Palestine « Tikkunista!

3. Countries Under Threat in the Middle East

Jan-20-2012 | Comments (0)

Bird’s Eye: Besides geography, what do Syria, Israel, Palestine, and Afghanistan have in common? The legitimacy of their governments is under severe attack. “Don’t speak too soon for the wheel’s still in spin, and there’s no tellin’ who that it’s naming. For the losers now may be later to win, for the times they are a changing”, as Mr Z. once sang.

* Syria: Al-Assad’s Last Roar Al-Ahram Weekly

“What is being debated now is ending the regime of Al-Assad, one way or another,” says a source within the Cairo-based Syrian opposition. “Nobody, not even the Russians with whom we have been talking, or Iran, Al-Assad’s strongest ally, have any illusions about him remaining in power.” The consensus within political and diplomatic quarters is that 2012 will likely see the end of the rule of Bashar Al-Assad, the ophthalmologist who took over in 2000 from his father Hafez Al-Assad, Syria’s president since 1970.

“Bashar Al-Assad might be in denial. He might even believe what he said [on Tuesday], that what is happening in Syria is not an uprising against his rule but an attempt by some armed groups to overthrow him in order to destabilise Syria and undermine Iran and Hizbullah,” speculated one Arab diplomat.“This would be a wrong assessment. The key players have all decided Bashar must exit the stage. How that happens is something he can decide.”

* Afghanistan: The Dust Settles Eric Walberg

Obama’s record on foreign policy has been shocking in retrospect. His call from Cairo for a new dispensation in the Middle East soon after his vow to close Guantanamo, along with this vow, are now in history’s dustbin. His enthusiastic embrace of the worst of Bush’s policies, from drones, assassinations and mercenaries to Orwellian police-state security are frightening proof of the helplessness of US politicians these days.

No better evidence that this paralysis will make the next four years the most perilous in US history is found in the bloody news dripping out of Afghanistan. NATO soldiers, Afghan soldiers and police, resistance fighters, and, of course, women and children continue to be killed at alarming rates, even as the Taliban open an office in Qatar (originally denied by all parties). Peace negotiations came to a standstill last year after the assassination of High Peace Council chief Burhanudin Rabbani (Afghan president 1992-96) by a visitor posing as a peace messenger from the Taliban.

The idea is to whip into shape an Afghan security force/ army and hand over nominal power by the end of 2014. But this force will be predominantly northern Tajik-speaking Afghans who make up only 28 per cent of the population and form the backbone of the current government. Less than 10 per cent of officers are Pashtun (vs 42 per cent of Afghans), and in any case the army attrition rate is 30 per cent, not to mention the infiltration rate of Taliban suicide martyrs.

Just as in 2012 in Iraq, we can expect some kind of handover in 2014 — the US people and economy simply cannot bear much more, but it will be to a chaotic police state, headed by the weak, discredited Hamid Karzai, with a confusing mix of army, police and mercenaries, much like the situation Afghanistan faced in 1993, at the end of the last US-Afghan love-in, in the 1980s. By 1996 a violent civil war had brought the country to a stand-still and the Taliban was the only way out. This scenario is about to repeat itself.

* Israel: French Parliament Report Accuses Israel Of Water ‘Apartheid’ In West Bank Haaretz
The French parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee published an unprecedented report two weeks ago accusing Israel of implementing “apartheid” policies in its allocation of water resources in the West Bank.
…The report said that water has become “a weapon serving the new apartheid” and gave examples and statistics that ostensibly back this claim. “Some 450,000 Israeli settlers on the West Bank use more water than the 2.3 million Palestinians that live there,” the report said. “In times of drought, in contravention of international law, the settlers get priority for water.”
….Senior [Israeli] Foreign Ministry officials said the Paris embassy had been asleep at the switch. “This report is a serious mishap that has caused diplomatic damage and has seriously damaged Israel’s image in France,” one senior official said.

* Palestine: The ‘Invented People’ Stand Little Chance Robert Fisk (Thanks, Gabe)

In the United States, where Netanyahu received so many standing ovations from a Congress that apparently thought it was the Knesset – far more ovations than he would ever have received in the real Knesset in Jerusalem – Israel is increasingly relying on the support of Christian fundamentalists.

This support has now coalesced with the Republican Party against Obama – whose grovelling to Netanyahu has won him no new friends – so that over recent years, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is routinely used to attack the Democrats. Having once been sustained by the progressive left, Israel now draws its principal support from right-wing conservatism of a particularly unpleasant kind. Christian evangelicals believe that all Jews will die if they do not convert to Christianity on the coming of the Messiah. And right-wing racists in Europe – the most prominent of them being Dutch – are welcome in Israel, while the likes of Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein are not.

