Russia censures Iran, expects Israel to help restore ties with US
Vladimir Putin surprised many at the event known as Russia’s Davos with his comments on the Iran nuclear deal and Russia’s relations with the US

Russian President Vladimir Putin at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum on May 25, 2018. Photo: Reuters/Sergei Bobylev/TASS
By M.K. Bhadrakumar | Asian Times | June 1, 2018
The annual meeting of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum – dubbed as “Russia’s Davos” – on May 25, which traditionally promotes foreign investment in the Russian economy, ended this time around as a major political event signaling a renewed bid by President Vladimir Putin for détente with the West.
In wide-ranging remarks at the forum, Putin made an explicit overture to Washington for dialogue. The US decision to quit the Iran nuclear deal was the leitmotif of the Q&A at St Petersburg – which are generally choreographed by the Kremlin in advance – and Putin seized the opportunity to articulate a highly nuanced position on the topic with an eye on the overall Russian-American relationship.
Unsurprisingly, Putin criticized the US’ rejection of the Iran nuclear deal as a unilateralist move which would have negative consequences. But then, Putin also expressed understanding for President Donald Trump’s domestic compulsion in taking such a decision.
Putin also proposed that the US and Iran, which had negotiated the 2015 pact directly, could resume their negotiations to settle the differences: “Even now, the US President is not closing the door on talks. He is saying that he is not happy about many of the terms of the deal. But in general, he is not ruling out an agreement with Iran. But it can only be a two-way street. Therefore, there is no need for unnecessary pressure if we want to preserve something. Doors must be left open for negotiation and for the final outcome. I think there are still grounds for hope.”
Putin probably sees Russia as a facilitator-cum-moderator between the US and Iran, but at any rate, he has deflected the focus from the EU’s approach, which single-mindedly focuses on the downstream impact of US sanctions against Iran. It is smart thinking on Putin’s part to signal that Moscow does not propose to wade into any transatlantic rift over the Iran issue. He probably doubts if the rift is real enough for outsiders to exploit.
Putin and the Iran nuclear deal
But the really intriguing part was that Putin also brought into the matrix the “good, trust-based relations between us (Russia and Israel).” Significantly, the interpolation occurred while Putin was arguing that the preservation of the Iran nuclear deal was also in Israel’s interests.
Neither Moscow nor Tel Aviv has divulged the details of the recent meeting between Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu in Moscow in early May. But Israeli sources have since divulged in bits and pieces that a major understanding might have been reached as regards the imperative need for an holistic approach toward the whole situation surrounding the “Iran question,” including Iran’s presence in Syria, which Israel indeed sees as existential threat.
Interestingly, three days after Putin spoke at St Petersburg, an influential Moscow think tank came up with a commentary regarding the emergent trends in the Syrian situation. Basically, the commentary stressed that Russian policy was switching tack and giving primacy to the search for political settlement and reconstruction of Syria. But it went on to discuss the rising tensions between Iran and Israel in Syria and blamed Iran for using Syria for the “export” of its policy of Resistance against Israel.
Hinting at growing resentment within the Sunni majority in Syria against Iran’s activities, the commentary contextualized Putin’s recent call for the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Syrian soil. It openly rapped the Iranians on the knuckle: “Iran’s operations in Syria go far beyond fighting terrorists and are hardly welcomed by anyone within the region and beyond. This heightens tensions in Israel’s relations with its bitter rivals … Serving as a platform for fighting the ‘Zionist’ enemy is something Syria needs the least.”
Indeed, these are extraordinary statements for an establishment think tank known to be close to the Kremlin. The key elements were: a) Russia holds Iran as responsible for ratcheting up tensions with Israel; b) Russia thoroughly disapproves of Syria being turned into a turf for Iran’s policy of “Resistance” against Israel; and, c) Moscow expects the Assad regime to distance itself from Iran’s anti-Israeli activities.
