Search This Blog

Loading...

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

US to Israel: Abu Mazen Has Been Harmed, Strengthen Him


Link

October 8, 2009

by Maya Bengal and Amit Cohen - Ma’ariv - 6 October 2009

After the three-way summit in New York, envoy George Mitchell is coming to the Middle East this evening for another round of talks. However, he can expect to find a PA chairman who is in a state of embarrassment after rejecting the Goldstone report on Operation Cast Lead, riots in Jerusalem over construction in East Jerusalem, and rising security tension in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. All this is reducing the chance of renewing direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

Nonetheless, officials in Jerusalem believe that a breakthrough is attainable, and that it will be possible to overcome the obstacles and announce the renewal of negotiations in the near future. Senior political officials say that it is possible that the renewal of diplomatic negotiations will be announced after Mitchell’s current visit.

President Obama has allocated only two weeks to this round of talks by Mitchell with Israel and the Palestinians. On October 18, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will submit a report to the president that will sum up the progress in the process. Tomorrow, Mitchell is scheduled to meet with Defense Minister Ehud Barak. In the meeting, the two will try to bridge the remaining gaps. On Friday, the envoy will meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu, in order to solidify the understandings that will be reached.

The Americans, who worked behind the scenes to help Israel prevent the Goldstone report from coming before the UN institutions for discussion, are now demanding that Israel show greater flexibility on the diplomatic process. Political sources in Jerusalem admit that the Americans asked Israel to strengthen Abu Mazen, who suffered a severe blow and was weakened on the Palestinian street when he backed down from his demand that the UN adopt the Goldstone report.

The [American] attitude is that after the prime minister’s declaration that the adoption of the Goldstone report would damage the renewal of the diplomatic process, he has to prove that he is willing to be flexible. The prime minister will be expected to provide Abu Mazen with a way down from his high horse, after the latter announced preconditions for the renewal of negotiations. Indeed, as of now, the Palestinians are holding firm to their position that the talks will not be renewed until Israel announces a complete freeze of construction in the settlements and East Jerusalem. The riots on the Temple Mount make it even more difficult for Abu Mazen, who is exposed to great public criticism in any case, to back down from this position.

In light of the severe criticism he has suffered, Abu Mazen is considering renewing the support for the Goldstone report and the demand that the UN adopt its conclusions. Officials in Jerusalem voice harsh criticism of the conduct of the Foreign Ministry representatives in Geneva, who embarrassed the PA chairman by hurrying to the media with the news that the Palestinians withdrew their proposal to the UN. “The conduct of the representatives who ran to the media immediately after the Palestinian turnabout, in order to take credit for the move and brag about it, caused serious diplomatic damage,” said a senior political source in Jerusalem. “Israel’s representatives to the UN should have restrained themselves. They acted hastily and caused severe damage to Abu Mazen.”

The main criticism is directed at Israeli Ambassador to the UN in Geneva Roni Leshno-Yaar, who hurried to give media interviews on the matter. The Foreign Ministry refused to comment.

Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said that the PA intended to take a series of legal and political steps to bring Israel to justice for the war crimes it committed in Gaza. He also clarified that Abu Mazen intended to reveal all the details regarding the postponement of the discussion on the Goldstone report.

A Third Intifada Coming, says Boyle The Canadian Charger

Link

By: Prof. Francis Boyle

Prof. Francis Boyle

Prof. Francis Boyle


The prospect for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians
Is “dead as doornail,” said Francis Boyle in an interview
With The Canadian Charger. That is “because Obama sided with Binyamin Netanyahu,” at the UN meeting of the General Assembly.

Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois and was legal advisor to the Palestinian delegation at the peace negotiations that culminated in the Oslo agreement.
According to Boyle, former senator George Mitchell “is running a dog and pony show” in his scampering around the Middle East.

“Because of his accomplishments in Northern Ireland, I had given him the benefit of the doubt, but not with what happened at the UN. Now it is clear that Mitchell’s mission is just a public relations exercise to delude the Arab and Muslim world into believing that the Obama administration is going to do something while in fact they are pushing their agenda against Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan.”

“At the UN,” he said, “the entire world saw Obama personally get steamrollered by Netanyahu. Obama was humiliated in front of the entire world which saw him as a pusillanimous and feckless leader.”

The US continues to fund Israel to the tune of $4 billion a year but will not insist on peace measures such as a halt to settlement construction.

Boyle believes that the current situation will inevitably lead to a third intifada, which will “sweep aside the geriatric leadership of Fatah.”

As for Gaza, “most of their leaders have been killed by Israel.” And as for Israel, it “never wanted peace. It always wanted more land, a greater Israel.”

He found that Israel has “an attitude like the Nazis toward the Slavs. The Nazis,” he explained, “saw the lands of the Slavs as German lebensraum, just like Israel and Palestine.”
“Israel could have had peace with Syria,” according to Boyle, peace that Syria wanted, but “Rabin was killed to prevent it.” Yitzhak Rabin was the Israeli Prime Minster when the Labour government was in power at the time.
Even Rabin was not interested in real peace with the Palestinians, Boyle argued.
The only kind of Palestine Israel wants is a Bantustan with virtually no power, like an Indian reservation.

“Arafat agreed to a Bantustan at Oslo,” he noted, “but just for five years. Israel would like that as a permanent arrangement.”
“Arafat was the only one who could possibly make peace. He was poisoned by Israel with Bush’s approval. Everyone agrees to that,” he noted.

In considering the intifadas, Boyle describes the first one as a spontaneous uprising. The second he finds to have been “deliberately provoked by Israel to prevent peace.”
He thinks that a third one will be more violent. In the meantime, Israel is “starving 1.5 million Palestinians to death in Gaza.”

He finds the Canadian government to be giving “full support to Israel. It has almost as reprehensible a role as the US.”
Boyle believes that the activities of “the Zionist lobby” are responsible for Canada’s actions, in both the Liberal and Conservative parties.

Back in November, 2007, he gave the Bertrand Russell Peace Lecture at McMaster University. At that time, he said that he started the DBS movement—divestment, boycott, and sanctions against Israel.
____________________________________________________________
boyle1Prof. Francis Boyle, is a professor of International Law at the University of Illinois, # College of Law. He has urged Iran to sue the United States at the International Court of Justice in Hague in order to discourage a military attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities and prevent the imposition of new sanctions by the U.N. Security Council. He said that he is ready to “represent Iran in an international tribunal for trying the Zionist regime in Israel on charges of genocide of Palestinians”, which he accuses the US to support.


October 4, 2009
Posted by Elias

Abbas Pressured to Quit over Report, Threatened with a Video Tape?!


Abbas Pressured to Quit over Report, Threatened with a Video Tape?!

06/10/2009 Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is facing unusually harsh criticism from within Fatah and other Palestinian groups for his decision last week to withdraw a draft document requesting the United Nations Human Rights Council pursue the adoption of the Goldstone report which could have led to the prosecution of Israel for war crimes during its aggression in Gaza.

Senior Hamas member Mahmoud al-Zahar has demanded that the Palestinian president resign for supporting the postponement of the UN vote. Al-Zahar told Al Jazeera that Abbas was guilty of "a very big crime against the Palestinian people" over the Palestinian Authority's support to defer endorsing the report, which was highly critical of Israel's conduct during the Gaza war.

"He is encouraging the Israeli military leaders to attack Gaza, to kill Hamas, and to kill people because they voted for Hamas; to postpone a very important report concerning the Israelis committing crimes against human beings," al-Zahar said on Monday. "He should resign and he should seek a fair trial. He is not representing any of the Palestinian people."

Hundreds of people in the West Bank city of Ramallah protested against the Palestinian Authority's decision to support a delay to a UN vote on whether to endorse the findings of the report, which was authored by Richard Goldstone, a former South African judge. Protesters gathered on Monday waving placards saying the delay "insults the blood of the martyrs and wounds our people".

Protests were also held in Jerusalem, where pro-Palestinian activists demanded an apology from Abbas. "If the government had anything to do with the decision we want it to resign," Muhammad Jadallah, the head of the Coalition for Jerusalem, said.

Thirty-two Palestinian groups in Europe also called on Abbas to immediately step down from office. In a statement, the groups said "the step to delay the endorsement was not less dangerous than the atrocities committed by the Israeli occupation in Gaza". During the three-week Gaza war, more than 1,400 Palestinians - one-third of them women and children - were killed.

Israel, meanwhile, has changed its diplomatic policy on the report, which it had vocally rejected as “biased”. The Israeli Foreign Ministry has instructed Israeli spokesmen not to comment on the report.

The adoption of the report by the 49-member UN Human Rights Council was seen as a key step towards eventually bringing war crimes charges against Israeli leaders at the International Criminal Court (ICC). The 575-page report blamed both the Israeli military and the Palestinian fighters for war crimes during Israel's offensive on the Gaza Strip between December and January, but was more critical of Israeli troops for "targeting and terrorizing civilians".

But the council on Friday deferred endorsement of the report until March, as requested by sponsors of the resolution, acting on behalf of the Palestinians. Sources have said that Abbas bowed to US pressure on the resolution, but the Palestinian president on Sunday dismissed the criticism.

FATAH ALSO ANGERED

Human rights organizations and Palestinian political factions - including the president's own Fatah movement – had been escalating their expressions of anger and condemnation about their leadership's decision to support the withdrawal. And many questions were being asked about how the crisis would affect ongoing efforts to reach national reconciliation.