3. Palestine, and Why UNESCO Matters

Nov-04-2011 | Comments (0)

Bird’s Eye: UNESCO voted to admit Palestine this week, and the US immediately stopped funding them, as was mandated by law. (Not 100% sure of what UNESCO does? Wikipedia will help) Why does this matter? We explain

* UNESCO approves Palestinian membership bid Al Jazeera

The UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) voted on Monday to admit Palestine as a member, a move which is likely to cause the US government to cut off tens of millions of dollars in annual funding to the body. The Palestinian bid received 107 “yes” votes during a UNESCO meeting in Paris, with 14 countries voting against and 52 abstaining, enough to satisfy a two-thirds majority of those countries present and voting.

The decision grants full membership to Palestine, which has had observer status since 1974; it allows the Palestinians to register certain sites, like the Church of the Nativity, in UNESCO’s World Heritage register. Riad al-Malki, the Palestinian foreign minister, said the vote would help to “preserve cultural heritage in Palestine.”

* UNESCO Palestine Vote Isolates US FurtherJuan Cole Informed Comment

Since a law passed by Congress in the 1990s forbids the US from funding UN bodies that recognize Palestine, the Obama administration has no choice but to withdraw the $80 million a year it gives UNESCO, which is a fifth of the agency’s budget. But what this step really means is that the US loses influence over UNESCO, and indeed, it might well lose its membership in the organization. UNESCO may have to close some offices and lose employees. Or someone else, such as Saudi Arabia or China, might pick up the $80 million, gaining influence over UNESCO at US expense.

If the move becomes common, the US could end up further and further isolated and helpless. What if the International Atomic Energy Agency recognizes Palestine as a member? If the US cuts it off, it loses a key arena within which it has been pressuring Iran over its nuclear enrichment program. And so on and so forth.

* Defunding UNESCO for the 1 percent Salon Magazine

Achieving full membership in UNESCO is only the first step in the broader Palestinian plan at the U.N. Other organizations will follow, and one of the first is likely to be WIPO, the World Intellectual Property Organization. WIPO is hardly a household word but it is an important entity. WIPO figures out how to protect patents, royalty arrangements and trademarks, so not only cultural workers but the biggest high-tech industries have a huge investment there too. That’s why the Obama administration convened a high-power meeting of corporate giants – Google, Microsoft, Apple and others – the day before the UNESCO vote, to see if they might have ideas to get out of the impasse.

… The problem is that if the United States has to leave WIPO, a lot of powerful corporations are going to be very unhappy. After WIPO, which U.N. agencies will be next to be defunded? Will it be the International Atomic Energy Agency, on whose reports U.S. strategists rely to figure out Iran’s nuclear power program? If an IAEA member state doesn’t pay its dues, will it still have access to the agency’s classified reports? Will it be the World Health Organization, leaving the U.S. Centers for Disease Control outside of the global collaborations it depends on to fight the spread of devastating diseases?

5. Exploring the Shalit Deal

Oct-21-2011 | Comments (0)

Bird’s Eye: More than a thousand prisoners, “murderers with blood on their hands” traded for one Israeli soldier? Why would Netanyahu make that deal? Why now? We have a few theories to share. We start with the Guardian, look at Bradley Burston in Haaretz, and end with the always excellent Uri Avnery.

* Gilad Shalit Release: Winners And Losers The Guardian

The agreement to release the captive Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit in exchange for 1,027 Palestinian prisoners is a dramatic story. But what is its wider significance? Why has it happened now? Who are the winners and losers? And what are the implications for the future of the Middle East’s most intractable conflict?

The deal is being claimed as a triumph by Hamas, the Islamist movement that controls Gaza and is anxious to bolster its position. Many commentators argue that the agreement was approved by Israel partly out of pique at the recent unilateral attempt by the Palestinian president,Mahmoud Abbas, to seek membership of the UN while peace talks with Israel are stalled.

* Bravo For These People, These Israelis Bradley Burston Haaretz

On the face of it, the exchange is preposterous, in some ways, borderline suicidal. On the face of it, agreeing with Hamas to the release of more than a thousand Palestinian prisoners, many of them to this day proud of having committed heinous murders of innocent people in premeditated acts of terrorism, makes little sense.

Israelis know that the exchange will bolster the recently flagging popularity of Hamas, in particular its more militant figures. It could seriously undermine Palestinian moderates, foster a return of large-scale terrorism, and deal a telling blow to the Palestinian Authority, in the process eroding the security of Israelis on both sides of the Green Line.
The deal to bring Gilad Shalit back to his family is painful to Israelis bereaved by terror. It is, by any measure, chillingly dangerous.

