أبعد من نفق الحرية… معادلات جديدة

 8 سبتمبر/ أيلول 2021

ناصر قنديل

–

عملية نفق الحرية التي نفذها القادة الأسرى الأبطال ليست بلا سياق كي نتوقف في قراءتها عند حدود البطولة والعزم والإرادة، كعناصر تختزنها العملية وتعبر عنها بقوة من جهة، فيما تعبر من جهة أخرى، عن حال الاهتراء والضعف والتراجع في حال كيان الاحتلال ومستوى جاهزية وتفوق إجراءاته الأمنية، وتطعن بفعالية مؤسساته العسكرية والاستخبارية والإدارية والقضائية في ردع المقاومين الفلسطينيين، وتقديم السجن المؤبد كنهاية حتمية لجيل المقاومين القادة، إعلاناً بإخراجهم نهائياً من حلبة الصراع، فالعملية التي نفذها قادة مقاومون أصحاب رؤية ودور فاعل في رسم سياق النضال الوطني الفلسطيني، تأتي في سياق فهمهم لتنامي هاتين المعادلتين، معادلة تعبّر عن القوس الصاعد بثبات لحضور الشعب الفلسطيني ومقاومته، ومعادلة تعبّر عن القوس الهابط بثبات أيضاً، لحضور وفعالية المؤسسة العسكرية والأمنية لكيان الاحتلال، بصفتها العصب الوجودي لهذا الكيان.

–

تأتي العملية ضمن سياق متلاحق على إيقاع سريع لوجهة واحدة، هي وجهة هذا الصعود والتألق في حضور الفلسطينيين شعباً وناشطين ومقاومة مسلحة، لفرض معادلات بدأت مع انتفاضة شباب القدس وحي الشيخ جراح والحضور في المسجد الأقصى، لتتوّجها صواريخ المقاومة الرادعة لحماية المقدسات، والتي انتهت بمواجهة سيف القدس التي كسرت خلالها مهابة ردع جيش الاحتلال لتحل مكانه عبر الصواريخ التي أحيت ليل تل أبيب معادلة الردع الفلسطينية، وبالتوازي تزامنت المواجهة مع ظهور عامل خطير تمثل بنهوض ظاهرة شباب الأراضي المحتلة العام 48 وإسقاط لمعادلة توصيفهم بـ»عرب إسرائيل»، وإعادة إنتاج موقعهم الحاسم في النضال الوطني الفلسطيني، على قاعدة رفض الاحتلال والاستيطان، وبعد تثبيت معادلة سيف القدس تواصلت حركة فلسطينيي الداخل، بصفتها تعبيراً عن توازن جديد غير قابل للكسر، وظهر المستوطنون في حال تراجع مع عمليات الهجرة التي سجلتها المدن والبلدات المختلطة بالنسبة لعشرات العائلات اليهودية، بما أعاد إحياء الصورة الأصلية لهذه البلدات والمدن، كجزء من الجغرافيا الفلسطينية، كما وصف نواب الجماعات المتطرفة للمستوطنين في مداخلاتهم تحت قبة الكنيست ما جرى في مدينة اللد، وترافق هذا المشهد المزدوج بين غزة والأراضي المحتلة عام 48 بحركة نضالية متصاعدة وثابتة الحضور في بلدات جوار القدس بوجه المستوطنين وامتدت إلى الضفة الغربية بتعبيرات مختلفة كانت أبرزها مواجهة بالسلاح في جنين سقط فيها أربعة شهداء، أعقبتها الطلقة الفلسطينية من مسافة صفر التي قتلت القناص الإسرائيلي في فوهة جدار غزة، وما تركته من تداعيات على صورة الآلة العسكرية الإسرائيلية أمام النهوض الفلسطيني الجديد، وفي تحول ربما يكون الأهم على الصعيد السياسي جاء التراجع الكبير في صورة السلطة الفلسطينية شعبياً، مع تحركات تشكك بوطنيتها وشرعيتها، مسجلة تحولاً جديداً لا يقل أهمية عن التحولات الموازية، وهو سقوط الشرعية الشعبية عن التنسيق الأمني الذي يربط أجهزة الاحتلال مع أجهزة السلطة الفلسطينية، وكانت الذروة مع استشهاد المقاوم نزار بنات، والانتفاضة التي رافقت استشهاده، بوجه السلطة وأجهزتها، من بوابة عنوان عريض لا للتنسيق مع الاحتلال ، ما حدا بالعديد من مسؤولي الأمن والاستخبارات والمحللين والخبراء الأمنيين في كيان الاحتلال للتحذير من خطورة انهيار السلطة وأجهزتها، أمام عجزها عن تحمل تبعات التنسيق الأمني والأحمال التي يرتبها على السلطة، مسجلاً سقوطها الأخلاقي بعيون الفلسطينيين، في ظل الغياب الكامل لكل المشاريع السياسية التي كانت تشكل غطاء تبرير التنسيق وتشرعنه، وظهور وعي فلسطيني ينظر بعين الريبة لكل وعود جديدة تطرح على هذا الصعيد، سواء في ظل حكومة بنيامين نتنياهو أو حكومة نفتالي بينيت.