The patent shift in the Russian stance implies Moscow’s acknowledgment that the fate of the Iran nuclear deal is also linked to Iran’s regional policies. Arguably, this Russian stance harmonizes with what Trump and Netanyahu have been saying all along. Perhaps, Russia hopes to cajole Tehran to walk toward the negotiating table where Trump is waiting. Perhaps, Putin also calculates that such a helpful stance cannot but have positive fallout on US-Russia relations as a whole. Time will tell.
The bottom line is that the close ties between Russia and Israel are sailing into full view. Interestingly, Israel just obliged a famous Russian oligarch who is perceived as close to Putin, by granting him citizenship, which would enable him to visit Britain – although London refuses to renew his residence permit. The influential Kremlin-linked Russian oligarch now de facto becomes the wealthiest Israeli citizen, too.
Suffice to say, it all does seem a cozy condominium between Putin and Netanyahu. The big question will be how far Netanyahu can help Putin to bring about a Russian-American “thaw” under this complex set of circumstances.
US ‘losing its cards’ in Syria: Highlights of RT’s interview with Bashar Assad
RT | May 31, 2018
Washington and its “puppets” tried, and failed, to destroy Syria – and the US military will eventually be forced out of the country: These are a few of the highlights from RT’s exclusive interview with President Bashar Assad.
Speaking with RT’s Murad Gazdiev in Damascus, Assad commented on a range of topics, from the threat of direct conflict between the US and Russia, to why he doesn’t fear Israeli assassination threats.
On Victory: ‘It’s self-evident’ that Syria is ‘moving closer to the end of the conflict’
Assad noted that the “majority” of Syria is now under government control, but said that continued provocations and escalations by the United States and its allies have needlessly prolonged the seven-year conflict. With each Syrian military victory or successful reconciliation effort, the US and its partners have attempted to counteract these gains by “supporting more terrorism, bringing more terrorists to Syria, or by hindering the political process,” Assad said.
However, he stated that it was “self-evident” that “we are moving closer to the end of the conflict,” adding that “without external interference it won’t take more than a year to settle the situation in Syria.”
The Syrian leader said that whenever possible, his government has chosen negotiations and reconciliation over use of force.
“War is the worst choice but sometimes you only have this choice,” Assad told RT. “Factions like Al-Qaeda, like ISIS, like Al-Nusra, and the like-minded groups, they’re not ready for any dialogue… So, the only option to deal with those factions is force.”
He defended the government’s use of ceasefires and allowing extremists to withdraw to Idlib province, describing the agreements as strategically advantageous for the Syrian army. “If you have two or three frontiers, that’s better than having 10, maybe more than 100 at the time.”
On the US: Washington ‘losing its cards’ in Syria
Although the US forces continue to operate illegally in Syria, they will eventually be forced out of the country, Assad told RT.
“The United States is losing its cards. The main card was Al-Nusra, that was called ‘moderate,’ but when scandals started leaking that they’re not moderate, that they’re Al-Qaeda, which is supposed to be fought by the United States, they started looking for another card. This card is the SDF [Syrian Democratic Forces] now,” he said, referring to the US-backed militia group. According to Assad, once Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) and Al-Nusra are exterminated, the Syrian military will turn its attention on the SDF.
“We’re going to use two methods to deal with the SDF: The first one, we started opening doors for negotiations – because the majority of them are Syrians. And supposedly they like their country, they don’t like being puppets to any foreigners – that’s what we suppose.” Assad said that these commonly-shared values could allow reconciliation with the government. “We all don’t trust the Americans, [so] the one option is to live with each other as Syrians.” However, if negotiations fail, the Syrian army will be forced to liberate areas occupied by the SDF, with the Americans, or without the Americans.”
On this point Assad was adamant: “This is our land, it’s our right, it’s our duty. To liberate [these areas], and the Americans should leave. Somehow, they’re going to leave. They came to Iraq with no legal basis. And look what happened to them. They have to learn their lesson.”