And it was the right thing to do.

* Uri Avnery on Gilad Shalit–the real story Tikkun Magazine

Journalists asked me if Binyamin Netanyahu had not been disturbed by the fact that the swap was bound to strengthen Hamas and deal a grievous blow to Mahmoud Abbas. They were flabbergasted by my answer: that this was one of its main purposes, if not the main one. The master stroke was a stroke against Abbas.

Abbas’ moves in the UN have profoundly disturbed our right-wing government. Even if the only practical outcome is a resolution of the General Assembly to recognize the State of Palestine as an observer state, it will be a major step towards a real Palestinian state…. For Netanyahu and Co. this is the real danger. Hamas poses no danger at all. What can they do? Launch a few rockets, kill a few people – so what? In no year has “terrorism” killed as many as half the people dying on our roads. Israel can deal with that. ….That, by the way, also explains the timing. Why did Netanyahu agree now to something he has violently opposed all his life? Because Abbas, the featherless chicken, has suddenly turned into an eagle.

Oct 7th, 2011 :: Year 8, Issue 29

Oct-07-2011 | Comments (1)

1. Followups

Bird’s Eye: Fukushima has irrevocably changed the way the Japanese feel about their government argues “Contaminated by Mistrust”, the powerful lead story in this week’s Guardian Weekly, as it looks at the psychological fallout from the nuclear disaster. From the Middle East, Al-Jazeera looks at why Palestinians have a problem recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. And a followup to last week’s Asian pictures, a wonderful “Big Picture” set of pictures explores Kashmir and Ladakh.

* Fukushima disaster: it’s not over yet Jonathan Watts The Guardian

….Before publication, I sent Reiko a draft of this article. Her reply was polite, but I felt she was disappointed. “Maybe you can find the answer. Maybe it is too much to ask. If so, just forget it. Even though I am much louder than other Japanese, I feel I am lost. My life here requires me to be normalised, to behave like we used to. I have to work, I have to eat. After five months of struggling, I am getting tired of worrying. It is much easier to give up pursuing reality. What bothers me most is being torn in this conflicting situation with no answer, every moment.”

I sympathise immensely but regret that I cannot offer the comfort of clarity. The nuclear disaster has been terrifying, but not as expected. If someone had told me a year ago that three reactors would melt down simultaneously, I would have assumed an apocalypse. Yet Japan today is not like any doomsday I imagined. Instead, there is a kind of slow decay. After three visits to Fukushima, I am less afraid of radiation than I was a year ago but more worried about Japan.

* Muslim Philosopher Dissembles the Concept of a “Jewish State” Al-Jazeera

First, let us say that confusion immediately arises here because the term “Jewish” can be applied both to the ancient race of Israelites and their descendants, as well as to those who believe in and practice the religion of Judaism. These generally overlap, but not always. For example, some ethnic Jews are atheists and there are converts to Judaism (leaving aside the question of whether these are accepted as such by Ultra-Orthodox Jews) who are not ethnic Jews.

Second, let us suggest also that having a modern nation-state being defined by one ethnicity or one religion is problematic in itself – if not inherently self-contradictory – because the modern nation-state as such is a temporal and civic institution, and because no state in the world is – or can be in practice – ethnically or religiously homogenous.

Third, recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state” implies that Israel is, or should be, either a theocracy (if we take the word “Jewish” to apply to the religion of Judaism) or an apartheid state (if we take the word “Jewish” to apply to the ethnicity of Jews), or both, and in all of these cases, Israel is then no longer a democracy – something which has rightly been the pride of most Israelis since the country’s founding in 1948.

* Scenes from Kashmir The Big Picture

Sept 30th, 2011 :: Year 8, Issue 28

Sep-30-2011 | Comments (0)

1. Followups

Bird’s Eye: Robert Fisk, always fascinating and usually insightful, speculates about the future fall out from Palestine’s request for UN recognition. We hear endless amounts about Libya and its relationship to the Arab Spring; here’s a fascinating perspective on how outing Gaddafi changes its relationship to Africa. And an amazing surfing picture that we missed last week

* Why The Middle East Will Never Be The Same Again Robert Fisk The Independent

The Palestinians won’t get a state this week. But they will prove – if they get enough votes in the General Assembly and if Mahmoud Abbas does not succumb to his characteristic grovelling in the face of US-Israeli power – that they are worthy of statehood. And they will establish for the Arabs what Israel likes to call – when it is enlarging its colonies on stolen land – “facts on the ground”: never again can the United States and Israel snap their fingers and expect the Arabs to click their heels. The US has lost its purchase on the Middle East. It’s over: the “peace process”, the “road map”, the “Oslo agreement”; the whole fandango is history.