–

الذي يمنح هذه التحولات قيمة استراتيجية واستثنائية، ويجعل عملية نفق الحرية تزخيماً لمسار يبشر بلحظة نوعية قادمة حكماً، هو أنها تجري في مناخ دولي وإقليمي مليء بالمتغيرات التي تسير بالاتجاه ذاته، اتجاه التراجع لكيان الاحتلال وحليفه وداعمه الأول الذي تمثله الهيمنة الأميركية على المنطقة والعالم، فتحت ظلال معادلة القدس تعادل حرباً إقليمية أنجز تكامل التنسيق بين قوى وحكومات محور المقاومة، وتحت عنوان سفن المقاومة لجلب المحروقات من إيران إلى لبنان أرض لبنانية فرضت معادلة الردع في البحار على الكيان، وتحت عنوان مشابه دعت المقاومة للبدء بالحفر والتنقيب عن الغاز والنفط تحت حماية صواريخها، وجاء الانهزام غير المسبوق للأميركي في أفغانستان وما رافقه من ذل، لم تنجح محاولات التمويه والتغطية بتحويله إلى انسحاب منسق يتم تسويقه بصفته علامة مهابة القوة العظمى، فجاء مقتل الجنود المغادرين وإصرار الإدارة الأميركية على مواصلة الانسحاب قطعاً لكل جدل حول الهزيمة المحققة التي تمثل طليعة خروج أميركي من آسيا، لم يعد ممكناً تفاديه، وترجمت العملية العسكرية السورية في منطقة درعا الواقعة تحت أنف قاعدة التنف وعلى حدود القواعد الأميركية في الأردن والعراق والحدود مع الجولان المحتل، أكبر اختبار للحقائق الجديدة وأهم إثبات طازج على المعادلات التي ترسمها، ولم يكن الكلام الأميركي الذي ترجم بخطوات عملية لفتح الطريق لرفع العقوبات التي يفرضها قانون قيصر على استجرار الكهرباء الأردنية والغاز المصري إلى لبنان عبر سورية، إلا تعبيراً عن محدودية هوامش المناورة المتاحة أمام الإدارة الأميركية في مواجهة تمدد مساحات معادلات الردع التي ينقلها محور المقاومة من مدى إلى مدى جديد، كما فعلت سفن المقاومة بنقل معادلة الردع إلى البحار، فوجد الأميركي اضطراراً أن القبول بتثبيت نتائجها في البر، رد للضرر الأعلى بالضرر الأدنى.