Hamas, which has de facto control of Gaza and is the main political rival to Abbas's Fatah faction, has appeared to rule out reconciliation under the present circumstances.
Egypt has invited Hamas and Fatah to Cairo for negotiations on October 26 towards the formation of a national unity government, but al-Zahar said that the PA's position on the Goldstone report made such a meeting futile.

Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh accused Abbas of personally instructing his representative in Geneva to revoke the representative's demand that the Goldstone Report be adopted, and accused him of "betrayal" of his people. Haniyeh said that this was typical of the PA and that Palestinian unity talks would not succeed unless there was change in Ramallah.

There has been strong dissension within Fatah over the delay as well, with an unnamed official saying "the consent to defer the vote had cost us dear. We'll need years to fix this mistake".

“A VIDEO CAUSED REPORT’S WITHDRAWAL”


The Palestinian Shahab agency quoted well-informed US sources as saying that a video was behind the Palestinian Authority's decision to withdraw support for Goldstone report. The agency said that a meeting was held in Washington in recent days between the representatives of the Palestinian Authority and Israeli delegation on the Gaza report. The sources pointed out that the PA representatives strongly rejected the Israeli request to defer the report and insisted on their position, until the Israeli Colonel Eli Avraham presented a video file displaying a dialogue which took place between Abbas and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak in the presence of the former Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

According to the same source, Abbas appeared in the video as trying to persuade Barak to continue the war on Gaza, while Barak seemed reluctant to the enthusiastic support from Abbas and Livni to continue the war.

The source pointed out that Avraham also introduced to the PA delegation a telephone conversation between the Israeli Chiefs of Staff office director Dov Weisglass and Tayeb Abdel Rahim, secretary general of the Palestinian presidency. Abdel Rahim was quoted as telling Weisglass that “conditions are ripe and ready for the Israeli army to enter Jabalia and Shatea camps”, adding that the downfall of the camps will end the rule of the Islamic Resistance (Hamas) in Gaza Strip.

According to the tape record, Weisglass told Tayeb Abdel Rahim that this will cause the killing of thousands of civilians. Abdul Rahim replied that "they all elected Hamas, they have chosen their own destiny, not us." So, Israel blackmailed the PA with the video and tape in order to win against the Goldstone report.

Israeli Maariv newspaper had previously

***********************************************

A poverty of leadership

Link

Osamah Khalil, The Electronic Intifada, 7 October 2009



Salam Fayyad, the appointed Palestinian Authority prime minister and a favorite of the US government and developmentistas, is being groomed to succeed President Mahmoud Abbas. (MaanImages/POOL/Mustafa Abu Dayeh)

A firestorm of criticism has erupted since Friday's "postponement" of the United Nations Human Rights Council's (UNHRC) vote on the Goldstone report, which accused Israel of committing war crimes during its winter invasion of the Gaza Strip. The postponement was at the behest of the Ramallah Palestinian Authority's (PA) ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Ibrahim Khraishi. Palestinians globally and across the political spectrum have rightfully been outraged at what is not only an unbelievable act of cowardice and ineptitude, but a betrayal of the highest order. Indeed, anywhere else in the world it would be considered tantamount to treason. Sadly and unsurprisingly, it is what passes for leadership from Mahmoud Abbas.

While the shock and anger over Abbas's actions is understandable, it ignores how he has behaved to date. Indeed, burying the Goldstone report represents the culmination of Abbas's collusion and incompetence dating to the time of his (brief) assumption of the then newly created post of prime minister in 2003. As the newly appointed prime minister, Abbas drew scorn for appearing beside then US President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and reciting a speech that appeared to have been written by a low-level State Department staffer -- with nary a mention of Palestinian suffering.

Yet, this abysmal beginning was a highlight compared to his subsequent presidency. After being ignored by Bush and Sharon his first year in office, Abbas collaborated with the US and Israel in an attempt to undermine and overthrow the Hamas-run government elected in 2006.

After Hamas's takeover of Gaza a year later, Abbas all but endorsed Israel's siege of the territory, going so far as to order the PA's ambassador at the UN to block an attempt by Qatar and Indonesia to obtain a Security Council resolution "expressing concern" over "a pending humanitarian crisis." As the siege tightened, Abbas repeatedly insulted his own people, deriding their efforts to break the siege as well as attempts by international solidarity activists to draw attention to their plight.

Judging by their fumbling and inconsistent responses over the past several days, Abbas and his cronies were clearly caught off guard by the reaction to the postponement. After making the ludicrous announcement that he would empower an investigation into what happened at the UNHRC, Abbas dispatched the PA's "foreign minister," Riyad al-Maliki, to New York to participate in an emergency session of the UN Security Council called at the request of Libya to discuss the Goldstone report. Regardless of what happens at the Security Council, any rational observer must ask, exactly what kind of "president" is Mahmoud Abbas and who does he represent?

Therein lies the rub. Abbas's term as president expired on 9 January and he has been ruling under extra-constitutional emergency powers since. Not only is the emperor without clothes, he lacks legitimacy as well. However, he does have a freshly trained and equipped praetorian guard courtesy of Washington and US Lt. General William Dayton. The sole purpose of this force is to secure the rule of Abbas and his appointed Prime Minister Salam Fayyad and by extension the Fatah party. On display during this summer's Fatah conference, the new security force demonstrates that while the neoconservative freedom agenda of the Bush Administration is gone, it has been replaced by a repression agenda under the guise of stability and realpolitik. Palestinians will be hard pressed to know the difference.

Whether or not the clumsy attempt to shelve the report is the tipping point for Abbas's rule, the succession process has been underway for several years. However, it is being coordinated by the US and Israel and is no reflection of the wishes and desires of the Palestinian people. Abbas's likely successor is Fayyad, who somehow manages to be an even more uninspiring and unpopular character. Yet, one would never know this considering the fawning press coverage he has received in the American media over the past few months, including The New York Times, Time magazine and The Los Angeles Times. Fayyad is a favorite not just of American and European leaders, but the developmentistas who benefit from and ensure the perpetual state of dependence that defines the Palestine Industry.

In spite of the accolades from different quarters and hyperbolic claims of plans for effective institution-building, Fayyad's record is remarkably thin on actual achievements. With no electoral success to point to, he is left with just one verifiable "success": introducing direct deposit to the PA, in particular the security services. No doubt this was a difficult effort, especially due to opposition from late Palestinian President Yasser Arafat. However, what is never discussed in the glowing press accounts is that Fayyad's singular achievement barely qualifies him to be finance minister -- his position when direct deposit was implemented -- not prime minister and definitely not president. But this isn't about achievements or qualifications -- that is not how the PA functions.

Fayyad was a favorite of the Bush Administration, especially the former president, and so far has maintained that status with the Obama Administration. Both the Bush and Obama administrations have thoroughly manipulated Abbas and Fayyad, ensuring their mutual suspicion, competitiveness and insecurity in order to maintain a feckless and weak leadership beholden to the US and Israel and not to the Palestinian people. Meanwhile, the same supporters of the Abbas and Fayyad government who never tired of hailing every banal utterance by Bush and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, regardless of how destructive their policies were to Palestinian rights and aspirations, have now sought to champion the meager efforts of the Obama Administration. Once again Palestinians are told that yet another American president is paying "attention" to their situation and is "focused" on the "peace process."

We have heard this all before, and unless Palestinians reclaim their national movement, we will hear it again and again. Palestinians and those sympathetic to their cause must recognize that Abbas and his clique will abandon any advantage and undermine any initiative that threatens the position, privileges and wealth they have accrued while in power. The PA will not dissolve itself, but it will disrupt and impede any progress or effort that threatens to truly challenge the occupation and Israel's system of apartheid of which they are an essential component and direct beneficiaries. No matter what success activists across the globe have against Israeli apartheid and the occupation, the PA will scuttle those gains. Tales of corruption, graft and incompetence at the highest levels of the PA are neither new nor shocking. What is, however, is that Palestinians have allowed this situation to persist. As a result, Abbas's government has grown more strident and obvious in its collaboration with the occupation, a fact fully realized in Geneva on Friday.

The calls for Abbas's resignation are long overdue and without question he is not now nor was he ever fit to be president of the Palestinian people. Similarly, Salam Fayyad has demonstrated that he is little more than a willing tool waiting to hear his master's call so he can ascend to power. These men are certainly responsible for the fiasco in Geneva, but Palestinians must also ask: who else is accountable? Accountability in this context is not just those who made and implemented this unconscionable decision, but the elected and appointed leadership of the Palestinian people who stood by and in their silence allowed it to pass. To date, the condemnations have been strong but the resignations have been few, and some likely self-serving. One wonders, where are the rest? Indeed, the measure for Palestinians in evaluating their leaders must now be: what did you do when Abbas shelved the Goldstone report? Did you oppose it? Or did you remain silent? Did you act? Or were you complicit? For those who claim to be leaders and representatives, this is how you will be judged -- now and by history. Let there be no doubt, there will be a reckoning and you must choose.

Absent from this discussion is what happened in those three weeks in Gaza. Nearly 1,500 Palestinians were killed, including 109 women and 320 children and thousands more were injured. Basic infrastructure, homes, businesses and schools were destroyed and because of the siege, are yet to be rebuilt. The use of white phosphorous and flechette bombs, indiscriminate shelling and bombing of civilian areas, use of human shields, and the list goes on. By burying the Goldstone report, the US, Israel and the PA also hoped to bury these crimes. With Gaza isolated and besieged, they believe that claims of Israeli war crimes will get overtaken by other events and lost in the media din. Considering the poverty of leadership in Abbas's regime, it is up to people of good conscience to step into the breach and ensure that Gaza is never forgotten and that the PA, like the occupation it serves, ends up on the ash heap of history.