…This vote at the UN – General Assembly or Security Council, in one sense it hardly matters – is going to divide the West – Americans from Europeans and scores of other nations – and it is going to divide the Arabs from the Americans. It is going to crack open the divisions in the European Union; between eastern and western Europeans, between Germany and France (the former supporting Israel for all the usual historical reasons, the latter sickened by the suffering of the Palestinians) and, of course, between Israel and the EU.

* Has Africa lost Libya? Knox Chitiyo The Guardian

For decades, Libya has been an integral part of Africa. Indeed Sirte, the Colonel Gaddafi stronghold where fighting still continues, was the birthplace of the Organisation of African Unity in 1963. About a quarter of indigenous Libyans are black, while African migrant workers in Libya exceed one million; and during his 40-year rule Gaddafi championed pan-Africanism and African multiculturalism.

…The revolution has moved Libya into the democratic wave of the Arab spring. There will be continued interactions between Libya and Africa; but culturally, ideologically and financially, Libya has moved towards a greater identification with its north African, Middle Eastern and south Mediterranean neighbours. Libya is embracing its Arab heritage. In a way this should be no surprise: Gaddafi’s embrace of pan-Africanism, while popular south of the Sahara, had little backing from Libyans. But the question of support for Libya’s revolution has divided sub-Saharan Africa.…

* Surfing Camera EyeWitness

Pro tip: When glueing your camera to a surfboard, it is important to choose your adhesive carefully

3. Obama to Palestinians: “No Change, No Hope”

Sep-30-2011 | Comments (0)

Bird’s Eye: So Obama has made it clear where he stands on the Palestinian question, and the reactions to his position come thick and heavy. A surprisingly compassionate “gedanken” experiment in Mondoweiss imagines what would happen politically in the US if Obama took the positions his critics want. The Guardian explains why Obama supports Netanyahu when Netanyahu consistently sabotages him (“It’s the election, stupid”), and Marc Ellis (University Professor of Jewish Studies, Professor of History and Director of the Center for Jewish Studies at Baylor University) mourns the Jewish New Year.

* Obama’s Impossible Dilemma–And Ours Jerome Slater Mondoweiss

Let us suppose that instead of saying all the wrong things, Obama were to say all the right ones. Let us further suppose that he didn’t merely say all the right things, he actually did the right things, at least insofar as he had the power to do so. Suppose he said that from this moment on, the Obama administration would end all its diplomatic, political and moral support of Israel until it agreed to the international consensus two-state settlement? What would be the consequences?

First, Congress would refuse to support him, and so the administration would be unable to end U.S. economic and military support of Israel, by far the most important components of potential U.S. leverage.

Second, as in the past the outcome of both the presidential and congressional elections could turn on just 2-3% (or indeed, much less) of the electoral vote. That means that there is a huge risk that the next presidency and both houses of Congress will come under the control of a Republican party that is dominated by know-nothings and the lunatic fringe. That is unbearable to contemplate—it could result in the worst crisis in American history since the Civil War.

Third—and this is really the clincher—I fear that Israel is so far gone that even if Obama said and did all the right things, even if he was reelected, and even if the Democrats controlled both houses of congress, it would not move Israel in the right direction.

* Barack Obama caught between Israel and his Palestinian ‘promise‘ Guardian

When the White House asked it to halt construction of Jewish settlements in the occupied territories to give peace talks a chance, the building went on. After Washington pressed Binyamin Netanyahu to embrace the promise of Palestinian independence within months, the Israeli prime minister did his best to scupper any prospect of new talks. Netanyahu even went so far as to publicly dress down the president of his country’s closest ally by lecturing Obama on Jewish historical claims and the Arab threat in front of the press at the White House. The president was furious at the humiliation and the administration made it known in private.

Barack Obama has good reason to ask what the present Israeli government has ever done for him.

…But Obama is is taking an unequivocal stand in favour of Israel in saying America will veto the Palestinian bid at the UN despite alarm in the Arab world. The former head of Saudi Arabian intelligence and ex-ambassador to Washington, Turki al-Faisal, this week warned that an American veto will make the US “toxic” in the region. Whatever the foreign policy implications, Israel is primarily a domestic political consideration and Obama’s position on Palestinian statehood is staked out with one eye firmly on the consequences at the ballot box and in dealings with Congress.

* Mourning the Jewish New Year Marc Ellis Mondoweiss

How sad the end is. I rend my garments. I mourn. Last week, I listened to Barack Obama, an African American and my President, speak at the United Nations. I became sad beyond words. I wonder where his sense of history went.