On Russia: Moscow’s leadership prevented ‘direct conflict’ with US military
Syria’s president heaped praise on Moscow, claiming that Russian “wisdom” had prevented a direct conflict between Russian and American forces in Syria. “We were close to having direct conflict between the Russian forces and the American forces, and fortunately, it has been avoided, not by the wisdom of the American leadership, but by the wisdom of the Russian leadership.”
While Assad reiterated that the United States military was not welcome in Syria, he said that avoiding escalation was the key to restoring Syria’s territorial integrity. “We need the Russian support, but we need, at the same time to avoid the American foolishness in order to be able to stabilize our country.”
He emphasized that Russia has shown restraint – not weakness – in Syria, noting how Russian warnings had likely dissuaded Trump from launching a full-scale attack against Damascus.
“The Russians announced publicly that they are going to destroy the bases that are going to be used to launch missiles, and our information – we don’t have evidence, we only have information, and that information is credible information – that they were thinking about a comprehensive attack all over Syria, and that’s why the threat pushed the West to make it on a much smaller scale,” the Syrian president said.
On Israel: No longer phased by ‘threat of Israeli aggression,’ Tel Aviv in ‘panic’
Assad shrugged off Israeli threats against his own life, telling Gazdiev that “my generation – and most of the generations in Syria now – has lived under the threat of Israeli aggression. This is something in our unconscious feeling. So to say that you are afraid while living with the same threat for decades – this is nonsense.” He said that the fact that Tel Aviv has resorted to threats suggests that the Israelis are panicking.
“The Israelis have been assassinating, killing, occupying for decades now, for around seven decades, in this region, but usually they do all this without threatening. Now, why do they threaten in this way? This is panic, this is a kind of hysterical feeling because they are losing the ‘dear ones,’ the dear ones Al-Nusra and ISIS, that’s why Israel is panicking recently, and we understand their feeling.”
He said reports that Syria was helpless to stop Israeli airstrikes were inaccurate. “Our air defense is much stronger than before, thanks to the Russian support and the recent attacks by the Israelis and by the Americans and British and French proved that we are in a better situation” than at the start of the conflict seven years ago, he said. However, Assad noted that when foreign-backed fighters first poured into Syria, the first thing they did was target air defense systems – suggesting a “direct link” between the terrorists groups and Israel.
On chemical attacks: ‘Is it in our interest? Why? And why now?’
Syria’s president described the string of alleged chemical attacks as provocations that have ultimately failed to persuade the international community to give the US and its allies a military mandate in Syria.
Washington and its allies blamed the last such attack, in April, on Damascus, but Assad insisted that the Western narrative makes no sense.
“The timing of this alleged strike was after the victory of the Syrian troops in Ghouta. Let alone the fact that we don’t have chemical weapons anyway,” he told RT. Pointing to multiple reports of civilians and medical workers in the area having no knowledge of a chemical attack – with some even appearing in the Western press – Assad concluded that the alleged incident was a last-ditch Western attempt to sway international opinion – one that failed.
“They told a story, they told a lie, and the public opinion around the world and in the West didn’t buy their story, but they couldn’t withdraw. So, they had to do something, even on a smaller scale,” Assad said, referring to the joint airstrikes against purported Syrian chemical weapons facilities, carried out on April 14 by the US, UK, and France.
However, Assad acknowledged that nothing was stopping Washington from attempting similar provocations in the future. The US has “trampled on international law,” and “there’s no guarantee that it won’t happen [again].”
Assad asked: “What was the legal basis of [the April missile] attack? [Or] the so-called anti-terrorist alliance, which supports the terrorists, actually? What is the legal basis of their attack on Yemen, Afghanistan? There’s no legal basis.”
On Trump: ‘What you say is what you are’
Asked if he had a nickname for US President Donald Trump, who had previously called Assad an “animal,” Syria’s leader admitted that he wasn’t in the business of name-calling.