Osamah Khalil is a doctoral candidate in US & Middle East History at the University of California, Berkeley and a frequent contributor to The Electronic Intifada. He can be reached at ofkhalil A T gmail D O T com.

Haram al-Sharif sovereignty under threat

Link

Jonathan Cook, The Electronic Intifada, 7 October 2009



Palestinian women in West Bank city of Bethlehem wait to pass a checkpoint on their way to Jerusalem's Haram al-Sharif, September 2009. (Luay Sababa/MaanImages)

Tension over control of the Haram al-Sharif compound of mosques in Jerusalem's Old City has reached a pitch unseen since clashes at the site sparked the second Palestinian intifada nine years ago.

Ten days of intermittently bloody clashes between Palestinians and Israeli security forces in Jerusalem culminated yesterday in warnings by Palestinian officials that Israel was "sparking a fire" in the city. Israel's Jerusalem Post newspaper similarly wondered whether a third intifada was imminent.

Israel, meanwhile, deployed 20,000 police to safeguard the annual Jerusalem march, which was reported to have attracted a crowd of 70,000 passing through sensitive Palestinian neighborhoods close to the Old City.

The ostensible cause of friction is Israel's religious holidays that have brought Jewish worshippers to the Western Wall, located next to the Haram al-Sharif and traditionally considered the holiest site in Judaism. The wall is the only remnant of the Jewish temple destroyed by Herod in AD70.

At a deeper level for Palestinians, however, the ease with which Jews can access sites in and around Jerusalem, while the city is off-limits to the vast majority of Palestinians, highlights the extent to which Palestinian control over Jerusalem and its holy places has been eroded by four decades of occupation.

That point was reinforced on Sunday when the gates to the mosque compound were shut by Israeli police, who cited safety concerns for 30,000 Jews praying at the Western Wall for Succot.

Jerusalem's police chief, Aharon Franco, also incensed Palestinians on Monday by castigating them for being "ungrateful" after Israel had allowed them to pray at al-Aqsa during Ramadan.

In fact, only a small proportion of Palestinians can reach the mosque. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza cannot get past Israel's wall, and the 1.5 million Palestinians in Israel and Jerusalem are finding it harder to pray there. This week police have been allowing only women and Palestinian men with Israeli identification cards showing they are aged at least 50 to enter.

Both the Palestinian Authority and Jordan issued statements this week warning that Jewish groups, including extremists who want to blow up the mosques, should be prevented from entering the Haram.

It was in this context that the leader of the Islamic Movement inside Israel, Sheikh Raed Salah, called on Israel's Palestinian citizens to "shield the [al-Aqsa] mosque with their bodies."

Concerned that most Palestinians can no longer access the mosques, Salah has taken it on himself to campaign against Israeli moves under the banner "Al-Aqsa is in danger," urging Israel's Palestinian minority to protect the mosques by increasing their visits and ensuring a strong Islamic presence at the site.

In a further provocation by Israel yesterday, Salah was arrested on suspicion of incitement and sedition. A judge released him a few hours later but only on condition that he stay away from Jerusalem.

Palestinian concerns about Israeli intentions towards the Haram are not without foundation. Israel's religious and secular leaders have been staking an ever-stronger claim to sovereignty over the compound since the occupation began, despite an original agreement to leave control with Islamic authorities.

On the ground that has been reflected in Israel's efforts to reshape the geography of the city.

It began with the hasty razing of a Muslim neighborhood next to the Western Wall that was home to 1,000 Palestinians. In place of the homes a huge prayer plaza was created.

Next a ring of Jewish settlements were built separating East Jerusalem from the West Bank, and more recently Jewish extremists have been taking over Palestinian neighborhoods just outside the Old City, such as Sheikh Jarrah, Ras al-Amud and Silwan.

With official backing, Jewish settlers have also been confiscating and buying Palestinian homes in the Old City's Muslim Quarter, including next to the mosques, to establish armed encampments.

They have also been assisted by Israeli archeologists in digging extensively under the quarter. Tensions over the excavations escalated dramatically in 1996 when Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister then as now, approved the opening of the Western Wall tunnels under the mosques. In the ensuing violence, at least 70 Palestinians were killed.

In addition, Israeli officials and rabbis have been redefining the significance in Jewish religious thought of the compound, or Temple Mount as it is known to Jews.

The rabbinical consensus since the Middle Ages has been that Jews are forbidden from entering the compound for fear of desecrating the site of the temple's inner sanctum, whose location is unknown. Instead religious Jews are supposed to venerate the site but not to visit it or seek to possess it in any way.

That view has been shifting since a wave of religious nationalism was unleashed by the seemingly miraculous nature of Israel's victory in the 1967 war. As the Israeli army captured the Old City in 1967, for example, its chief rabbi, Shlomo Goren, rushed to the Haram to read from the Bible and blow a ram's horn, as the ancient temple priests had once done.

At the Camp David talks with the Palestinians in 2000, Ehud Barak, the Israeli prime minister at the time, demanded -- against all Jewish teachings -- that the whole compound be declared the "Holy of Holies," a status reserved for the temple's inner sanctum. His adviser Moshe Amirav said Barak had used this precondition to "blow up" the negotiations.

The Camp David failure led to an explosion of violence at the Haram al-Sharif a few months later that triggered the second intifada.

Islamic sovereignty was challenged again in 2003 when Israeli police unilaterally decided to open the compound to non-Muslims. In practice, this has given messianic cults, who want the mosques destroyed to make way for a third temple, access under police protection.

It was precisely rumors that Jewish extremists had entered the compound on the eve of Judaism's holiest day, Yom Kippur, that provided the spark for the latest round of clashes.

It is reported that a growing number of settler rabbis want the injunction against Jews praying at the compound lifted, adding to Palestinian fears that Israeli officials, rabbis, settlers and fundamentalists are conspiring to engineer a final takeover of the Haram al-Sharif.

Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net.

A version of this article originally appeared in
The National, published in Abu Dhabi.

An Appeal to the American People

Link

By: Alan Hart

Alan Hart's Zionism  JPEG

Author Alan Hart opens Volume One of the American edition with an Appeal to the American People. The following is the text of it.