I am a Jew. President Obama spoke of Jewish history – the years of exile and persecution, the Holocaust, the return to our ancient homeland. We deserve the respect of our Arab neighbors and the world. I wonder if he speaks of American history in the same way.

…Is it possible to remain silent about slavery? Slavery is the defining moment of American history. Can Jews be silent about the ethnic cleansing of Palestine? The ethnic cleansing of Palestine is among the defining moments of contemporary Jewish history.

3. Palestine

Sep-23-2011 | Comments (0)

Bird’s Eye: Today Palestine summits its bid for recognition as a state to the UN. What this means for Palestine is uncertain; what it means for the US and Israel is slightly clearer and worse. It means political isolation and public excoriation. We look forst though at Palestine, with a range of opinions brought by Al Jazeera, and an exploration of what the word ‘state’ means in this context.

* Palestinian Statehood Goes To UN In Key Moment For Peace Process The Guardian

Mahmoud Abbas submits his bid for recognition of Palestine as a state to the UN on Friday. The submission comes at the end of a week that has seen a dramatic diplomatic shift in the Palestinians’ favour, even though the request, to the security council, is likely to fail. The Palestinian leader is expected to hand over a letter asking for Palestine to join the UN as a state shortly before he addresses the general assembly to plead the case for admission…..Abbas’s determination to press ahead has prompted the most serious attempt to revive the peace process in years as Washington, London and Paris seek to avoid a showdown in the security council that could severely damage their standing in a rapidly changing Middle East.

The US said it would veto statehood, while Britain and France were likely to abstain.

* Debating the UN bid for Palestinian statehood Al Jazeera English

This diplomatic high-wire act to statehood has garnered international attention and controversy. Experts and stakeholders say the outcome of the bid is unknown. They agree that it marks a change in strategy from previous bi-partisan negotiations, which have failed thus far to bring about a Palestinian state.
Many are sceptical of the move, and several questions remain unanswered. Will it bring an end to the Israeli occupation? Will it alter the US’ diplomatic role in the region? Will it get Palestinians and Israelis back to the negotiating table? Or will it inspire a grassroots Palestinian mobilisation?

Al Jazeera spoke to stakeholders, academics, analysts, and activists asking them what they thought of the upcoming bid. What is the Palestinian Liberation Organisation’s [PLO’s] statehood strategy at the UN, and what are the possible repercussions for all those concerned?

* What Palestinian state? Al Jazeera English

Will it be a declaration of a “state”? Or something that may quack and waddle like a state but doesn’t have quite enough feathers to fly like a state?

With its focus on the 1967 borders, has the Palestinian Authority (PA) finally fully succumbed to the revocation of refugee rights and reparation? Will the US veto the proposal for Palestinians’ full UN membership on the grounds that it is “counterproductive”, revealing, yet again, that they are not an “honest broker”? Can their credibility in the Middle East dwindle yet further?

4. Israel

Sep-23-2011 | Comments (0)

Bird’s Eye: We start with Thomas Friedman, a piece doubly interesting because Friedman, always a center-right voice on Israel, sounds as though he’s saying exactly what Walt and Mearsheimer were pilloried for saying two years ago about the political control AIPAC has, as Glen Greenwald notes in Salon. Patrick Seale, from Counterpunch, has an excellent piece exploring what happens to those who navigate a new alignment with old maps.

* Israel – Adrift at Sea Alone Thomas Friedman New York Times

I’VE never been more worried about Israel’s future. The crumbling of key pillars of Israel’s security — the peace with Egypt, the stability of Syria and the friendship of Turkey and Jordan — coupled with the most diplomatically inept and strategically incompetent government in Israel’s history have put Israel in a very dangerous situation.

This has also left the U.S. government fed up with Israel’s leadership but a hostage to its ineptitude, because the powerful pro-Israel lobby in an election season can force the administration to defend Israel at the U.N., even when it knows Israel is pursuing policies not in its own interest or America’s.

* Conservative rabbis overwhelmingly disapprove of settlers Mondoweiss

NY Jewish Week’s Eric Herschthal reports on “the increasingly liberal” views reflected in a Conservative movement survey of 100s of American rabbis:

46 percent said they were “always proud” of Israel, but 44 percent said they were “sometimes ashamed.” Sixty-three percent thought that Israel should freeze settlements in the West Bank, and another 17 percent were unsure. More than twice as many rabbis supported Obama’s call for a peace deal based on ’67 borders with lands swaps than those that opposed it, and the vast majority–78 percent–viewed the settler movement unfavorably.