“This is not my language, so, I cannot use similar language. This is his language. It represents him,” he said. “I think there is a very well known principle, that what you say is what you are. So, he wanted to represent what he is, and that’s normal,” Assad added.
“The only thing that moves you is what people that you trust, people who are level-headed, people who are thoughtful, people who are moral, ethical, that’s what should move anything inside you, whether positive or negative. Somebody like Trump will move nothing for me,” he said.
On the myth of Syria’s ‘civil’ war: It was foreign-backed regime change
Assad disputed claims that the seven-year conflict has been a “civil war,” pointing out that there is no sectarian or ethnic conflicts in the areas currently controlled by the government. “Now in Damascus, in Aleppo, in Homs, in every area under Syrian government control, you will see [the whole] spectrum of Syrian society. With no exceptions.”
He noted that the term ‘civil war’ had been used widely since the beginning of the conflict in Syria – but it does not correctly characterize the conflict.
“A Syrian civil war means there are lines based either on ethnicities or sects or religion. Or maybe political opinion. In reality, in the areas in direct control by the government, which is now the majority of Syria, you have all this diversity,” Assad said. “So the word civil war is not correct. What we have actually, from the very beginning – mercenaries, Syrians and foreigners being paid by the West in order to topple the government. This is the mere reality. Everything else is just a mask to cover the real intentions.”
Israel, Myanmar sign agreement to teach about the Holocaust
MEMO | May 31, 2018
Israel and Myanmar have signed a cooperation agreement on educational programmes including curricula on teaching about the Holocaust, Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely said on Twitter on Tuesday.
“We continue to cooperate with our friends around the world,” Hotovely wrote, referring to Myanmar whose army has been accused by the UN of committing ethnic cleansing against the Muslim Rohingya minority and where hundreds of thousands of survivors have been displaced as refugees.
“The two countries will work to develop two official curricula for schools in both countries to teach about the Holocaust and its lessons as well as the negative consequences of intolerance, racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia,” Haaretz newspaper reported Wednesday.
Israel has continued to supply Myanmar with arms despite allegations of genocide. The armaments sold to Myanmar include over 100 tanks, weapons and boats that have been used to police the country’s border and perpetrate numerous acts of violence against the Rohingya, such that the UN suspects the army is committing ethnic cleansing.
Palestinian Youth injured by Israeli gunfire in blockaded Gaza

Palestine Information Center – May 31, 2018
GAZA – A Palestinian youth was shot and injured by the Israeli military east of the Bureij refugee camp, in central Gaza Strip on Wednesday evening.
A PIC news correspondent said a bullet fire by Israeli soldiers penetrated a 15-year-old child’s back. He was rushed to the Shuhadaa al-Aqsa Hospital, in Deir Balah, so as to be treated for his wounds, reported critical.
According to the Gaza-based Palestinian Health Ministry, 118 Palestinians were killed and 13,300 others injured by Israeli gunfire unleashed toward Palestinian protesters as they joined the Great March of Return, launched on March 30.

Labour Friends of Israel slammed for visiting country after recent killings of Palestinians

RT | May 30, 2018
Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) have been heavily criticized for promoting their latest trip to Israel with a series of pictures on social media, just weeks after the ‘massacre’ of Palestinian protesters by Israeli Defense Forces.
LFI are currently in Israel to “promote bilateral ties and meet politicians”, according to Britain’s Jewish News. They’ve been marking their trip with a series of smiley photos and meetings with Israel’s Labor party, much to the dismay of many of those on Twitter who are outraged at Israeli military action against civilians.
Their first tweet said: “We’re in Israel this week for a parliamentary delegation – here’s the group in Jerusalem this morning.”
One LFI tweet pictured a meeting with Israeli Labor leader Avi Gabbay. He recently wrote to Jeremy Corbyn to notify him of his party’s severing of ties with the Labour leader in response to the “crisis” of anti-Semitism in the UK party. It would appear these LFI members are in Gabbay’s good books.