Dear America,

If all of our children, wherever they live, are to have the prospect of a future worth having, the world needs America’s best, not what it had under the neo-conned regime of President George “Dubya” Bush—its worst.
This Englishman, who first began to ask himself why things are as they are in the world when he was covering the war in Vietnam, knows America well enough from coast to coast to have a good idea of what your best is.
Deep down, you Americans are the most idealistic people on earth. This suggests to me that if all of you were properly informed about why what is happening in the Middle East is happening, you would want to make your democracy work to cause your government to play its necessary and leading role in stopping the countdown to catastrophe for all of us. I believe, for example, that if all Americans had been properly informed long ago about the cause and effect relationship of Israeli occupation and Palestinian violence, there would have been pressure on Congress and the White House long ago for an end to Israeli occupation of Arab land grabbed in the 1967 war. In that event the conflict in and over Palestine, which I describe as the cancer at the heart of international affairs, could have been cured and would not now be threatening to consume us all.
In 1974 I spent some time alone with His Royal Highness Prince Phillip at Buckingham Palace. I was there to try to persuade him to persuade Her Majesty The Queen to consent to a royal premier for Five Minutes To Midnight, a film I had made on global poverty and its implications for all. We talked for more than two hours, mainly about the state of the world in general, and the state of Britain in particular. At a point H.R.H said: “If I was prime minister, I would hang trade union leaders from lampposts.” As soon as I got home, I typed a short note to him. I thanked him for his time and suggested that it was not a good idea to hang trade union leaders from lampposts. He replied by return. He didn’t mean what he had said to be taken literally. He was, he wrote, “exaggerating to make a point.”
Sometimes it is necessary to exaggerate to make a point, so (deep breath!) here goes.
The problem, dear Americans, is that many of you are too uninformed to make your democracy work for the purpose of giving expression and substance to your idealism. And many of you are uninformed about conflict in the Middle East not because you don’t want to know, but because you have been misinformed by the corporate-controlled mainstream media, which has been described as the “Israeli occupied” media.1 On my visits to America over the years many, many Americans said to me, “We know we’re not getting the truth from our own mainstream media.” That being so, my question is—Why then do so many of you continue to let your views be shaped by the mainstream media’s take on what is happening in the Middle East?
After 9/11 most if not all Americans asked, “Why do they hate us?” For very many Americans, “they” were more or less all Arabs and Muslims everywhere.
What would Americans have learned if, instead of rushing to declare his war on global terrorism, President Bush had caused that question to be addressed seriously?
The short answer—the long one is in this book—begins with the statement that the overwhelming majority of all Arabs and Muslims everywhere do not hate America or Americans. (A truth is that for decades very many Arabs and other Muslims would, if they could, have migrated to America to enjoy a better life there. Today, however, the number of Arabs and other Muslims who would opt for American residence and citizenship if they could is greatly reduced because of the fact, sad but true, that the monster of Islamophobia is on the prowl across the Land of the Free and licking its lips). What almost all Arabs and Muslims everywhere do hate is American foreign policy—its double standards in general and, in particular, its unconditional support for an Israel, a country which ignores UN resolutions, demonstrates its contempt for international law and human rights conventions (continued occupation, torture, targeted assassinations and collective punishment are part of this package), and resorts to state terrorism.
To put “anti-Americanism” into its true Arab perspective, I offer this thought. If it had been possible for an American President to wave a magic wand and have Israel back behind more or less its borders as they were on the eve of the 1967 war, with a Palestinian state in existence on the Arab land from which Israel had withdrawn as required by UN Security Council Resolution 242, and with Jerusalem the capital of two states, the U.S. would have had, overnight, with one wave of that magic wand, the respect, friendship and support of not less than 95 per cent of all Arabs (and very probably that of almost all Muslims everywhere). And if the President had also pressed the Arab regimes to be serious about democratizing their countries, the U.S. would have become their champion, truly admired, as it was when President Woodrow Wilson was in the White House.
As professors John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt argued in their groundbreaking book, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, unconditional support for Israel is not in America’s own best interests. In fact it’s not in anybody’s best interests including those of the Jews of the world.
My only quarrel with the Mearsheimer and Walt book is its title. For reasons this book makes clear, the phenomenon of their title is not an Israel lobby. It’s the Zionist lobby, and I’ll get to why it should be called by its proper name in a moment.
Mearsheimer and Walt’s work improved to some extent the prospects for informed and honest debate about who must do what and why for justice and peace in the Middle East, but an actual resolution of the conflict in and over Palestine needs the citizens of America to be better informed than they are about much more than the Zionist lobby’s influence on American policy for the Middle East.
Above all Americans—American Jews especially—need to know that almost everything they’ve been conditioned to believe about the making and sustaining of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is not true. They need to know, for example, that Israel and the Palestinian refugee problem were created, mainly, by Zionist terrorism and ethnic cleansing. And they need to know, again for example, that Israel’s existence has never—ever—been in danger from any combination of Arab military force. Zionism’s assertion that Israel’s Jews have lived in constant danger of being “driven into the sea” was the propaganda cover that allowed Israel (a Zionist, not a Jewish, state) to get away where it mattered most—in Europe and America—with presenting its aggression as self-defense and itself as the victim when, actually, it was and remains the oppressor.
The problem with the truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of conflict in and over Palestine is that it’s pregnant with extreme danger because it could provoke anti-Semitism2 throughout the mainly Gentile nations of the Judeo-Christian or Western world, which is where most Jews live. There is, however, a way to exorcise this extreme danger. It is by giving the truth its necessary global context, not only to show that consequences have causes, but also to explain, among other things, the difference between Judaism and Zionism. Knowledge of the difference is the key to complete understanding of the conflict and who must do what and why for justice and peace.
Judaism is the religion of Jews, not “the“ Jews because not all Jews are religious. Like Christianity and Islam, Judaism has at its core a set of moral values and ethical principles. As holocaust survivor Dr. Hajo Meyer states in his book, An Ethical Tradition Betrayed: The End of Judaism,3 these values and principles put Jews “at the forefront of humanitarian and socially constructive endeavors” throughout much of history. (In his book my dear friend Hajo expresses his dismay at what he sees as the “moral collapse of contemporary Israeli society and the worldwide Jewish community as a whole.” He compares Israel’s current policies with the early stages of the Nazi persecution of Germany’s Jews. He stresses that he is not seeking to draw a parallel between Israel’s current policies and the Nazis’ “endgame”—the slaughter of six million European Jews. He is merely trying to point out, he says, “the slippery slope” that eventually led to this catastrophe, and the necessity of “foreseeing the possible consequences” of a policy that oppresses and marginalizes the Palestinians in their own homeland).
Even the shortest definition of Zionism must begin by recognizing that there is what might be called “spiritual Zionism” and “political Zionism”. In the sense that they look to Jerusalem as their spiritual capital or center, all Jews who are religious could regard themselves as spiritual Zionists. The Zionism of this book’s main title and substance is political Zionism.
It is Jewish nationalism in the form of a sectarian, colonial enterprise which, in the process of creating in the Arab heartland a state for some Jews—mainly by terrorism and ethnic cleansing as noted above—made a mockery of, and demonstrated contempt for, Judaism’s moral values and ethical principles. (Judaism insists that the return of Jews to the land of the ancient Hebrews must await the Second Coming of the Messiah. Zionism said, in effect: “We can’t wait for Him. Zionism is the Messiah.”) As this book makes clear, prior to the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust, political Zionism was of no interest to more than a minority of the Jews of the world and was opposed by many.
Supporters of Israel right or wrong conflate Judaism and Zionism because the assertion that Judaism and Zionism are one and the same enables them to claim that criticism of the Zionist state of Israel is a manifestation of anti-Semitism. Often, almost always these days, the accusation that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is a form of blackmail intended to silence criticism of, and suppress informed and honest debate about, the Zionist state and its policies. The reality is that Judaism and political Zionism are total opposites, and knowledge of the difference is the key to understanding two things:
1. Why it is possible, with good reason on the basis of all the facts, to be passionately anti-Zionist—opposed to Zionism’s colonial enterprise—without being, in any way, shape or form anti-Semitic.
2. Why it is wrong to blame all Jews everywhere for the crimes of the hardest core Zionist few in Palestine that became little Israel, and then Greater Israel.
It’s worth noting that virtually all Arabs and other Muslims have always known the difference between Judaism and Zionism. And it can be said without fear of contradiction that throughout much of their history, Arabs and other Muslims were the best protectors of Jews in need of sanctuary. It was Zionism’s colonial enterprise that poisoned the relationship, though not-perhaps I should say not yet-to the point at which most Arabs and other Muslims blame all Jews for Zionism’s crimes.
Jews, all Jews, also need to know the difference between Judaism and Zionism. Am I suggesting that many don’t know it? Yes. A truth today, or so it seems to me from conversations with Jews, is that very many if not most of them have no idea of what Zionism actually is, both in ideological principle and practice in Palestine form the early years of the 20th century to the present. And there are two main reasons for this apparent lack of awareness.
One can be explained by the awesome success in propaganda terms of Zionism’s Nakba denial. Nakba is the Arab word for catastrophe and shorthand in Arab terminology for Zionism’s ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1948.
The other main reason is that many Jews of the world don‘t want to know the truth of history as it relates to the creation of the Zionist state of Israel and the Palestinian refugee problem (in much the same way, some might say, as Americans, some or many, don’t want to know what really happened to the native Indians of America). In the Prologue to this book, Waiting for the Apocalypse, I seek to explain, empathetically, why to date many Jews have not wanted to know the truth of history.
So why do I assert that all Jews need to know the difference between Judaism and Zionism?
The sleeping giant of classical anti-Semitism is being re-awakened in the mainly Gentile Judeo-Christian world in which most Jews live, and a prime cause of the re-awakening is the behavior of the Zionist state of Israel and its extraordinary (some would say insufferable) self-righteousness. As we shall see, prior to the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust many of the best Jewish minds of the time feared that Zionism, if it was allowed to have its way, would at some point provoke anti-Semitism. These fears were given a fresh public airing by a most remarkable Israeli, Yehoshafat Harkabi, in 1986. He was the longest serving Director of Israeli Military Intelligence and was universally respected. In the Prologue I quote from his book, Israel’s Fateful Hour. He warned of the danger of Israel becoming “a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism”.
It’s my view that after the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust, and because of it, the giant most likely would have gone back to sleep, remained asleep and, in all probability, would have died in its sleep – IF Zionism had not been allowed by the major powers, first Britain, then America, to have its way, as Balfour put it, “right or wrong”.
What, really, is the basis for believing that anti-Semitism is seriously on the rise?
The increase in the desecration of synagogues and Jewish graves (and the like), verbal abuse and assaults on Jews are indicators. But what may be far more sinister is the growing number of Europeans and North Americans who are now beginning to speak negatively about Jews at dinner parties and behind closed doors. The more it becomes apparent that Israel is the obstacle to peace on any terms most Palestinians and other Arabs and Muslims can accept, the more this antipathy will grow, with the real danger that it will break out, become unsuppressed, and manifest itself as violent anti-Semitism. It’s my view, which I know is shared by some eminent Jews in Europe and America, that if the monster of anti-Semitism does go on the rampage again, it might well start its journey in America.
But what actually happens in the future will depend a great deal on whether or not the vast majority of Jews who live in the nations of the mainly Gentile Judeo-Christian world are prepared to come to grips with the fact that Zionism is, as the title of this book asserts and its substance demonstrates, their real enemy. If they can and do, and are then prepared to end their silence on the matter of Israel’s behaviour, they will, by distancing themselves from Zionism, best protect themselves from a charge of complicity (if only by default) in Zionism’s crimes. Silence is not the way to refute and demolish such a charge.
I am aware that many Americans, including American Jews, might honestly believe they are serving the best interests of the Jews by refusing to address the foundational Zionist myths, but I say they are wrong, dangerously wrong. All, including the corporate-controlled mainstream media, who refuse to come to grips with the truth of history and thus why it is perfectly possible to be passionately anti-Zionist without being anti-Semitic, are helping to set up all Jews to be blamed for the crimes of the relative few.
As surely as day follows night, the Zionist lobby and other supporters of Israel right or wrong will make an awesome effort to limit distribution of this book in America, and to cause the informed and honest debate it was written to promote to be suppressed. The less this attempt to suppress the truth of history is successful, the more all citizens of America will be empowered to give substance to their idealism, to make their democracy work for justice and peace in the Middle East.
I would like readers of this post to know that I was moved close to tears by the words of an eminent Canadian Jewish lady who does speak out. She is Judith Weisman, a Toronto psychotherapist and a member of Independent Jewish Voices, a founding member of Not In Our Name, Jews for a Just Peace and the Jewish Women’s Committee. See her and listen to her
here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx1eRkBgzcA