–

عملية نفق الحرية تأتي لتتوج هذا السياق المتسارع، تأكيداً لثنائية، مناخ فلسطيني جديد يشمل الشعب وفصائل المقاومة والنشطاء والنخب وشباب وصبايا الجيل الرابع، يرتكز على الشعور بالقوة، مفعم بالحيوية، مليء بالمبادرات، غير قابل للاحتواء، غير آبه بالتضحيات، قادر على فرض المعادلات، يتحرك تحت عنوان كل فلسطين لنا، ويضع السلطة بين خيارات صعبة، وكيان الاحتلال بين خيارات أصعب، وبالمقابل كيان مترهل، يشعر بالضعف، يتشظى سياسياً ويتراجع أمنياً، لا يملك هامش الاختيار للمناورة بين حرب يخشاها، وتسوية لا يقدر على رفع فواتيرها بما يجعلها قابلة للتداول، فهو بين شاقوفي مقاومة شعبية وعسكرية متصاعدة واثقة من أن كل معركة تقربها شوطاً من تحقيق أهدافها، ومستوطنين يزدادون تطرفاً وتوحشاً وشكوكاً بصدقية حكوماتهم، وهو عالق في منتصف الطريق بين مواجهة هذه الروح الفلسطينية الجديدة، فلا يجرؤ على تحديها والمضي في التحدي حتى النهاية، وبين التعامل مع عدمية وعبثية التطرف الاستيطاني الذي يشكل البيئة الانتخابية لصاعة السياسة، لا يجرؤ على تخطيها والقفز فوقها لإطلاق مبادرات سياسية تتجاوز الكلام الإنشائي الفارغ.

–

لحظة دراماتيكية لتلاقي هذا القوس الفلسطيني الصاعد وهذا القوس الإسرائيلي الهابط ستشعل المنازلة الشاملة، وتنشئ حقائق جديدة تشبه لحظة ولادة التحرير في غزة، لتشق الطريق نحو مسار تراكمي جديد، يضع الكيان بين خياري المضي في حرب شاملة قد تكون آخر حروبه، أو التساكن مع متغيرات تزيد هزاله وتعمق حال التراجع الاستراتيجي، وتمنح خيار المقاومة مساحات إضافية في توازن الردع والتحرير، على قاعدة معادلة «القدس أقرب»، والمعادلة التي سبقتها «إسرائيل أوهن من بيت العنكبوت» التي جاءت عملية نفق الحرية أبرز تجسيد حي لحضورها.

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

• العدو يُفرغ غضبه في الأسرى: تحذيرات المقاومة بالمرصاد
• جلبوع ليس زمانك فارحل
• عملية نفق الحرية.. فشل إستخباراتي وصفعة مدوية
• «ولا شيء في الأرض، لا شيء فيها سواك»

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

“سيف القدس” وإخراج دمشق من الفخّ الكارثيّ

تموز 9 2021

أحمد الدرزي

المصدر: الميادين نت

لم تكن فلسطين في العقل السوري في أي يوم من الأيام إلا جزءاً من البيئة الجغرافية السورية.

قد تكون دمشق الرابح الأكبر بعد الفلسطينيين في معركة “سيف القدس” باعتبار أنها كشفت دورها السابق والمستقبلي تجاه فلسطين.

تلقَّفت دمشق نتائج الانتصار الكبير للمواجهة الأخيرة بين “إسرائيل” والمقاومة الفلسطينية، التي توحّدت بمستوويها المدني والعسكري، وبقطاعاتها الثلاثة في غزة والضفة الغربية والأراضي المحتلة العام 1948، بسعادة كبيرة، لظهور نتائج موقفها الداعم للمقاومة الفلسطينية الذي لم ينقطع، رغم كل ما أصابها من بعض حركة “حماس” أثناء قيادة رئيس مكتبها السياسي السابق خالد مشعل، ما دفع الرئيس الأسد إلى استقبال قادة المقاومة بشكل علني، والتركيز على ضرورة إبراز الدور السوري في كلِّ الانتصارات، بما في ذلك الانتصار الأكبر، عملية “سيف القدس”، التي غيرت المعادلات داخل فلسطين، وأظهرت مدى هشاشة الكيان الذي لا جذور له في هذه الأرض، حتى تاريخياً، والَّذي تشبه خرافة قوّته خرافة وجود يهوذا و”إسرائيل” ومعبد سليمان في أرض فلسطين. كما أدركت دمشق بحسها السياسي الخبير بالشؤون الدولية أنَّ هذا الانتصار سينعكس عليها إيجاباً في المدى القريب إقليمياً ودولياً.