From just under 100 supporters and select officers, only 7 Labour members of LFI made the trip to Israel. They include MPs Andrew Gwynne, Labour’s National Co-ordinator, LFI chair Joan Ryan, who was the subject of an Al-Jazeera undercover investigation into links between Israeli diplomats and the LFI, as well as MPs Sharon Hodgson, Louise Ellman and Jonathan Reynolds.
The LFI came under fire for declaring that “Hamas must accept responsibility” for scores of Palestinians being killed in mid May, during demonstrations to mark 70 years since Nakba “the catastrophe”.
In a tweet that was subsequently deleted, LFI responded to the killing of more than 60, including 6 children and the injuring of some 2,500 Palestinians by stating: “Tragic events on the Gazan border; all civilian deaths are regrettable. Hamas must accept responsibility for these events. Their successful attempt to hijack peaceful protest as cover to attack Israeli border communities must be condemned by all who seek peace in the Middle East.”
The widely-condemned statement has reportedly led to a number of Labour MPs disassociating themselves from the group, including Tulip Siddiq and Catherine West, who requested being removed from LFI’s supporters list, according to media outlet, Skwawkbox.
‘Israel’s detention of freedom flotilla is a crime’

A ship carrying 20 Palestinians set out from the Port of Gaza in the hopes of breaking Israel’s decade-long maritime embargo of the Gaza Strip [Mohammed Asad/Middle East Monitor]
MEMO | May 30, 2018
Head of the Popular International Committee to Support Gaza, Dr Essam Yousef, called on the international community to pressure Israel to immediately release the passengers of a ship that set sail yesterday from Gaza heading to Cyprus in an effort to break the 12 year siege of the enclave.
Israeli occupation forces flanked the ship as it reached nine nautical miles from Gaza’s shores only for them to force it on to the Israeli port of Ashdod to the north of Gaza.
In a press statement today, Yousef condemned “the latest crime which is to be added to the occupation’s criminal record against the Palestinian people and the people of Gaza, who have been besieged for 12 years. This is a violation of all international conventions, laws, and legislations.”
Yousef held the Israeli authorities completely responsible for the safety of the ship’s passengers, who are “ill, students and unarmed civilians”.
“How can a state with an arsenal of deadly weapons as big as Israel and which considers itself a regional force superior to the rest of the region’s countries on a military level, pursue a ship carrying the ill and students who’s only aspiration is to leave the besieged Gaza Strip for treatment and education?” Yousef asked.
“Isn’t this state ashamed of itself, as it acts like a rogue state above the law, building its strength and force on the remains of innocent, starving and oppressed Palestinian people,” he added.
Yousef called on the governments of the free world and humanitarian and human rights organisations, as well as all international institutions to continue to pressure the occupation to lift the illegal and immoral siege imposed on two million people in Gaza, posing a blatant violation of all international charters related to human rights.
He also stressed the “Palestinian people’s right to move in and out of their country for treatment, education, work and any other activity, like the rest of the peoples of the world. No force on earth can continue to imprison and suffocate an entire nation who aspires for freedom and a dignified life.”
Lebanon launches search for first oil & gas reserves despite Israeli threats
RT | May 30, 2018
Beirut has announced the start of its oil and gas exploration for offshore energy reserves in the Mediterranean after approving a plan submitted by a consortium of France’s Total, Italy’s Eni and Russia’s Novatek.
Energy and Water Minister Cesar Abi Khalil said Lebanon plans to launch a second offshore licensing round by the end of 2018 or early 2019.
In February, the country signed its first offshore oil and gas exploration and production agreements with the Total-Eni-Novatek consortium for offshore Blocks 4 and 9.
Part of Block 9 contains waters disputed with neighboring Israel but the consortium said it had no plans to drill in that area. Lebanese authorities gave the go-ahead this week for exploration of the two blocks to begin, said Khalil.
The exploration period can last up to three years and the first well is expected to be drilled in 2019, providing all government departments grant necessary licenses and permissions “on time and without delay”, he added.
