the West Bank security militia for summoning Asma Hamouda, the wife of prisoner Ra’ed Hutri and a member of Qalqiliya municipal council, for interrogation.
Nofal stressed that this action is contrary to the Palestinian people’s norms and traditions, adding that women should be spared any political differences.
Israeli army escorts 500 Jewish Israelis into controversial settlement near Nablus
By Saed Bannoura – IMEMC News – August 25, 2010
500 Israeli citizens, escorted by dozens of military vehicles, drove by bus deep into the West Bank on Wednesday in a provocative visit to a West Bank settlement. The settlement has been the home of a number of violent attackers of local Palestinians, and many incidents of violence have originated from the settlement.
The most recent incident was the burning of Palestinian olive trees in the area this past weekend, just one of dozens of arsons that no police force has investigated.
On Wednesday, dozens of buses entered the West Bank in violation of the Oslo agreement and other signed accords, in the second such incident this month. On August 5th, around 300 Israelis were escorted into the same area to visit a site known as ‘Joseph’s Tomb’.
During the incursion, Israeli military forces that had been deployed in the area implemented increased security checks on the Palestinian residents of the region, delaying some people for several hours at checkpoints in order to allow the Jewish worshipers to pass freely.
The Palestinian Authority in the West Bank was recently given the authority by Israeli military rulers to be able to refurbish the site, which is a holy place of pilgrimage to Christians, Muslims and Jews. Israeli Rabbis Shlomo Amar and Yona Metzger criticized the idea of Palestinians having control over a holy site that is on their own land – despite the fact that Jewish, Christian and Muslim holy sites were all preserved and maintained during the hundreds of years of Muslim rule over the Holy Land, the Rabbis stated, “If the PA receives the right to refurbish the holy grave site, it is clear that it will end up becoming a mosque…How can we give them authority and ownership over the place that is one of the three [in addition to Jerusalem and Hevron] that our Sages teach that the Gentiles cannot claim is not ours?… Such a disgrace cannot be allowed.”
The tomb is located near Balata refugee camp in Nablus, where thousands of Palestinian refugees live after having been exiled from their homes in what is now Israel.
After the last such incident, Taleb Abu Sha’ar, the Minister of Religious Affairs in Gaza challenged the Israeli military’s decision to escort the invading civilians, calling it a violation and provocation.
Ashton ‘concerned’ by anti-wall leader’s conviction
Ma’an – 25/08/2010
Abdallah Abu Rahmah
BETHLEHEM — EU foreign affairs and security chief Catherine Ashton said Tuesday she was concerned by the conviction of a Palestinian anti-wall campaign leader by an Israeli military court on charges of incitement and organizing demonstrations.
“The EU considers Abdallah Abu Rahmah to be a Human Rights Defender committed to non violent protest against the route of the Israeli separation barrier through his West Bank village of Bil’in,” Ashton said in a statement.
Ashton said she was further deeply concerned that “at the possible imprisonment of Mr Abu Rahmah is intended to prevent him and other Palestinians from exercising their legitimate right to protest against the existence of the separation barriers in a non violent manner.”
The High Representative added that the EU considers the route of Israel’s wall where it is built on Palestinian land to be illegal, and that it maintained a presence at all of Abu Rahmah’s court hearings.
Abu Rahmah was detained on 10 December 2009 during a night raid. According to his supporters, Abu Rahmah’s conviction was based only on testimonies of minors who were arrested in the middle of the night and denied legal counsel despite significant ills in their questioning.
###
International Solidarity Movement
Abdallah’s outrageous conviction today will be followed by a sentence in the coming weeks. The amount of pressure we will be able to generate in this time could influence Abdallah’s sentence, but will also make clear to Israeli authorities that the repression of the popular struggle does have a political price.
Please use the below template letters prepared by the Popular Struggle Coordination Committee to ask your Minister of Foreign Affairs to send an official inquiry to the Israeli government about Abdallah. Demand that your country apply pressure on Israeli officials to release Abdallah Abu Rahmah and stop targeting popular struggle.
Military court convicts anti-wall leader
Ma’an – 24/08/2010
BETHLEHEM — An Israeli military court on Tuesday found the leader of a West Bank protest movement guilty of incitement and organizing illegal demonstrations.
Abdallah Abu Rahmah of Bil’in, near Ramallah, could face jail time for his leadership in the popular campaign against Israel’s wall, which severs the West Bank village for to protect nearby settlements.