لم تكن فلسطين في العقل السوري في أي يوم من الأيام إلا جزءاً من البيئة الجغرافية السورية، التي حدَّدها أغلب الجغرافيين العرب بمصطلح بلاد الشام، ومنهم الإدريسي الأشهر، باعتبارها المناطق التي تمتد من شمال وغرب السويدية، التي تشكل الحد الفاصل بين بلاد الشام وبلاد الأرمن، إلى العريش أو رفح جنوباً. وقد قُسِّمت إدارياً في عهد السيطرة العثمانية في القرن التاسع عشر إلى 3 ولايات، هي دمشق وحلب وبيروت.

ولَم يكن الفلسطينيون يتعاطون مع دمشق إلا باعتبارها مركزهم السياسي والاقتصادي، وهو ما دفعهم إلى الاشتراك في مؤتمر سوريا الأول في دمشق في العام1918 ، بوفدٍ مؤلف من 17 شخصية فلسطينية، على رأسهم ممثل نابلس الباحث والمؤرخ عزة دروزة، الذي اختير نائباً لرئيس المؤتمر وقام بتلاوة بيانه الختامي، الذي عبَّر فيه عن رؤية مشرقية للهلال الخصيب ضمن إطار عربي.

لَم تغب هذه الرؤية عن أغلب الفلسطينيين من الناحية الفعلية، حتى بعد تشكّل المقاومة الفلسطينية بفصائلها المتنوعة، واختيارها دمشق مركزاً وحاميةً لها أثناء احتلال بيروت وإبّان تحريرها من العدو الإسرائيلي، والأهم من ذلك، حركتا “حماس” و”الجهاد” الإسلاميتان، رغم التناقض الأيديولوجي بينهما. وخير من استطاع أن يعبر عن هذا التوجه العام، رغم كل ما شاب المواقف السياسية، هو الشهيد نزار بنات الذي عرّف عن نفسه بأنه سوري فلسطيني.

هذا ما يفسّر دوافع العقل السياسي السوري بالتعاطي مع القضية الفلسطينية، ففضلاً عن كونها قضية حقوقية أخلاقية إنسانية ذات بعد عربي وإنساني، فإنها قضية احتلال لأرض سورية تشكّل بعداً استراتيجياً للتواصل مع مصر وادي النيل وقارة أفريقيا بأكملها، وهي أهم منطقة سوريَّة يقتضي التركيز عليها أكثر من لواء إسكندرون وبقية المناطق المحتلة، كما أنَّها قضية وجودية بسبب طبيعة الكيان التوسعية وأبعاد سياسات الهيمنة والاستعباد التي تشكّل من أجلها ضمن دوائر متعددة، أقربها إليه سوريا ومصر.

ورغم خروج سوريا من معظم الفخاخ التي نصبت لها، وخصوصاً في الفترة الفاصلة بين العامين 2006 و2011، بفضل حرب تموز في جنوب لبنان، التي ساهمت بها بشكل كبير وواسع، واعتبرتها نصراً كبيراً لها، ما دفع الولايات المتحدة إلى نصب فخّ اقتصاديّ، برفع اتهامها المزوّر بقتل رئيس الوزراء اللبناني رفيق الحريري عنها، وتوجيهه إلى “حزب الله”، ودفع دول السّعودية وقطر والإمارات العربية المتحدة وتركيا ومصر إلى الانفتاح على سوريا، ومحاولة تغيير تموضعها الجيوسياسي بين الشرق والغرب بالسياسات الاقتصادية الليبرالية التي يغلب عليها الطّابع الخدمي والنمط الاستهلاكي.