Alan Hart
Alan Hart

Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East.
He blogs on www.alanhart.net and tweets on www.twitter.com/alanauthor
*****************************************************************
Author’s Note
The story this book tells is constructed on the documented truth of history and insights from my own engagement with the conflict in various capacities over more than three decades. I was, for example, the first Western correspondent to the banks of the Suez Canal with the advancing Israelis in the Six Days War of June 1967. And over the years I enjoyed intimate access to, and on the human level friendship with, leaders on both sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict. I am probably the only person on Planet Earth to have enjoyed a special relationship with the two greatest opposites in all of human history – Golda Meir, Mother Israel, and Yasser Arafat, Father of Palestine. (I made a BBC Panorama profile of the former and wrote a book about the latter). In telling the whole, unexpurgated story of the creation of the Zionist state of Israel and how it became a threat not only to the peace of the region and the world but also to the best interests of Jews everywhere and the moral integrity of Judaism itself, I’ve quoted from my private conversations over the years with leaders on both sides. My aim in doing so was to provide an extra degree of real and rare insight.
Given its length, three volumes for the American edition with perhaps a fourth in due course, some might ask – “Why such a big enterprise?” And some might add, “Do you seriously believe that more than a handful of Americans will be bothered to take the time and make the effort required to read three or even four volumes?”
I am, of course, aware that because of its length this book does require a serious commitment of reading time, and therefore effort, during the 18 months or so in which all three or possibly four volumes will be published. How can I possibly justify such a call on readers’ time? My short answer is in two parts.
I believe the reward for effort will be understanding, probably for the first time ever for very many Americans, of how all the pieces of the most complex and complicated jig-saw puzzle fit together and, therefore, an understanding of why the Palestine problem is the cancer at the heart of international affairs and what must be done and by whom if it is to be cured before it consumes us all.
The length of this work is also to do with the nature of the challenge I set myself. To tell the truth needed for real understanding, I had to re-write the whole story of the making and sustaining of the Arab-Israeli conflict, replacing Zionist mythology with the documented facts of history. To make complete understanding possible, it was also necessary for me to put regional events into their global context. The latter includes, for example, what went on behind closed doors in London, Paris, Washington and Moscow. All of that was a mission impossible in a single volume.
To date in the mainly Gentile Judeo-Christian or Western world we have had only a first draft of history, one constructed on Zionist mythology. This book offers a second, one that exposes Zionist mythology for the propaganda nonsense it mainly is.
And there’s a little something I’d like to add here by way of encouragement for what is sometimes called the general reading public. This book is written in the conversational style of the television reporter and to some extent reads more like a novel than a conventional historical work. This is to make the story accessible to all – i.e. not just a relatively small number of academics and other professionally interested people. I can also report that since the publication in the UK of the first hardback edition of this work in two volumes, I’ve received a good number of messages from so-called ordinary people of all faiths and none telling me they thought the book is “an easy read” and a “page-turner”. There was even a rabbi who called me to say, with great good humour, that I was to blame for his lack of sleep. He told me he had taken my book to bed to read a little each night but that when he started he couldn’t put it down.
In the UK, I had to set up my own publishing company to get the first hardback edition of this book in two volumes to the retail market place; and this despite the fact that my literary agent had on file letters of rare praise for my work from the CEOs of some of our major publishing houses. One CEO described my manuscript as “awesome… driven by passion, commitment and profound learning.” This letter added, “There is no question it deserves to be published.” But all in the UK were too frightened to publish this book out of fear of offending Zionism too much and being falsely accused of promoting anti-Semitism and, possibly, finding themselves on the receiving end of an organized boycott of all their authors and titles. It didn’t matter that my book is actually the opposite of anti-Semitic, and contains my call, as a Gentile, for the Jews to become a light unto nations by demonstrating that right can prevail over might and there is a place for morality in politics.
My access to the documented truth of history was assisted by the named authors from whose work I have quoted. I thank them all and eight in particular for the special quality of their original research. The eight are: Lenni Brenner, Alfred M. Lilienthal, the writing duo of Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre, Seymour Hersh, Stephen Green, Yehoshafat Harkabi and, most notably, Avi Shlaim.
I am also indebted to Ilan Pappe. He and Avi Shlaim are Israel’s two leading “revisionist” (which means honest) historians. Ilan’s own latest book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, a seminal work documented in chilling detail, was not available for me to draw off when I was finalizing the content of my own Volume One; but I make reference to his work in a footnote to my Chapter 10 which is titled Zionist Terrorism and Ethnic Cleansing. Ilan and I have become dear friends and allies in common cause and regard ourselves as being, with a small band of others including Avi Shlaim, on the hottest frontline in the war for the truth of history. Ilan is at the very top of Zionism’s official “S.H.I.T” list (Self-Hating Israeli Traitors), and we both think I would be up there with him, ahead of 6,999 others, if I was an Israeli. In one of our first conversations Ilan said he thought Zionists were more frightened of my book than any other because of its title. His latest book, he said, they could rubbish in their usual way. “Your book,” he added, “is a real problem for them because its main title, Zionism, The Real Enemy of the Jews, is the whole truth in seven words.” The many hours of his precious time Ilan gives me for analytical conversation helps greatly to keep my own thinking refreshed and finely tuned. His most generous endorsement of my work is on the back cover of this volume. (There was, however, one point on which Ilan censured me. He said that I was, and all others were, wrong to use the term “diaspora” as in Jewish diaspora. His argument, with which I fully agree and actually develop in this book, is that diaspora implies that the Jews of the world have a biological and ancestral connection to the ancient Hebrews and thus an historical claim to the land of Palestine that became Israel. In reality they-almost all if not quite all the Jews of the world-have no such connection or claim. Most believe they do, but they don’t. With good grace Ilan accepted that when I use the term Jewish diaspora it is for convenience).
I must also thank my dear wife, Nicole Marie Louise, to whom I have been married for 47 years. Only a lady as remarkable and as loving as she is would have allowed her husband to put everything on the line, including his home and perhaps even his life, in order to tell the truth of history. Whenever I am asked why I do what do, I quote my dear friend Hajo Meyer. At breakfast one morning after he had been one of my guests on a debating platform in London, I asked him why at the age of 82, and given that he is vilified by Zionism’s propaganda hit men, he continues to serve in the frontline of the war for truth and justice. He replied, “The first person I see every morning is me.”
Nicole understands that I, too, need to be able to live with myself.
That this book is now published in the United States is due entirely to the vision, courage and commitment of Diana G. Collier, the Editorial Director of Clarity Press, Inc. (www.claritypress.com/Hart-1.html) I cannot find words adequate enough to express my thanks to her and my respect for her. Courage of the kind Diana and her colleagues have demonstrated is extremely rare in the publishing as well as the mainstream media world.
The book is available from Amazon as well as bookshops not frightened of offending Zionism, and Clarity Press can provide very significant discounts for bulk purchases by advocacy groups.
Source: intifada-palestine.com
October 3, 2009 Posted by Elias

CHERNUS: Obama Trapped Behind Wall of Mideast Containment

Link

- October 8, 2009

It’s the Iranians, Stupid

US Containment

by Ira Chernus - The Huffington Post - 6 October 2009

Damn the Iranians and full speed ahead. That was the U.S. policy in the Middle East. But the waters have proved treacherous, with torpedoes everywhere. Despite an initial hopeful sit-down with Iranian negotiators, this won’t be the October the White House wanted on the foreign policy front. By now, Barack Obama was supposed to have announced — with ruffles and flourishes — the beginning of Middle East peace talks, leading to a final status agreement by 2012. But something didn’t happen.

Israel didn’t heed Obama’s demand to stop all settlement expansion in the West Bank. So Obama didn’t stick to that demand, settling instead for a temporary freeze after a spate of new building. The Palestinians, buoyed by Obama’s initial strong stance on the settlements, refused to negotiate until Israel stopped all construction. Other Arab nations didn’t offer Israel nearly as many concessions as the U.S. administration was demanding. Undermined by all that didn’t happen, the president had nothing of substance to announce. Read More…

Amr: Abbas is responsible for delaying the vote on Goldstone’s report


Amr: Abbas is responsible for delaying the vote on Goldstone’s report

[ 06/10/2009 - 05:07 PM ]

RAMALLAH, (PIC)-- Nabil Amr, the resigned Palestinian ambassador to Cairo, accused Mahmoud Abbas of being responsible for postponing the vote on Goldstone’s report about Israeli war crimes in the Gaza Strip.

Amr told Al-Jazeera satellite channel on Tuesday that Abbas has to admit his responsibility for withdrawing the report, pointing out that Abbas tried to evade his responsibility by saying he would form a committee to investigate what happened and putting the blame on Arab countries.
In the same context, the Palestinian communist party condemned on Monday the withdrawal of Goldstone’s report as a political scandal and high treason.

The party said that Abbas’s claims about the involvement of Arab countries in the withdrawal of the report and the formation of an investigation committee were an attempt to pull the wool over the eyes and cover up his blatant compliance with the Israeli dictates.

During a protest held outside the UNRWA headquarters in Gaza on Tuesday, families of war victims deplored Abbas for withdrawing Goldstone’s report, considering his position a disrespect for their pains and for the blood of thousands of Palestinian martyrs.

They appealed to international human rights organization and Arab leaders to refer Goldstone’s report to international courts to prosecute Israeli leaders for the crimes they committed against them.

For its part, the Palestinian community in Switzerland strongly denounced the PA irresponsible position against Goldstone’s report, saying that this position represented a political and moral decline and contradicted the interests and rights of the Palestinian people and the justice of their national cause.

The community demanded the Palestinian Authority (PA) to apologize to the Palestinian people for selling their rights at auction.