The verdict was read in a military courtroom packed with friends, supporters, and family members, concluding an eight-month trial. Diplomats from Europe including a representative of the European Union attended.
According to his supporters, Abu Rahmah’s conviction was based only on testimonies of minors who were arrested in the middle of the night and denied legal counsel despite significant ills in their questioning.
The court threw out two charges, stone-throwing and arms possession, activists said. The arms charge was over Abu Rahmah’s collection of used tear-gas projectiles and bullet cases, the indictment said.
“This absurd charge is a clear example of how eager the military prosecution is to use legal procedures as a tool to silence and smear unarmed dissent,” the Popular Struggle Coordination Committee said in a statement.
Abu Rahmah’s case was the first time the prosecution had used the organizing and participating in illegal demonstrations since the First Intifada, the committee said.
Military law defines illegal assembly in a much stricter way than does Israeli civilian law, in practice forbidding more than 10 people from assembling without receiving a permit from the military.
Abu Rahmah was detained in December during a night raid, but he “did not find himself behind bars because he is a dangerous man,” the committee insisted.
“Abdallah, who is amongst the leaders of the Palestinian village of Bil’in, is viewed as a threat for his work in the five-year unarmed struggle to save the village’s land from Israel’s wall and expanding settlements.”
Abdallah is the recipient of the the Carl Von Ossietzky Medal for Outstanding Service in the Realization of Basic Human Rights, which awarded by the International League for Human Rights in Berlin.
US fires on civilian Bagram protest
By Tom Mellen | Morning Star | 24 August 2010
US troops fired on thousands of Afghan civilians as they protested outside the massive US military base at Bagram on Monday.
A provincial police official said that at least one civilian was killed in the incident, but Nato asserted that no civilians had been killed or injured.
The Western military alliance claimed that soldiers had only fired “warning shots” to disperse residents after they surrounded a military patrol and attacked vehicles outside the sprawling facility with rocks and iron bars.
But Parwan province deputy police chief General Faqir Ahmad was adamant that one civilian had been killed – although he said he could not be sure who fired the fatal bullet.
Gen Ahmad said that the Nato shooting had served to enrage the crowd, which he put at about 2,000 people.
He said that some responded by using rocks and sticks to attack police and the head of the district government, Kabir Ahmad, who had tried to calm the situation.
He reported that Mr Ahmad and a police officer had sustained serious but not life-threatening injuries.
Gen Ahmad went on to say that the rally had been triggered by the arrest of a religious teacher suspected of taking part in a rocket attack on occupation forces.
Also on Monday, officials and residents of Baghlan province in the north of the country accused Nato troops of killing eight civilians during a pre-dawn raid.
Mohammed Ismail, the governor of the Talah wa Barfak District, said that foreign troops broke into a district house at 2am and killed eight civilians, injured 12 and took nine prisoners.
The province’s governor Munchi Abdul Majid confirmed the attack but could not provide details.
Nato spokesman Major Michael Johnson said that he was unaware of any such attack.
Meanwhile the Taliban has reportedly attacked and torched a Nato convoy carrying fuel and materiel to US troops in the south.
Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf Ahmadi claimed responsibility for the attack on the lorries destined for Helmand and alleged that the assault prompted US forces to evacuate their military base in Sangin.
Nato denied the Taliban’s claims and boasted that US-led troops had killed 40 militants in offensives this week in eastern Afghanistan.
Monday’s clash between locals and occupation forces outside the Bagram base is the second such incident in 10 days.
On August 15 hundreds of residents participated in a militant demonstration in protest at the construction of military facilities on land owned by villagers.
Protesters threw “baseball-size rocks” at troops as they escorted a mercenary to the base, according to Nato.
Gaza’s industries suffer under siege
Mel Frykberg | IPS | 23 August 2010
 |
A bombed out biscuit factory in Gaza. (Mel Frykberg/IPS) |
GAZA CITY, occupied Gaza Strip – Just off Omar al-Mukhtar Street, Gaza City’s main thoroughfare, in a narrow, sandy alleyway is a little second-hand clothing shop. In the dimly lit store, with only intermittent electricity for some hours a day at best, sits a single battered and aging sewing machine.
This is where Khaled Nassan, a father of four children, tries in vain to eke out a living repairing and selling second-hand clothing. Nassan charges the equivalent of 25 cents on average to repair an item. Gazans can’t afford to pay the dollar it used to cost. Nassan is lucky if he takes home $20 a day.