ورغم ما تحقَّق من ذلك، فإنَّ دمشق عندما وُضعت بين خياري الشرق والغرب في مشاريع نقل الغاز القطري إلى تركيا عبر الأراضي السورية، ودعم المقاومة لأجل فلسطين وتسليمها كي يتم ذبحها، فإنها رفضت المساومة، ما تسبّب بتعرّضها لأكبر كارثة في تاريخها، باستخدام نمط الجيل الرابع من الحروب لتدميرها (حروب الوكالة)، والذي أدّى إلى حدوث صدع اجتماعيّ كبير، بفعل النجاح في إثارة الهويات الفرعية لدى طيف واسع لا يُستهان به من السوريين.

تدرك دمشق، أياً كان صاحب القرار فيها، عمق القضية الفلسطينية في وجدان وعقل السوريين الذين اندفعوا للتطوع في حرب 1948، رغم تنوع الهويات الفرعية بأشكالها القومية والدينية والمذهبية والقبلية والعشائرية والمدينية والريفية، وهي تشكّل القاسم المشترك الأكبر القادر على تجاوز هوياتهم الفرعية نحو إبراز هويتهم السورية الجامعة. وقد تجلت خير تجلٍ أثناء حرب تموز، باندفاع كل السوريين لاستقبال اللبنانيين الذين لجأوا إليهم بعد العدوان الإسرائيلي الواسع التدمير للجنوب اللبناني، وهي الآن بأمسِّ الحاجة لرأب الصدع الاجتماعي الكبير والعميق الذي تسبّبت به الحرب الكارثية على سوريا والسوريين.

تأتي أهمية معركة “سيف القدس” الأخيرة التي لا تُقدر قيمة نتائجها الكبرى حتى الآن لسوريا والإقليم، وقد تكون دمشق الرابح الأكبر بعد الفلسطينيين فيها، بأنها كشفت دورها السابق والمستقبلي تجاه فلسطين، واختبرت من جديد مدى قدرة الالتزام بالمواجهة الحقيقية المباشرة مع “إسرائيل” وإيقاظ وجدان أغلب السوريين للعودة إلى سوريّتهم، على الرغم من كوارث الحرب والحصار، وعقوبات “قيصر”، وتغوّل اقتصاد الظلّ وسيطرته على معظم مفاصل الاقتصاد، والانحسار الكبير لدورة الحياة الاقتصادية الطبيعية، وهي الآن تحتاج إلى الخروج من الكارثة بمعالجة 3 مسائل أساسية مترابطة وعاجلة، لا يمكن الفصل في ما بينها، أولها الملف الاقتصادي الذي تتطلَّب معالجته إرادة وإدارة وعقلية جديدة، ورأب الصدع الاجتماعي، واستعادة الدور الإقليمي الحامي لها واللائق بموقعها الجيوسياسي الأخطر.

وقد وفَّر انتصار عملية “سيف القدس” عاملين مهمين للخروج الناجح من الفخ الأخطر، وهما الدور الإقليمي الذي سيعود إليها إلى حد كبير، ودور عامل الرفض لبقاء “إسرائيل” ومقاومتها بإزالة الصدع الاجتماعي.

ويبقى العنصر الأهم والضاغط الذي يتعلَّق بإعادة الدورة الاقتصادية الطبيعية، وفقاً للموارد المتاحة ومساهمة الحلفاء والأصدقاء، وتحجيم اقتصاد الظل إلى الحدود القصوى، وهو ما ينتظره السّوريون بعد السابع عشر من هذا الشهر، كي يتابعوا تحرير ما تبقّى من أراضيهم المحتلّة في الشمال السوري من الاحتلالين التركي والأميركي، فهل تتحقَّق آمالهم بذلك؟

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Zionist Ethnic Cleansing in Sheikh Jarrah Neighborhood and the Silwan Village

 19/06/2021

By Dr. Zuhair Sabbagh | June 19, 2021

In order to understand the issue of ethnic cleansing carried out by the Zionist entity and its tools in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, in colonized Jerusalem, we must not address it in the Zionist colonial settler context because it lacks scientific credibility. In order to solve this problem, we have to ask and answer the following questions: Who is the real side that legally owns the properties of the “Jewish Quarter” in colonized Jerusalem? Who legally owns the real estate of Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood and the Silwan village? What follows is a serious attempt to answer these two questions.