In a joint statement issued Tuesday, the media forum, the media assembly and the journalist bloc expressed their dismay and shock at the PA for its irresponsible position towards Goldstone’s report.

They described this position as a poisoned dagger stabbed in the heart of every Palestinian seeking to avenge the blood of innocent victims who were slain by Israeli war criminals.

The Palestinian police, for their part, declared Tuesday their intention to arrest everyone involved in obstructing Goldstone’s report on Israeli war crimes, noting that they lost hundreds of policemen during the last Israeli war.

In a televised statement on Al-Jazeera channel, Osama Hamdan, the representative of Hamas in Lebanon, said that Abbas must bear responsibility for what he had done, adding his only solution is to backtrack on his decision and correct what happened by putting Goldstone’s report forward and supporting it.


Al Thani and Ihsanoglu: Abbas delayed action on Goldstone’s report

[ 06/10/2009 - 10:43 AM ]

GAZA, (PIC)-- Envoy of Qatar to the UN human rights council in Geneva Khaled Al Thani and secretary-general of the organization of Islamic conference Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu affirmed Monday that the Palestinian Authority (PA) was responsible for delaying the vote on Goldstone’s report.

Al Thani told Al-Jazeera satellite channel that everyone in the human rights council was surprised to see the PA envoy submitting a request to postpone the vote on the report until next March.

He said that the PA envoy was instructed directly by Mahmoud Abbas not to take any action on the report during the current session and to work on delaying it.

For his part, Ihsanoglu also confirmed that the PA was the party that decided to defer action on the report, noting that any objection now would be of no use after the PA delegation and major countries agreed on the postponement.

In a related context, Palestinian informed sources told the Palestinian information center (PIC) that the Palestinian left-wing factions cancelled their participation in the national conference on the PA position on Goldstone’s report held Monday due to threats they received from Abbas and his aides.

The sources explained that the series of meetings called for recently by the Movement of Islamic Jihad and attended by left-wing factions affiliated with the PLO which issued statements condemning the PA’s step against Goldstone’s report raised the ire of Abbas.

The sources added that things also got worse after the popular front issued a statement following a meeting with Palestinian premier Ismail Haneyya describing him as an extraordinary premier.

Afterwards, Abbas’s aide Tayeb Abdelrahim threatened leaders of the popular front including Abdelrahim Malluh and Jamil Al-Majdalawi to take punitive action against them if they did not curb their incitement against the PA in Ramallah.

In a new development, the Palestinian ministry of interior said Monday that it embarked on studying the requests it received from many national factions and human rights organizations demanding it to arrest all people involved in delaying the vote on Goldstone’s report on charges of high treason and collaboration with the Israeli occupation against the Palestinian people.

For their part, the network of NGOs and the civic coalition for defending Palestinian rights in Jerusalem called Monday for holding accountable all those who are involved in suspending the vote on Goldstone’s report.

They also condemned the PA position as an abominable bias against the Palestinian rights and blood, noting that the PA had already killed a decision on the apartheid wall in the international court of justice in The Hague.

In a special parliamentary sitting held Monday in Gaza city, the Palestinian legislative council (PLC) adopted the report prepared by the parliamentary committee of human rights on the PA’s withdrawal of its support for Goldstone’s report.

The approved report condemns the PA position as high treason against the Palestinian people that entails the prosecution of all those involved.

The Islamist lawmakers in the West Bank also denounced in a press release on Monday the PA’s position against Goldstone’s report, saying that the PA provided the Israeli occupation with a free service and save it a lot of trouble.

For their part, the Palestinian factions in Ramallah called in a joint statement for forming a committee to investigate the decision taken by the PA to delay Goldstone’s report and for holding accountable the parties involved in taking such a decision.

Comments:

lu said...

UP, there is a good documentary you may want to watch. Narration is in Spanish but you can listen to Gazans speaking in Arabic and English, that makes a good portion of the video, and the rest you'll understand through the images. It is touching.If you want to watch it, you'll find two links to it in my blog. I've uploaded a tiny trailer of some 25 seconds or so, but the code of the video is not available for uploading, so one must go to the RTVE site. It has been broadcasted two days ago.

On another token: Sometimes I fail to understand the Angry Arab. Being a political scientist as he is, and despite the vast amounts of papers and books he reads, he however utterly fails to understand Hamas (in my opinion), and very happily makes harsh comments on them when he is lacking half of the picture at least.

Today he's castigating Hamas for "rescuing" Abbas (... and others are echoing him) but he surely did not see how Hamdam urged Abbas to retract from what he did at Geneva to the war crimes report. And next we find Ereikat making declarations to the settlers press (Ynet) saying that Abbas is "reconsidering" bactracking. He he.Now imagine he does, as it may well happen, given his lust for power. It would be a resounding success for Hamas. As to the "reconciliation" move, he incredibly speaks from his guts and not from his brain.

One could expect more from an intellectual specialised in politics and having a sound knowledge of the history in the region. Were it for my guts I'd also say "there's nothing to speak about, both are two worlds appart". But I'm convinced Hamas must have several good reasons to act the way they're acting. I can think of five or six and they surely can think of more having all the data as they have, added to a first hand knowledge of Fatah's disgraceful deeds.

So, best is to wait and see, for they are not stupid. And certain armchair generals shouldn't think they're smarter than them, specially when they're comfortably sitting behind a computer at home, rather with own life at risk 24x7x360, as the Hamas guys are.
2:46 PM, October 06, 2009

lu said...

Forgot to say the title of the documentary is The wounds of Rafah (Las heridas de Rafah), and mainly speaks about the hard work inside the tunnels where oxygen is scarce and temperature is well above 40 degrees (centigrade). Such conditions added to lack of space make pushing goods extremely difficult.
2:56 PM, October 06, 2009

Dear Lu

I fully agree with your assesment, and would add, I don't have to wait to see. I read the Angry arab contradicting statement on Fath Coup

I wonder why Hamas should be blamed for foiling a Usraeli Coup planned to save the Fath collaborationist team? I don't expect better from a guy who believe that all good guys in Fath has died or left.

If there is such a coup, Hamas should be thanked for foiling it. I would save the ass of an exposed traitor, to avoid a hidden traitor. They did every thing to turn Palestinians against Hamas, War, Siege, Propaganda, and they failed. Remember that many of those who elected Hamas were not pro-Hamas., and imagine the result of any future election after the Goldstone Report's scandel.

I am following the shitty comments of armchair general at PP comfortably sitting behind a computer at home, talking about "Becomming Very Good in Doublespeak; it Denounces the Traitor, but Still Works with Him!"

Thanks to Hamas Doublespeak, that spoiled that spoiled ememy plans and exposed traitors.

Fatima Wrote:
I dont understand this reconciliation , like we say in Arabic it is like mixing oil with water . One party cooperates openly with the zionists and targets the resistance and tortures them to death and the other supports the resistance , how can the 2 agendas ever meet ??

fatima 10.06.09 - 2:20 pm #

I agree with fatima, Palestinian reconciliation with 2 different agendas is like "mixing oil with water" but I understand reconciliation. Water and oil can't mix, but can but can be contained together on one container for some time (Hezbullah Joined siniora govenment, and Fath Joined Haneya Government.

I don't see any difference between Palestinian reconciliation and Lebanese Reconciliation. Therefore, I wonder why some people use different standards.

UP

Israeli highschoolers choose jail over occupation army service

Link

Nora Barrows-Friedman, The Electronic Intifada, 6 October 2009



Refuseniks Maya Wind and Netta Mishly. (whywerefuse.org)
As US-made Hellfire missiles and white phosphorus rained down on the entrapped people of the Gaza Strip earlier this year, a number of "refuseniks," young Israeli men and women who refuse to serve mandatory military conscription after high school, along with anti-occupation activists attempted to shut down the Israeli Air Force base near Tel Aviv. It was from this base that airborne weapons of war, flown by their former classmates, took off to kill Palestinians just miles down the beach in Gaza.

From chronic checkpoint beatings, to the use of Palestinian children as human shields during invasions, to widespread use of torture and interrogation in detention camps, to the killing of unarmed civilians during incursions and wide-scale massacres that spur international condemnation, Israel's soldiers are the face of the state's expanding and illegal occupation and colonization of Palestine. And a new generation of conscripts have just finished boot camp, eager to carry on this vicious tradition of occupation.

Within mainstream Israeli Jewish society, mandatory conscription into the military is regarded as a rite of passage; a normalized violent adventure meant to codify nationalism and Zionist supremacy while carrying out Israel's policies of aggression. (Paradoxically, a few thousand non-Jewish, "Arab-Israeli" citizens have also served in the army -- see Jonathan Cook's recent article "False promise of integration for Palestinian soldiers in Israel.") Recently, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman repeated an oft-heard mantra as he attempted to defend the state's criminal massacres in Gaza earlier this year. "Israel," Lieberman claimed, "has the most moral army in the world."

However, a growing number of Israeli Jewish youth facing mandatory military conscription -- the Shministim -- are breaking the chain of conventional cooperation with the occupation. Refusing to participate in a system they agree to be immoral as well as illegal, these young people exemplify complicity with their ethical values rather than their state's colonialist policies.
The Shministim have also started linking up with American military resisters to strategize and build an international movement of opposition to the state-sponsored violence of occupation -- from the West Bank and Gaza to Iraq and Afghanistan. At the same time, these young people are speaking directly to Jewish audiences across the US who may romanticize Israel's perceived "need" for an aggressive military system, hoping to inspire critical thought centered on the actual reality for Palestinians affected by Israel's actions.