The minister explained that drilling would determine whether Lebanon had commercial reserves and, if so, their scale. Lebanon shares the Levant Basin in the eastern Mediterranean with Israel, Cyprus, and Syria. A range of big sub-sea gas fields have been discovered in the area since 2009.
However, the country was far behind Israel and Cyprus in exploring and developing its share of resources as a result of political issues over the past few years, and a dispute with Israel over Lebanon’s southern maritime border.
Israel had earlier threatened Lebanon over drilling in areas which it considers to be disputed. It warned Lebanon that it would pay a “full price” if another war breaks out between the two countries.
Three months ago, Lebanese President Michel Aoun appealed to US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, asking for Washington’s “effective role” in settling the dispute with Israel over offshore oil drilling areas. After the US proposed sharing the offshore blocks, Lebanon rejected its offer to “help.”
The US proposal reportedly specified that the Lebanese would take up 65 percent of the disputed sections of the shelf. Commenting on the proposal Aoun said Lebanon will not give Israel a “millimeter.” He underlined that the offshore energy blocks are located in Lebanon’s waters and thus are within Beirut’s exclusive economic zone.
Lebanon and Israel’s dispute runs over a triangular area of around 860 square kilometers (332 square miles) of waters, which could contain huge reserves of natural gas and maybe even crude oil.
Exposing the dynamics of UNSC draft resolutions on Palestine
MEMO | May 29, 2018
Last week, the UN Security Council discussed a draft resolution on providing international protection for Palestinians, upon request by Kuwait’s permanent representative to the UN, Mansour Al-Otaibi. By the end of this week, the UNSC will be voting on the resolution, with Wafa news agency reporting that if the US uses its veto, Palestinians will call upon the UN General Assembly for “an extraordinary meeting under the title ‘Uniting for Peace’”.
It is safe to say that Palestinians are ensnared politically, and every gesture that is ostensibly for their protection is but another manacle that consolidates their isolation. Lest anyone jump on the bandwagon of “protection”, it is best that one takes into account that the international community has repeatedly confirmed its loyalties lie with Israel. Its credibility as regards protection, therefore, should be immediately denounced. Asking two fundamental questions juxtaposed against each other would clarify international intentions once and for all.
What does Palestine mean for Palestinians? What does Palestine mean to the international community?
For the first question, it is imperative that one draws upon Palestinian narratives of their land and follow the trajectory of how the entire territory that is their right was colonised by Israel’s existence. From that departure point, it is also important to include two rights that the international community wilfully ignores: the right of return and the right of struggle, by all means, against colonialism.
The second question deals more with disregard rather than concern. Even before Israel’s inception, Palestine was treated as a commodity and its people fodder for collateral damage. The Partition Plan of 29 Novermber 1947 is now hypocritically marked as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. Let us be clear upon what this alleged solidarity has entailed: supporting colonial Israel and its so-called “right to defend itself” against the population that it has colonised and ostracised. UN solidarity has condoned massacres of Palestinians and forced displacement. In return, it has dedicated one specific day for remembrance which has yet to cause revulsion internationally, rather than acquiescence to commemoration.
The juxtaposition between both questions occurs now, in terms of the Palestinian right of return and their right to struggle for liberation from colonialism. On paper, the UN has not denied these rights. However, it has forced Palestinians into a vacuum where knowledge of rights is not tantamount to accessibility. The UN has created slogans for Palestinians while aiding Israel diplomatically, to the point that is has become a duty to separate the authentic, internationalist, solidarity with Palestinians from the exploitative, symbolic, corrupted remembrance which the UN has bequeathed to Palestinians.
As the UN derives impunity from its own existence, with what conscience can we declare approval for protection emanating from the institution? We must remember that “international protection” is concocted from the exterior, with Palestinians having little to no say in how such protection would be provided, what form would it take and what parameters would be imposed by the UN. Is it too late to remember that during other massacres, UN rhetoric was primarily concerned with Israel’s “right to defend itself”? Does memory fade with the passing of years to the point that the Nakba and subsequent massacres are forgotten? I believe not. A memory that emanates from within has the power to transcend time.