Who is the Legal Owner of the Real Estate of the “Jewish Quarter”?

As a result of capitalist contradictions and class conflicts that led to the birth and development of nationalist movements in Europe, European Jewish communities suffered arbitrary persecutions, which included a number of massacres against them. These campaigns of arbitrary persecution have prompted large numbers of European Jews to emigrate from Eastern Europe, particularly Tsarist Russia, to Western Europe. Some of these Jews emigrated also to the Ottoman Empire, particularly to the rising city of Jerusalem.

When the persecution of Jews intensified in a number of European countries in 1880, 

Youssef ibn Rahamim Miyohas arrived in Jerusalem seeking help. Abed Rabbo son of Khalil son of Ibrahim, a resident of Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, rented him a plot of land in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood for 90 years. Due to the fact that the land was an Islamic trust land, this lease allows Jews to rent land and prohibits the sale of land to them under Ottoman regulations and laws. ¹

In his research article entitled “Guests, then Renters, then Settlers”, Abed Al-Raoof Arnaoot, a Palestinian researcher, reported that after Miyohas signed the rent agreement, he brought 62 Jews to the location and divided the rented land into 62 pieces, which enabled each of them to build a small house of tens to hundreds of meters in area. They then lived in these houses. ²

The land was then registered in the name of Abed Rabbo, the person in charge of this Islamic trust. This is proven in the Turkish property ownership documents which are still owned by both the Abed Rabbo family and the Hijazi family. ³

In addition, the credible historical references indicate that “the year 1880 and its aftermath witnessed a remarkable influx of thousands of Jews from Europe to Jerusalem after facing persecutions. The then Ottomanic laws allowed the rental of these lands by Jews, but not their sale. According to Ottoman laws, Islamic trust lands are legally permitted for lease but are not legally allowed to be sold. ⁴

According to a reputable and highly credible scientific reference, 85 percent of the real estate in the ‘Jewish Quarter’ was owned by Muslim Arabs⁵ in the Ottoman period. This real estate belonged to the Islamic trusts. As is well known, Islamic trusts are prohibited from selling their real estate and are only allowed to rent it.

In 1968, the Zionist state expropriated for public usage 12 percent of the Old City of occupied East Jerusalem, which included the “Jewish Quarter”. The equivalent of 80 percent of the expropriated area was not Jewish property.⁶ These expropriated properties were put up for sale only to the Israeli and Jewish publics.

Thus, the credible historical references undoubtedly prove that the territory of the so-called “Jewish Quarter” is mostly the land of the “waqf” Islamic trusts. As is also well known, Islamic trusts are prohibited from selling their property because they are endowed for the benefit of a social purpose or for the benefit of a mosque or a religious place. The land of the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood is leased land owned by Islamic trusts. Mr. Abed Rabbo al-Saadi, who is the custodian of the bulk of the land, confirms that: “In 1880, some Jews emigrated to Jerusalem, they were in a deplorable state, they came to our ancestors and asked them to lease them this land, and because of their situation and persecution in Europe, our ancestors agreed. Our ancestors agreed to lease the land to a Jewish person named Yusuf ibn Rahamim Miyohas.” ⁷

Here we can come to the firm conclusion that the Jews who inhabited the so-called “Jewish Quarter” during the Ottoman rule rented their homes from Arabs and Islamic trusts, and did not buy them, because Islamic trusts do not sell their property. Legally, the majority of Jews are not owners of the properties they lived in, but remain tenants. Therefore, they are not entitled to claim ownership of this real estate. These properties are owned exclusively, and mostly by Islamic trusts.