Since 1970, groups of Shministim -- Hebrew for 12th-graders -- have emerged, turning against the overwhelming current of generational militarism. Writing public letters to Israeli heads of state, Shministim cohorts refuse to participate in the system of occupation, and, more broadly, vociferously challenge a national attitude of supremacy and racist entitlement over historic Palestine's indigenous population.

Though personal stories of revelatory tenacity are wholly unique for each young person who stands up, the shock of collective reality and personal responsibility is a common theme. After witnessing brutal violence carried out by Israeli occupation soldiers against Palestinians in the West Bank village of Bilin, 19-year-old Shministim member Maya Wind says that "the only moral option for me was to refuse."

Not surprisingly, the Israeli government does not concur with Wind's revelation. Shministim refuseniks face draconian jail sentences in repeated cycles until they reach 21 years old or manage to secure a discharge on the basis of medical or mental health.

Israeli youth who refuse to cooperate with Israel's military occupation are sent into a lengthy and relentless labyrinth of court martials and consecutive jail terms in what Israeli lawyer Michael Sfard, representing Shministim, calls a "price tag" meant to deter other young Israelis from non-participation. "Otherwise," he says, "[the Israeli government's] argument says, everyone -- of ideological or personal reasons -- will refuse to serve."

I recently interviewed Wind and her Shministim cohort, Netta Mishly, during their tour in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Wind says that the political and ultra-religious environment in her high school led her to question the reality behind the ideologies of her government and her fellow students. "A lot of my classmates were settlers, including extremists from [settlements in] the West Bank ... there were a lot of questions that surfaced for me. I didn't even use the word 'occupation' back then." Through a discussion group with Palestinians in Jerusalem, Wind says that she awakened to a different reality than the one offered to her inside Israeli-Jewish society. "I figured I needed to learn more. Through a conversation with a Palestinian girl, I started to question more. I started going to the West Bank."

Wind was sent to jail during the third week of the Gaza massacres, and spent several weeks behind bars. Sentenced four times, she spent a cumulative two months in detention and another 42 days in a military prison altogether. She was subjected to a "humiliating" array of psychiatrists and psychologists sent by the military to determine her mental fitness, required to serve in the army. Wind says that all of the Shministim were labeled mentally unfit by these health professionals, therefore giving Israel the excuse that the problem was not with the policies or the morality of the military, but with the Shministim themselves.

Netta Mishly, also 19 years old and from Tel Aviv, was active in several political groups from early adolescence and supported by parents who encouraged her to think critically. She said that her decision to refuse was made clear during her activity against Israel's wall in the West Bank. "After I was there, and I saw how the soldiers attack civilians without any security justification, after I saw how the state steals land from [Palestinians] ... For me, not going to the army was a decision I came to after visiting the West Bank for the first time."

She says that her life changed completely after returning to school. "I kept hearing the same line [in class] -- that we need to defend ourselves, and we need to go to the army. I couldn't believe this anymore because I saw how the soldiers act on the ground. I connected with other activists and we started thinking about how we were going to take this difficult step, and we decided to keep working in the same tradition that started before us. We drafted a letter to the government, saying that we wouldn't take part in the terrible crimes that Israel is doing in our name. After that, one by one, each one of us went to jail."

Mishly was sentenced to a week in detention at the military base because there was "no room" in the regular prison (during the December-January attacks on Gaza, hundreds of Palestinian citizens of Israel who participated in protests were rounded up and thrown into Israeli jails, on charges of treason and incitement). After the trial, one of the highest-ranking Israeli military justices decided they could re-try Mishly and she received another 20 days. "When you make the decision not to go to the army, you don't know where [the punishment] is going to end," she says.

Meanwhile, as US President Barack Obama readies another "troop surge" to entrench the interminable American occupation of Afghanistan, Wind and Mishly are meeting with US military resisters in order, Wind says, to expand international rejection of militarism. "I think that's why Netta and I have come to the US. It's not just about the Israeli occupation. It's not just an Israeli thing. The US is occupying. And there are all forms of racism, prejudice and violence ... these are not just phenomenons particular to the Middle East, you have this in the US as well. It's towards immigrants, Mexicans, towards Iraq and Afghanistan. I think we're trying to show that these are global phenomenons and we all have to create a broader justice movement."

Sarah Lazare of the Bay Area-based GI Resistance support organization Courage to Resist is helping to organize an upcoming delegation of US war resisters to Palestine-Israel, she says, to connect with Israeli refuseniks. Calling itself Dialogue Against Militarism, the group intends to discuss similar experiences and learn from each other's strategies for confronting war and occupation, while engaging with the effects of militarism in their respective societies.

"It is extremely powerful that war resisters in Israel are connecting with war resisters in the US," says Lazare. "Given the close relationship between the so-called 'War on Terror' and the Israeli occupation, it is vital for resisters in these two countries to join forces, in order to build a movement strong enough to take on the forces we're up against. Israeli and US war resisters are having exciting discussions, sharing experiences, and showing direct solidarity with each other, and I think this is a powerful step towards stopping US and Israeli-led occupations."

In January, upon her sentencing, Maya Wind offered her declaration of conscience to the military court. "We can no longer term our military a 'Defense Force,'" she asserted.

"A defense force does not conquer lands of another people. A defense force does not assist in the building of settlements on those lands. A defense force does not permit settlers to throw stones at Palestinian civilians, nor does it deny them access to their lands and source of livelihood. None of these are acts of a defense force."

www.WhyWeRefuse.org
www.NewProfile.org

Fatah Official Says Violence May Lead to 3rd Intifada


Fatah Official Says Violence May Lead to 3rd Intifada
Readers Number : 71

07/10/2009 “Recent violence in the capital and the ongoing tensions surrounding Al-Aqsa mosque could trigger a third intifada,” senior Fatah official Hatem Abdel Kader said in a conversation with the Israeli daily The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday.

"It's a very sensitive situation," the former Palestinian Authority minister for Jerusalem affairs indicated as he stood outside a home in the city's Wadi Joz neighborhood. Officials from the northern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel, including its leader, Sheikh Raed Salah, were among those who had congregated on the home's roof, in response to the recent Israeli violent actions.

Salah was arrested at that same house in the evening, after police decided that comments he had made in recent days - including calling on Muslims to become "martyrs," if necessary, for the sake of the Aqsa Mosque - constituted “incitement.”The Jerusalem Magistrates Court released him on Tuesday night, just hours after his arrest, but issued an injunction prohibiting him from entering Jerusalem for 30 days.

Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch lauded the decision to arrest Salah. "I offer my full backing to the police. We will continue to enforce the law in an uncompromising manner," he said. "The police will use all of the tools at its disposal to act against any element that incites others to violence and subversion against the state," Aharonovitch said.

Abdel Kader, who was arrested on Sunday for “inciting violence” and banned from entering the occupied city for 15 days, blamed the police for the current round of tensions that have engulfed the capital's eastern neighborhoods. "Israel's decisions so far have been very dangerous," he said. "And if they don't want things to escalate, the Israelis should back away from this issue. If not, we are afraid that the situation could lead to an explosion - it could lead to a third intifada."

Abdel Kader's comments came after an upswing in violence in recent days, which began on Sunday morning when Israeli extremist groups tried to enter the Aqsa Mosque and when the Israeli occupation police denied the Palestinians entry to the compound for morning prayers.

Since the Temple Mount was reopened to Muslim worshipers on Sunday afternoon, entry to the compound has been restricted to females and to men over the age of 50. Abdel Kader's arrest on Sunday afternoon was also part of the occupation police actions in that day, but the Fatah official was released on the condition that he remain at least 150 meters away from the occupied Jerusalem city for 15 days.

Abdel Kader, who represents Fatah's "young guard," said all eyes were on Al-Aksa, and that Palestinians were deeply concerned over the tensions surrounding the site.

Touching on the Israeli authorities’ plan to allow Jewish prayer on the Aqsa mosque, Abdel Kader said that no other religious groups should be allowed to pray there. "People must respect the site," he said. "It's a very important symbol for us, and [the current restrictions] are a violation of our freedom of religion. What would happen if they restricted access to the Kotel? Arabs aren't allowed to go there as it is now, but what if they restricted entry to the Kotel for Jews?"

Abdel Kader also said any outbreak of violence would threaten already-stalled negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. "If they make something happen in Al-Aqsa, the entire peace process could explode," he said.

BREAKING NEWS: PLO official admits ‘mistake’ in delaying Goldstone report

Link

October 8, 2009

Ma’an News Agency - 7 October 2009

20359


Bethlehem – Ma’an/Agencies – A senior Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) official admitted for the first time on Wednesday that the Palestinian leadership made a mistake by delaying action on a United Nations report on war crimes in Gaza.

“We have the courage to admit there was a mistake,” said Yasser Abed Rabbo, a member of the PLO executive committee and an advisor to President Mahmoud Abbas, according to AP.

Abbas’ government buckled to US pressure last week and withdrew a motion from the UN Human Rights Council to take action on a report by South African Judge Richard Goldstone.

Deferral of action on the report caused widespread public outrage among Palestinians, including calls for Abbas’ resignation and the dissolution of the Palestinian Authority.

Richard Falk on Palestine and Goldstone report

Link

07 Oct 09

Richard Falk on Palestine and Goldstone report - 07 Oct 09:

"The Palestinian leadership has backed a move to defer a UN vote on the Goldstone report that accuses Israel of committing war crimes during its offensive in Gaza.

Richard Falk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and a special UN rapporteur on the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories, talks to Al Jazeera about the possible motivation behind the decision."