“There is almost no business. I’m surviving on about $500 a month, and I have several children at university. My family is dependent on aid from the [UN agency for Palestine refugees (UNRWA)]. Without them we would not survive,” Nassan tells IPS.
Prior to Israel’s systematic strangulation of the coastal territory (which began during the outbreak of the second Palestinian Intifada or uprising in 2000 but peaked with its hermetic sealing in 2007 when Hamas took over) Nassan had a clothing factory which employed 250 Gazans who in turn supported nearly 3,000 dependents.
“I used to travel to Israel regularly for business to meet my Israeli business partners and visit stores where my clothing was sold. I would also purchase material there to bring back to Gaza but now I can’t import any material,” says Nassan.
“Previously my profits ranged around $20,000 monthly. I used to give my kids five dollars daily pocket money; now they are lucky if they get 50 cents. They have to walk long distances to and from university. We can’t even afford cheap shared taxis and I’m concerned about being able to fund their future education.”
Nassan is a harsh critic of the ruling Hamas regime. Eighty percent of Gaza’s population is now dependent on foreign aid, much of it from UNRWA. Despite Israel’s recent decision to ease the blockade it is still forbidding Gazan factories and companies from exporting their goods, and preventing the import of vital raw materials and spare parts and machinery.
Gaza’s economy was heavily dependent on the furniture, clothing, textile and food production sectors selling their goods outside Gaza.
Israeli authorities originally argued that the blockade on almost everything but bare humanitarian aid was for security reasons. However, following a lawsuit by the Israeli rights group Gisha the Israeli government was forced to acknowledge that the siege was a political move.
“A country has the right to decide that it chooses not to engage in economic relations or to give economic assistance to the other party to the conflict, or that it wishes to operate using ‘economic warfare,'” the government said.
Nassan is one of hundreds of formerly prosperous Gazan businessmen whose businesses and livelihoods have been decimated by the blockade and Israel’s devastating military assault on the strip during Israel’s invasion of Gaza at the end of 2008 beginning of 2009.
IPS visited the remains of a former three-story biscuit and potato chips factory belonging to Wael al-Wardah in northern Gaza a few hundred meters from the Israeli border.
The factory used to employ 150 individuals who supported approximately a thousand dependents. Its annual turnover was $10-12 million.
Craters, walls pockmarked with bullet holes, twisted and blackened machinery and equipment and sagging ceilings are all that remain after the Israelis employed F-16s, tank fire and bulldozers against the factory.
Al-Wardah, 43, father of seven from Gaza City, inherited the biscuits and potato chips factory from his father. His factory and the factories belonging to his four brothers who used to produce ice cream, sweets, potato chips and biscuits suffered 80 percent destruction and more than $10 million worth of damage during the Israeli bombardment. Twenty-two trucks and vehicles were also destroyed.
During the last three days of Israel’s 2008-09 winter assault, the Israeli Air Force embarked on an intensive bombing campaign aimed at the coastal territory’s economic infrastructure.
Israel had employed its “Dahiyeh doctrine,” which advocates disproportionate force in asymmetrical warfare against the civilian infrastructure of its enemies. Al-Wardah is adamant that no fighters were in the vicinity of the factories, because the Israelis were nearby.
Despite the bloody past, al-Wardah and his brothers are keen to start afresh. But they have been unable to import construction material to rebuild their factories. Al-Wardah is also unable to bring into Gaza machinery he bought in Europe.
“I have more than a million dollars of raw materials and specialist machinery sitting in Israel’s Ashdod port. It costs me $400 monthly to store the goods, but I still can’t bring them into Gaza,” he told IPS.
“Because I’m unable to continue my previous business I’m trying to start a pickled vegetable business, so I’ve brought in some equipment through the smuggling tunnels with Egypt. But this is very expensive and the tunnels get regularly bombed too.”
Karl Schembri from Oxfam in Gaza says easing the blockade doesn’t suffice.
“Gazans continue to suffer. The siege has to be completely lifted. There has to be free movement for people, and if the economy is to recover the import of raw material has to be allowed. Concrete and steel are needed to rebuild after the immense destruction,” Schembri told IPS.
Canadian Boat to Gaza to break siege, overcome “aid traps”
Steven Zhou, The Electronic Intifada, 23 August 2010
 |
The Canadian Boat to Gaza will bring back with it Gaza-produced goods to support trade with the besieged territory. (Free Gaza) |
Canadian activists looking to assist in the breaking of the siege of Gaza plans to launch a Canadian Boat to Gaza this fall. However, this Canadian version of the Freedom Flotilla that seeks to break the siege has a twist.