How the Guardian of the Property of the Absentees Turned into a Despicable Thief

According to a credible research that was carried out by two Israeli criminologists, Uzi Livia and Ariel Aboksis, the state of Israel reached in total area of 20,770 square kilometers (more than four and a half million dunams) at the end of the Zionist war of aggression, which began on November 30, 1947 and ended on July 30, 1949. Most of this area, was considered to be the property of the absentees, i.e. Palestinian refugees, and constituted 77 percent of the total area of the Zionist entity. The absentees, a Zionist term, were “Arabs who “left”, and there are those who say they were “expelled” and/or “fled”, during the war of independence. Absentees’ property includes real estate, land, workshops, factories, bank accounts and movable property.” ⁸

After the end of the war, the newly established Zionist State designated a custodian on the property of Palestinian refugees and gave him a temporary role, with established legal arrangement to determine that role. Uzi Livia and Ariel Aboksis explain this role as follows:

… Basically, these laws are based on the principle that in a period of war, the government temporarily uses these properties for the benefit of the war effort. Its role is to preserve the property for the benefit of their owners or for war damage compensation, in order to return it to them when the state of emergency is abolished. Under this concept, the custodian was given only a temporary role. His primary duty was to preserve the property of those absentees in the transitional period. ⁹

The justification set by the Zionist state for the “temporary” seizure of the property of Palestinian refugees was that,

Because of their status as hostile citizens, that are located outside the country, under arrest or under surveillance, the law does not allow them to use their property as long as hostilities are under way. The moment the owners stop being absent, the custodian must return their property to them. Therefore, he cannot make a permanent and final decision on the property that he holds temporarily. For the same reason, he can rent property for only a short period of time, which does not exceed five years, and is not authorized to sell or transfer this property to others in an irreversible manner. ¹⁰

As a result of the limitations imposed by the law, the custodian of the property of the absentees requested, in 1949, that the government expand his powers so that, for example, he can transfer or lease property for a longer period than five years and also provide him with freedom of disposal, in order to allow the property to be placed in the service of the colonial settlement and colonial objectives of the Zionist entity. This required the enactment of a new law. ¹¹

All requests of the custodian regarding the expansion of his powers were accepted, and the Zionist parliament enacted the “Absentee Property Act of 1950”. Under this law, all property owned by refugees, including the property of the Islamic Waqf,¹² was transferred to the absolute control of the Zionist state, represented by the Zionist custodian on the property of refugees. Thus, the power of the custodian has been transformed into a government institution that is the richest in the Zionist state. ¹³

It is worth mentioning that the establishment of peace between the Arabs and the Zionist entity required talks and concessions, especially on the issue of the return of the Palestinian refugees. The Zionists opposed the return or compensation of the refugees and threw the blame for the creation of the refugee problem on the Arab side, and falsely accused the Arab side of rejecting peace. Historical facts prove that those who ethnically cleansed the Palestinians and that those who occupied half of the Palestinian proposed state under the Partition Resolution, were the Zionist side. ¹⁴ These facts have been confirmed by the two researchers Uzi Livia and Ariel Aboksis, who wrote that:

Thus, we believe that the first seeds of Israel’s anti-peace stance have been cultivated in Israel’s position on the return of refugees, which Israel has sharply opposed. All sources of living for Arab refugees who previously lived in the State of Israel has been completely obliterated. Their economy has been destroyed, so their re-absorption into Israel will produce a social and financial problem that is much worse than the arrangement of their absorption in every other country. ¹⁵

Thus, the Zionist State plundered and acted freely and without restrictions regarding the property of the Palestinian refugees, selling and renting it as it wished. In order to establish a false legal cover for this theft, the Parliament of the Zionist entity enacted the so-called “Absentee Property Act of 1950.” According to this law, the role of the custodian of the property of the absentees has changed from a “custodian” with temporary and limited powers, to a despicable thief armed with a settler colonial law. Here, the Zionist State has pursued, in its policies towards the property of the indigenous population, a settler colonial approach that is very similar to that pursued by all settler colonial states such as: the United States of America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa during the Apartheid regime, and Algeria under French settler colonialism. When comparing them with each other, one notices the great similarities among them regarding the course of action they adopted towards the lands of the indigenous population. Of course, there are special characteristics for each settler colonial project, and there is a different historical context. 