The Middle East’s New Geopolitical Map Patrick Seale

America’s most grievous mistake, however — the source of great harm to itself, to Israel, and to peace and stability in the Middle East — has been to tolerate Israel’s continued occupation and dispossession of the Palestinians. These policies have aroused intense hate of Israel in the Arab and Muslim world and great anger at its superpower protector.

We are now witnessing a rebellion against these policies by the region’s heavyweights — in effect a rebellion against American and Israeli hegemony as spectacular as the Arab Spring itself. The message these regional powers are conveying is that the Palestine question can no longer be neglected. Israel’s land grab on the West Bank and its siege of Gaza must be ended. The Palestinians must at last be given a chance to create their own state. Their plight weighs heavily on the conscience of the world.

Turkey, long a strategic ally of Israel, has now broken with it. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has denounced it as “the West’s spoilt child.” In a passionate speech in Cairo, he warned Israel that it must “pay for its aggression and crimes.” Supporting the Palestinians in their efforts to gain UN recognition as a state was, he declared, not an option but an obligation.

5. United States (Canada)

Sep-23-2011 | Comments (0)

Bird’s Eye: We don’t live in the kind of democracy in which the governments actually do what the people want. (Maybe no one does.) Governments do what they need to do to hold on to power. Gideon Levy looks at Obama’s betrayal of hope and change; Mondoweiss looks on Obama’s speech, and despairs, and Yves Engler explores the widening gap between Harper’s position, and Canada’s.

* Gideon Levy on US Palestinian veto Haaretz

It is difficult now to understand Obama’s America. The man who promised change is turning out to be the father of American conservatives. …Et tu, Brute? After all, in your Cairo speech you promised a new dawn for the Muslim world, you promised a new America to the Arab world. And what came of this? The same old American wolf – which blindly and automatically supports every whim of Israel’s to such an extent that it is not clear which is the world power and which is the protectorate – and not even dressed in sheep’s clothing. …The riddle remains unsolved because it is difficult to comprehend how a black president, who believes in justice and equality, can bow down with such unbearable lightness to a right-wing government in Israel, to narrow election considerations in America, and to Jewish and Christian lobbies. It is difficult to comprehend how his America does not understand that it is shooting itself with a lethal bullet in the heart by supporting the Israeli refusal to make peace. After all, deep in his heart this American president knows that the Palestinians’ demand is justified because they too are worthy, finally, of becoming independent – and that Israel supports occupation. Why does one have to wait for the book of memoirs that he will surely write one day in order to hear this? He knows that the Arab Spring, that erupted to a certain extent in the wake of his promising Cairo speech, will now turn its anger and hatred toward America, once more toward America, simply because of its insistent opposition to Palestinian freedom.

*Palestinians have a better chance of getting a state on Craigslist than from Barack Obama Mondoweiss

Avigdor Lieberman is thrilled by a speech that called Israel the “historic homeland” of “the Jewish people.” AIPAC is over the moon: “President Obama demonstrated his understanding of Israel’s legitimate requirements.” J Street is happy, too.

Netanyahu called the speech a “badge of honor.” Of course. Because Obama’s description of “the Jewish people’s burden of centuries of exile, persecution”– and the Palestinians’ burden to amend for that– is straight from Netanyahu himself.

Not a word about settlements or occupation. Not a word about Palestinian conditions, or Palestinian nonviolent resistance, while he sang praises of the Arab spring. No sense of the strategic let alone moral urgency of ending the longest military occupation in modern history.

* How Pro-Israel Is Stephen Harper’s Government? Yves Engler rabble.ca

Canada is one of only a half dozen countries that has publicly come out against the Palestinian Authority’s UN bid and the Conservatives are lobbying “like-minded” countries to do the same to blunt such a move).

Isolated diplomatically, Harper is also contradicting the wishes of Canadians. A recent GlobeScan-BBC poll of 20,446 people in 19 countries found that 46 per cent of Canadians support the Palestinians statehood bid while only 25 per cent oppose it. Apparently, there are more Canadians in favour of the Palestinians than voted for the Conservatives.

3. Palestine Seeks Full Membership at U.N.

Sep-16-2011 | Comments (0)

Bird’s Eye: Well, Abbas is gambling on the UN, as he prepares the proposal. It’s clear he has the votes, just as it’s clear the US will veto the proposal in the Security Council. (The US said it will veto the Palestinian proposal “to help Palestine form a genuine state”. We’re not making this up.) We offer perspectives on this proposal from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Rabbi Lerner in the US… and a fascinating theory what will happen afterwards.

* Turkish Leader Urges Vote for Palestinian Statehood New York Times

Capitalizing on Turkey’s growing stature and influence across the Middle East at a time of regional upheaval, its prime minister ramped up the pressure onIsrael and the United States on Tuesday, telling Arab League ministers they must vote for Palestinian statehood at the United Nations this month.