Palestinians do not deserve repetitive attempts at manipulating their rights and having the UN establish its collaborative dominion at their expense. This is not to say that Palestinians do not need protection. However, they are not in need of protection from Israel’s accomplices to degrade their options further by increasing their risks of being politically targeted. Two rights and the means to achieve them are what Palestinians need – the right of return and the right to struggle by all means for liberation. A unifying, internationalist force that is ready to stand by Palestinians to help them achieve their rights. Anything less than that is calling Palestinians to play a part in their betrayal.
Israel bill to limit Palestinians’ access to High Court passes first reading

MEMO | May 29, 2018
Israeli politicians waved through a bill that would limit Palestinians’ access to the High Court last night, according to the Jerusalem Post.
The bill would prevent many cases, including those of housing demolitions and Israeli land grabbing offences, from reaching the High Court, instead redirecting them to district courts in the occupied West Bank.
Right-wing politicians stated that the bill would reduce the number of complaints pertaining to land ownership that are often filed by Palestinians and left-wing organisations in the aftermath of settler occupation.
Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, a supporter of the bill, rejoiced in its passing of the first reading.
“The move will also reduce the heavy burden imposed on the High Court of Justice,” she said adding that the High Court “handles more than 2,000 petitions each year, and should reject many of them outright.”
Critics however argued that the bill was a step towards annexation of the West Bank, by expanding the power of district courts outside of Israeli sovereignty.
Zionist Union MK Tzipi Livni expressed concern that the move would strengthen the argument that Palestinians should have the right to vote in Israel, as has been suggested as part of the one-state solution.
Shaked defended the bill, stating that in the case of land ownership claims, it would place the burden of proof on the Palestinians filing the case, not the Israeli settlers.
The bill will also refer other issues to the lower court, such as restraining orders and Israel entry permits.
Israel has long sought to annex the occupied West Bank to preserve the illegal settlements in the area, but has struggled with what the fate of Palestinians would be.
Earlier this month, Israel’s deputy defence minister, MK Rabbi Eli Ben-Dahan, claimed that Israel could annex the entirety of the occupied West Bank, without giving its Palestinian residents the right to vote.
“The clear and absolute thing is that we are here in the Land of Israel and we are not afraid of any attempts to frighten us,” he said. “They want to scare us that maybe soon we will not be a majority and therefore we have to abandon Judea and Samaria [the West Bank]. This is a grave mistake.”
Read also:
Palestinians call to save their homes from Israeli demolition orders
8 things I learned about Palestine while touring 8 Western nations
By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | May 29, 2018
On 20 February, I embarked on a global book tour that has, thus far, taken me to eight nations. The main theme of all my talks in various cultural, academic and media platforms was the pressing need to refocus the discussion on Palestine on the struggle, aspirations and history of the Palestinian people.
But, interacting with hundreds of people and being exposed to multiple media environments in both mainstream and alternative media, I also learned much about the changing political mood on Palestine in the western world.
While the nations I have visited – the US, Canada, the UK (England and Scotland), the Netherlands, Austria, Australia and New Zealand – do not in any way represent all western countries, the diverse platforms that were available to me allowed me to gain a reasonably good perspective on the ideas, perceptions and attitudes of people in government, media, academia and civil society:
First, the civil society support base for Palestine is growing exponentially, not only in the number of people who are concerned with – or interested in – learning about Palestine, but also in the nature of that engagement as well. The detachment or sense of despair of the past, has all but completely vanished, being replaced with a proactive approach – as in people wanted to be agents of change at local and national levels.
Second, the consensus regarding the support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement is constantly increasing among unions, churches, university campuses, etc. The old view that BDS was divisive and counter-productive hardly has much traction these days, and most of the remaining debates concerning BDS are not concerned with the ethics of the boycott strategy, but the nature and extent of the boycott.