Palestine Video - A Palestine Vlog

UN must act on Goldstone and the PA must be dissolved

UN must act on Goldstone and the PA must be dissolved

Omar Barghouti, The Electronic Intifada, 5 October 2009



The Palestinian Authority has no legitimacy to claim to represent these Palestinian children in Gaza, or Palestinians anywhere. (Wissam Nassar/MaanImages)
Palestinian civil society has strongly and almost unanimously condemned the Palestinian Authority's decision to delay action regarding the UN Fact-Finding Mission's report, headed by justice Richard Goldstone, which investigated the recent Israeli war of aggression against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip. A common demand in almost all Palestinian statements was for the UN to adopt the report and act swiftly on its recommendations to bring the report to the Security Council and failing meaningful investigation by responsible parties, take the case to the International Criminal Court in order to bring an end to Israel's criminal impunity, and to hold it accountable before international law for its war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza and, indeed, all over the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Succumbing to US pressure and unabashed Israeli blackmail, Mahmoud Abbas, leader of the Ramallah Palestinian Authority (PA), was reportedly personally responsible for the decision to defer council consideration of the Goldstone report. This dashed the hopes of Palestinians everywhere as well as those of international human rights organizations and solidarity movements, that Israel would finally face a long overdue process of legal accountability and that its victims would have a measure of justice. The PA decision -- which delays adoption of the report at least until March 2010 -- gives Israel a golden opportunity to bury it with US, European, Arab and now Palestinian complicity, and constitutes the most blatant case yet of PA betrayal of Palestinian rights and surrender to Israeli dictates.

History of betrayal

This is not the first time, though, that the PA has acted under orders from Washington and threats from Tel Aviv against the express interests of the Palestinian people. The historic July 2004 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), finding Israel's wall and colonies built on occupied Palestinian territory illegal, presented a rare diplomatic, political and legal opportunity to isolate Israel just as apartheid South Africa was isolated after the ICJ's 1971 decision against its occupation of Namibia. Alas, the PA squandered the opportunity and systematically -- quite suspiciously, actually -- failed even to call on world governments to comply with their obligations stated in the advisory opinion.

The whole clause on Israel and Palestinian rights that was to be discussed at the recent UN Durban Review Conference in Geneva was dropped after the Palestinian representative gave his green light. Efforts by non-aligned nations and former UN General Assembly president Father Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann to push for a UN resolution condemning Israel's war crimes in Gaza and establishing an international tribunal were thwarted mainly by the Palestinian ambassador to the UN, causing several prominent diplomats and international law experts to wonder which side the official Palestinian representative was on.

The Mercosur-Israel Free Trade Agreement was almost ratified by Brazil last September after the Palestinian ambassador there expressed approval, only urging Brazil to exclude Israeli settlement products from the agreement. With prompt action by Palestinian and Brazilian civil society organizations and eventually by the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), this ratification was averted and the responsible Brazilian parliamentary committee recommended that the government refrain from approving the agreement until Israel complies with international law.

In all these cases and many similar ones, the instructions to the Palestinian representatives came from Ramallah. The PA government there has, however, illegally appropriated the PLO's authority to conduct Palestinian diplomacy and set foreign policy, conceding Palestinian rights and acting against Palestinian national interests, without worrying about accountability to any elected representatives of the Palestinian people.

The PA's latest forthright collusion in Israel's campaign to whitewash its crimes and escape accountability came a few days after the far-right Israeli government publicly blackmailed the PA, demanding that it withdraw its support for adopting the Goldstone report in return for "permitting" a second mobile communications provider to operate in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

This collusion undermines the great efforts by human rights organizations and many activists to bring justice to the Palestinian victims of Israel's latest massacre in Gaza, the more than 1,400 killed (predominantly civilians), the thousands injured, the 1.5 million who are still suffering from the wanton destruction of infrastructure, educational and health institutions, factories, farm lands, power plants and other critical facilities, and from the long criminal Israeli siege against them.

It is nothing short of a betrayal of Palestinian civil society's effective boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel, with all its recent, remarkable growth and achievements in mainstream western societies and among leading unions. It is also a betrayal of the global solidarity movement that has worked tirelessly and creatively, mainly within the framework of the fast-spreading BDS campaign, to end Israel's impunity and to uphold universal human rights.

It is crucial to remember that the PA does not have any legal or democratic mandate to speak on behalf of the people of Palestine or to represent the Palestinians at the UN or any of its agencies and institutions. The current PA government has never won the necessary constitutional approval of the democratically elected Palestinian Legislative Council. Even if it had such a mandate, at best it would only represent the Palestinians living under Israel's military occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, excluding the great majority of the people of Palestine, particularly the refugees.

Israel's strongest weapon, the PA

Only the PLO can theoretically claim to represent the entire Palestinian people, inside historic Palestine and in exile. For such a claim to be substantiated and universally accepted, though, the PLO would need to be revived from the grassroots upwards, in a transparent, democratic and inclusive process involving Palestinians everywhere and encompassing all political parties that are outside PLO structures today.

In parallel with this popular take-back of the PLO by the people and their representative unions and institutions, the PA must be responsibly and gradually dismantled, with its current powers, particularly the representation seats at the UN and other regional and international institutions, returned to where they belong: a revived and democratized PLO. Dissolution of the PA, however, must at all times avoid creating a legal and political vacuum, as history shows that hegemonic powers are often the most likely to fill such a vacuum to the detriment of the oppressed.

The fact is the PA has been gradually and irreversibly transformed since its establishment 15 years ago. It began as an often powerless, obsequious and coerced sub-contractor of the Israeli occupation, relieving Israel of its most cumbersome civil duties, like providing services and tax collection. Most crucially, the PA very effectively helped Israel safeguard the security of its occupation army and colonial settlers. Now, the PA has gone beyond those roles, becoming a willing collaborator that constitutes Israel's most important strategic weapon in countering its growing isolation and loss of legitimacy on the world stage as a colonial and apartheid state. Israel's hundreds of nuclear weapons and its fourth most powerful military in the world proved impotent or at least irrelevant before the growing BDS movement, particularly after Israel's acts of genocide in Gaza. The almost unlimited diplomatic, political, economic and scientific support Israel receives from American and European governments and its unparalleled impunity have also failed to protect it from the gloomy fate of apartheid South Africa.

Even before Israel's war on Gaza, many unions around the world had joined the BDS campaign. After Gaza, BDS leaped into a new, advanced phase, finally reaching the mainstream. Years of careful groundwork facilitated this, but international shock at Israel's white phosphorus showers of death visited upon the children of Gaza cowering in UN shelters, and the universal feeling that the international order has failed to hold Israel accountable or even end its slaughter, or the ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, has provided an enormous boost.

In February, weeks after the end of Israel's Gaza bloodbath, the South African Transport and Allied Workers Union (SATAWU) made history when it refused to offload an Israeli ship in Durban. In April, the Scottish Trade Union Congress followed the lead of the South African trade union federation, COSATU, and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions in adopting BDS to bring about Israel's compliance with international law. In May, the University and College Union (UCU), representing some 120,000 British academics, reiterated its annual support for the logic of boycott against Israel, calling for organizing an inter-union BDS conference to discuss strategies to implement the boycott.

And in September, Norway's government pension fund, the world's third largest, divested from an Israeli military contractor supplying equipment for construction of the illegal West Bank wall. Shortly after that, a Spanish ministry excluded a team representing an Israeli college illegally built on occupied Palestinian land from participating in an academic competition. Also in September, the British Trades Union Congress, representing more than 6.5 million workers, adopted the boycott, ushering in a new phase reminiscent of the beginning of the end of the South African apartheid regime. According to concrete, persistent and mounting indicators, Palestinians are witnessing the arrival of their South Africa moment.

Amidst all this came the Goldstone report, quite surprisingly -- given the judge's strong connections with Israel and Zionism -- providing the straw that may well break the camel's back: irrefutable evidence, meticulously researched and documented, of Israel's deliberate commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Despite its clear shortcomings, this report presented Israel with the daunting possibility of standing trial at an international tribunal, effectively ending its impunity.

In this dire situation, only one strategic weapon in Israel's arsenal could fend off a crushing legal and political defeat: the PA. And Israel indeed used it at the right time, almost killing the Goldstone report.

Ultimately, the failure of the UN Human Rights Council to adopt the Goldstone report is another proof, if any is needed, that Palestinians cannot hope at the current historical moment to obtain justice from the US-controlled so-called "international community." Only through intensified, sustainable and context-sensitive civil society campaigns of boycott and divestment can there be any hope that Israel will one day be compelled to end its lawlessness and criminal disregard of human rights and recognize the inalienable Palestinian right to self determination. This right, as expressed by the great majority of the Palestinian people, comprises ending the occupation, ending the legalized and institutionalized system of racial discrimination, or apartheid, and recognizing the fundamental, UN-sanctioned right of Palestine refugees to return to their homes of origin, like all other refugees around the world.

We simply cannot afford to give up on the UN, though. Human rights organizations and international civil society must continue to help the Palestinian struggle to pressure the UN, at least its General Assembly, to adopt and act upon the recommendations of the Goldstone report at all levels. If the UN fails to do so it will send an unambiguous message to Israel that its impunity remains intact and that the international community will stand by apathetically the next time it commits even more egregious crimes against the indigenous people of Palestine. This would gravely undermine the rule of law and promote in its stead the law of the jungle, where no one will be protected from total chaos and boundless carnage.

Omar Barghouti is a founding member of the BDS movement (www.BDSmovement.net).