In partnership with the Free Gaza Movement (the group behind numerous boats to the Gaza Strip), the Canadian Boat to Gaza initiative, headed in part by Canadian activist Sandra Ruch, seeks to also take goods out of Gaza. In this way, the Canadian activists hope to assist Palestinians in Gaza by helping them, as declared in their mission statement, “assert their right to export, trade and provide for themselves rather than be at the mercy of international aid.” It is often forgotten that the siege of Gaza, intensified after the Hamas elections victory in 2006, prohibits all exporting from the Strip. This is the other half of the siege, which helps to corrode the economic independence of the Palestinian people.
The launch of the project was made at the first fundraiser for the Canadian Boat to Gaza on 14 July 2010 at the Steel Workers Hall located in downtown Toronto. Having been to the Gaza Strip twice, Ruch has seen the effects of the suffocating blockade. “Every time that I went to Gaza,” recalled Ruch, “the people told me, ‘You know, we’re not farm animals, we can’t just be fed — we need to be free.'” The organizers estimate the initiative will cost at least $300,000 CDN ($294,663 USD) and fundraising efforts are going on at the moment to reach that amount before the fall sailing season starts in mid-September of this year.
This theme of self-empowerment and self-reliance ran throughout the kickoff fundraiser, which also featured Israeli economist Shir Hever, who gave a presentation on the different types of aid that go into the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. Hever also discussed how Israel as the occupying power manipulates the management of this aid in ways that allow it to benefit politically and economically from the occupation. Hever detailed the ways in which international aid indirectly takes the heat off Israel’s responsibilities (and crimes), and how the Canadian Boat to Gaza project can contribute to the solution of these problems (Hever’s talk is available on Youtube).
Ultimately, the flotilla movement allows the humanitarian problem in Gaza to be tended to with dignity. While incorporating a mechanism by which the people of Gaza can profit on the ground from the humanitarian support, Hever also emphasized that the flotilla initiative itself is a “strong political message,” forcing “the world to focus on the political and humanitarian disaster that is the Gaza blockade as well as the Palestinian question in general.” By helping to carry Palestinian exports, the act brings to attention the Palestinian right to trade with the outside world (something that Israel, as the occupying power, is supposed to respect).
Hever’s research puts aid to the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip in political context. During the years of the Oslo accords from around 1994 to 2000, the international community (especially the European Union) began to funnel more humanitarian and developmental aid to the occupied territories, amounting to approximately $7 billion USD (see “International Aid to the Palestinians Under Occupation,” Alternative Information Center, 7 July 2010).
Instead of being makers of their own destiny, the Palestinians are forced into being passive consumers of mostly Israeli goods. The Palestinians in Gaza, who are not allowed any exports under the siege, and a very, very limited amount of imports from the United Nations (the amount of which fluctuates at the whim of Israeli officials), suffer most from these economic absurdities. All the while, Israel stands to gain the most financially by collecting service fees and customs fees that inevitably accompanies the aid itself. This makes the Canadian flotilla an even more urgent initiative. If successful, it will allow (in addition to raising awareness of the occupation) the Palestinians to fight for some semblance of economic freedom in the shape of exporting their goods to the rest of the world.
Being dependent on aid forever is not compatible with sovereignty. Being under occupation and dependent on international aid is even worse. As the occupying power, Israel’s responsibilities are partially blurred by the donations from international aid agencies. Thus, as Hever stated at the Canadian Boat to Gaza fundraising launch, “The Freedom Flotilla initiative has the exact traits that are the opposite of the aid that goes through the official channels of the UN and the World Food Program. … This is an opportunity to send aid without paying any taxes to Israel, without letting Israel decide what goes in and doesn’t go in, and without allowing Israel to control who will be the staff … many of the aid agencies working in the occupied territories have staff members disqualified by Israel.”
The seven Turkish and American activists who lost their lives on the Mavi Marmara last May exemplified solidarity and their sacrifice helped to further crack the fortress of Israeli hasbara or propaganda. The Canadian Boat to Gaza initiative hopes to honor the legacy of such efforts. In a time when conventional methods of international aid have proven to be largely ineffective in the face of a brutal and manipulative occupation, the Canadian Boat to Gaza seeks to help Palestinians achieve dignity and independence.
Steven Zhou is a student and activist at the University of Toronto in Canada. He is a contributor to The Canadian Charger, and runs his own blog, (Un)Conventional Analysis at www.worldbfree88.wordpress.com.