Third, the degree of decisiveness in supporting Palestinians has also been heightened. The wishy-washy stances that wagered on the Israeli “peace movement’ or Labour Party “doves”, while condemning “extremists on both sides”, has diminishing appeal.
Indeed, the successive Israeli wars on Gaza and the continued siege on the Strip have all gradually, but irreversibly, pushed the narrative on Palestine towards a whole new direction, one that has little room to wait for an Israeli awakening. The recent lethal Israeli response to Gaza’s peaceful Great March of Return protests has further galvanised support for Palestinians, even among relatively apolitical audiences.
Fourth, unable to push back against growing pro-Palestine movements, Israeli and pro-Israel supporters are pushing, like never before, the accusation of anti-Semitism against those who question the Israeli occupation, use the term “Israeli Apartheid” or support BDS.
While the tactic is no longer silencing the discussion on Palestine, it is creating the necessary distraction to divert attention, energy and resources to less urgent issues. A case in point is the British media’s obsession with the, supposedly, rampant anti-Semitism within the Labour Party at a time when thousands of Gazans were injured and scores killed while peacefully protesting in Gaza.
Fifth, young people are less likely to be intimidated by long-standing Israeli tactics. While the older generation of civil society leaders and activists are unwittingly beholden to the many smearing tactics used by Israel and its supporters, the younger generation is not as easily intimidated. Part of the reason is that digital media – social media, in particular – has helped younger people achieve a degree of global connectivity that has heightened their sense of unity and resolve.
The new generation of Palestinian university students and young intellectuals are also reclaiming their role in this trajectory. Their ability to connect with western societies as insiders and outsiders has helped bridge cultural and political gaps.
Sixth, while “One Democratic State Solution” ideas are yet to achieve the critical mass that could, and will, eventually push for a change in policies amongst various governments, the so-called “Two-State Solution” no longer commands a dedicated following. It is almost a complete reversal from the views that permeated during my earlier world tours, nearly 20 years ago.
Seventh, some intellectual, and even civil society circles, are still obstructed by the erroneous thinking that the best way to convey the Palestinian viewpoint is through non-Palestinians. This belief is even championed by some Palestinians themselves (especially members of previous generations who suffered political and cultural marginalisation and discrimination).
Although many anti-Zionist Jewish and Western intellectuals have been placed at the centre stage to articulate a Palestinian message, the alienation of the Palestinians from their own discourse has proven costly. Despite strong and growing support for Palestine, there is still a serious deficiency in an authentic understanding of Palestine and the aspirations of the Palestinian people – their history, culture, everyday realities and viewpoints.
Needless to say, what is needed is an urgent and complete reclamation of the narrative over Palestine and the decolonisation of the Palestinian discourse.
Eighth, the connection between the Palestinian struggle for freedom and that of other indigenous groups is often highlighted, but much more can be done. Israeli supporters are actively pushing the misleading notion that Israelis are the “natives” of the land and are, thus, reaching out to indigenous communities around the world in search for common ground. While the reality is to the contrary, pro-Palestine groups can do much more to link the struggle of the indigenous native Palestinians with that of other indigenous and other oppressed and historically marginalised groups around the world.
A general, but equally important realisation I have experienced throughout my three-month journey has been the numerous personal and group initiatives carried out by thousands of people all over the world in solidarity with the Palestinian people: from 11-year-old Salma, who convinced all of her classmates in Perth, Australia, to write Palestine on the map in her geography class, despite knowing that they would all have been marked down for their action, to the elderly couple in Auckland, New Zealand, who, well into their 80s and walking with much difficulty, continue to hand Palestine flyers to passers-by at a busy street corner, every week, for the last 20 years.
It is these people, and millions like them, who represent the real constituency for Palestine. They are fighters in the trenches of human solidarity that neither Israel, nor anyone else, can possibly defeat.