“Recognition of the Palestinian state is the only correct way,” the prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said in a speech to members of Arab League in Cairo on the second day of his so-called “Arab Spring” tour. “It is not a choice but an obligation.”

Mr. Erdogan’s support of Palestinian statehood was certainly no surprise. But the commanding tone of his message, coupled with his increasingly hostile attitude toward Israel — which once considered Turkey its close friend — underscored how Turkey has now cast itself as a leader in the region.

* US risks being ‘toxic’ over Palestinian veto: Saudi prince AFP

The United States must back a Palestinian bid for UN recognition of statehood or risk becoming “toxic” in the Arab world and forcing a split with ally Saudi Arabia, a top Saudi diplomat warned Monday. If Washington imposes its veto when the Palestinians seek to become the 194th member state of the United Nations then “Saudi Arabia would no longer be able to cooperate with America in the same way it historically has,” former Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal wrote.

He warned in a commentary in the The New York Times that a US veto would see American influence decline, “Israeli security undermined and Iran will be empowered, increasing the chances of another war in the region.The ‘special relationship’ between Saudi Arabia and the United States would increasingly be seen as toxic by the vast majority of Arabs and Muslims, who demand justice for the Palestinian people.”

* Ten Reasons Palestine Is Right To Bring Its Case To The UN Bradley Burston, Haaretz

Here are ten reasons that Abu Mazen’s Hail Mary route at the UN may succeed after all:

1. It restores the issue of Palestine from the back-burner to the world’s biggest stage, without resort to violence. The UN move has already compelled all relevant parties to the conflict to re-examine long-accustomed and long-stymied tactics and mindsets….

2. It conveys the concept of Palestine as a nation, living alongside Israel as a member of the community of nations, acknowledging the primacy of the UN as a forum for state-to-state airing of disputes. This stands in stark contrast to the loose-cannon guerrilla band image cultivated by Yasser Arafat in his 1974 address to the General Assembly (“Today I have come bearing an olive branch and a freedom-fighter’s gun. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat …”), which gave no quarter to the existence of an independent Israel.

* Both Recognize Palestine AND Re-affirm Israel’s Right to Exist as a Jewish State. Rabbi Michael Lerner, Tikkun magazine

A far wiser strategy is for the U.S. (even better, with Israel) to introduce a resolution to the Security Council providing full membership in the U.N. to Palestine while simultaneously reaffirming Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. Both sides win. Israel will feel less isolated, and Palestinians will get full instead of the only partial and largely symbolic membership in the U.N. it could get from the General Assembly once the U.S. vetoes membership in a Security Council resolution.

* Palestine: Plan B Strenger Haaretz

If the UN bid does not yield any tangible results, the Palestinian leadership may seriously consider dissolving the Palestinian Authority, and the West Bank, once again, will be Israel’s responsibility. The implications are enormous both economically and politically.

In that event, the Palestinians are then likely to turn to the UN with a new request: They will claim that after 44 years of occupation, they are de facto residents under Israeli sovereignty, and should therefore receive Israeli citizenship. This scenario is likely to be the de facto burial of the two-state solution: What would the current Israeli coalition do under such circumstances?

4. Israel: A Failed Government

Sep-16-2011 | Comments (0)

Bird’s Eye: While huge protest marches (400,000 plus) continue within Israel about the cost of living and lack of social justice, external relationships are getting critically worse. Israel’s two closest allies, Turkey and Egypt, have been alienated; Palestine’s approach to the UN is a win-win for them, and by Israeli calculus that means lose-lose for Israel. Both Haartez and Al Jazeera use the term ‘tsunami’… a bad sign for a country that has nowhere to run to..

* Captain Netanyahu’s Crew Is Running Israel Aground Haaretz

Groucho Marx boasted in one of his films that he worked his way up from nothing to a state of extreme poverty. Netanyahu’s achievement is much more impressive, since he began with countless political options and diplomatic leads, yet in a mere two years, has reached extreme diplomatic poverty: with no hope, no friends in the region, no partners for dialogue, no real allies, even bereft of military options (some will take comfort in that, at least ).

He and his crew of eight devoted this entire time to riding roughshod over every diplomatic finesse, to scattering threats, to provoking crises, to searching for anti-Semitism and to finding various bizarre excuses for continuing the annexationist status quo. Only when they were absolutely forced to did they pay lip service to “two states” and “willingness to negotiate” – but with a lack of conviction that was worse than an direct refusal. For in so doing, Netanyahu did not merely irreversibly lose sympathy; he lost a much more important card: trust.

* Israel’s Diplomatic Tsunami Al Jazeera

September is the month of havoc – or so Israeli officials have been warning. The story is that when the Palestinian Authority puts in a UN bid for statehood, in a few weeks time, it will precipitate what Israel describes as a ”diplomatic tsunami” - a wave of hostility as nations stampede to back the Palestinians, leaving Israel unsupported and alone.
Perhaps, then, Israel’s latest round of botched diplomacy can be viewed as a typically pre-emptive move. How else to explain the catastrophic fallout with Turkey last week – when, despite months of trying to avoid such an outcome, Turkey downgraded relations with Israel?

After Israeli commandos killed nine Turkish citizens on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla last year, Turkey froze relations, but was willing to thaw them upon receiving an Israeli apology. It seemed like an easy solution, but elements of Israel’s far-right coalition torpedoed the idea, despite pressure from the US and repeated attempts to formulate a sufficiently palatable phrasing of “sorry”. Now, Turkey has announced that all trade, military and defence ties will be cut – a grave loss of a significant regional ally.

* Crises With Turkey And Egypt Represent A Political Tsunami For Israel Haaretz

During Hanukkah 2008, Israel attacked Gaza in Operation Cast Lead. Now it is eating the bitter fruit of that operation, which was the turning point in the attitude of the world and the region toward Israel and its belligerent and violent policies. The shock waves take time to arrive, but now they are coming, and they are big. Every day has new dangers. Some are the result of Israel’s actions, its aggression, its euphoria, its arrogance and carelessness. The outcome: The only two countries that ever accepted it in the region, Turkey and Egypt, are burning their relations with Israel. The first was via a government decision, the second that of an angry mob.

During that fateful Hanukkah, the Israel Defense Forces attacked Gaza and its defenseless population. Israelis did not see that war on their televisions as people saw it in Istanbul and Cairo. Here they made do with an army of pundits who reported fighting in Gaza when there was almost none. Here they hid from us most of the horrific pictures that were broadcast elsewhere in the world – including, of course, Istanbul and Cairo. At the time, they only counted the numbers of the (many ) Palestinian dead and the numbers of the (few ) Israelis, and therefore the operation was seen as a colossal military, diplomatic and even moral success.

June 10th, 2011 :: Year 8, Issue 21

Jun-10-2011 | Comments (0)

Followups

* Obama’s message to Israel Al Jazeera (Thanks Gabe!)

Late May’s extraordinary sequence of speeches and meetings involving US President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu… did not make for an edifying interlude. The week beginning May 19 will not be remembered for displays of farsighted statecraft, or high moral courage. What we saw instead was brash, unapologetic chauvinism from Netanyahu, an outright refusal of moral leadership from Obama, and acts of political cowardice and opportunism from the US Congress outrageous even by the low standards of that frequently ignominious body.

But that is not to say that the week’s display was not useful. On the contrary, much of importance was accomplished. Now, more clearly than ever, we can see the future. For if there were any questions remaining about the current nature and direction of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, May’s events have put an end to them. Zionism is far from dead, and will surely survive, at least in altered form. But a fundamental change in the nature of the Israeli state has become inevitable. To understand why, we should start with President Obama….

* Global Warming Crisis May Mean World Has To Suck Greenhouse Gases The Guardian

The world may have to resort to technology that sucks greenhouse gases from the air to stave off the worst effects of global warming, the UN climate change chief has said before talks on the issue beginning on Monday. “We are putting ourselves in a scenario where we will have to develop more powerful technologies to capture emissions out of the atmosphere,” said Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN framework convention on climate change. “We are getting into very risky territory,” she said, stressing that time was running out.

* David and Kathy on Q CBC Podcast

Jian spoke to Kathy Witterick and David Stocker, the Toronto parents who became an international media sensation for their decision not to reveal the sex of their baby named Storm. They wanted to set the record straight as they feel much misinformation is being reported by the mass media. The public reaction to their story has been divided – some are supporting the family’s choice to keep Storm’s gender private, while many are accusing the parents of turning their youngest child into a “lab experiment”.

Older Posts »

RSS Feed

3. Countries Under Threat in the Middle East

3. Palestine, and Why UNESCO Matters

5. Exploring the Shalit Deal

Oct 7th, 2011 :: Year 8, Issue 29

Sept 30th, 2011 :: Year 8, Issue 28

3. Obama to Palestinians: “No Change, No Hope”

3. Palestine

4. Israel

5. United States (Canada)

3. Palestine Seeks Full Membership at U.N.

4. Israel: A Failed Government

June 10th, 2011 :: Year 8, Issue 21

Categories

Blog Roll

Tags