Today, the Zionist colonial entity is using the Absentee Property Act of 1950 to give justification and legal cover to all ethnic cleansing carried out in Sheikh Jarrah, Silwan, Al-Khan al-Ahmar, the Al-Walaji village, Jaffa, Hebron and the Negev region.

The Zionist entity uses all its colonial tools to carry out operations associated with ethnic cleansing such as unjust law, false documents, complicit colonial courts, colonial police and army, herds of armed and violent settlers, and settlement organizations financed with American money from Jews and others. All of them, under the leadership of the extremist colonial government of the Zionist right-wing parties, are carrying out a fierce offensive campaign of ethnic cleansing against the indigenous Palestinian population. The focus of this study will be on the ethnic cleansing campaigns that are taking  place in Sheikh Jarrah and Salwan.

Preparing for Ethnic Cleansing in Sheikh Jarrah Neighborhood

Ethnic cleansing in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood began with the settlement organizations of “Benvenisti Endowment”, “Ateret Cohanim”, “the Nahlat Shamoun Limited”, and “El-Aad Society”, filing legal proceedings in Israeli courts against the Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood. The first cases began in 1972, in which they claimed that Palestinian-inhabited houses were owned by Yemeni Jews. Lawyers for these organizations provided fake documents to prove their ownership.

In return, the Palestinians submitted their documents from Turkish agreements, and official receipts that clearly show that the land is Arab and owned by Islamic trusts, and that the Jews rented it from their owners and did not own it. The Palestinians have proved that they are the real owners of the land and that the land of the Islamic Trust is not sold, but is rented.

“We have provided all the documents,” said Yahya Abed Rabbo al-Saadi, who was the custodian for the bulk of the land in Sheikh Jarrah: “We presented to the court all the documents which prove Palestinian ownership of the land. These documents were issued to us by the Islamic Shari’a Court in Jerusalem, the Ottoman Archives in Ankara, and the Land Department of Amman…” ¹⁶ The Zionist Central Court refused to accept these documents, arguing that the court does not recognize them as valid documents.

For its part, the Jordanian Foreign Ministry sent 14 official documents concerning Sheikh Jarrah’s houses to the Palestinian Authority. These documents show that in 1956, the Jordanian Ministry of Development and the UNRWA refugee agency, concluded an agreement with 28 Palestinian refugee families under which 28 housing units were built in the Al-Jani vineyard to house them. UNRWA’s condition was for Palestinian refugees to relinquish their legal status as refugees. After three years, their ownership will be legally established. ¹⁷ For reasons that remain unknown, these families have not been able to register the land in their names. Consequently, these Jordanian documents have been submitted to the Zionist Central Court, which also rejected them.

In 2010, cartographer Khalil Tofakji traveled to Istanbul. At the Ottoman State Archives he found documents which prove that the territory of Sheikh Jarrah is Palestinian and owned by Palestinians, which is contrary to the Zionist claim. These documents have been submitted to the Israeli court. ¹⁸

The Zionist Central Court rejected both the Jordanian and Tofakji’s documents and claimed that it did not recognize their credibility. The court then issued an order to adopt the Zionist position which was based on fake documents and false allegations. This has always been the controversial approach of the Israeli courts.

The Role of Zionist Judicial Institutions in Land Cases

The writer Abdelkader Badawi believes that these Zionist judicial institutions have an important role in the settler colonial system and that they provide the Zionist government with a legal cover for the plunder of Palestinian property. No matter how fragile and discredited this cover may be, the oppression and arrogance of the Zionist entity and its instruments, make the settlers’ cases successful through falsification and when unjust judicial decisions are made, the Palestinians have no real power to change them. It is a racist and colonial justice that is devoid of justice, fairness and credibility. The writer further believes that,

It is customary in the Israeli judiciary system to accept the account of Jews and settlers, particularly in matters of land and property, without paying attention to the nature or eligibility of legal justifications, as these institutions have already existed to be, among other objectives and endeavors, an instrument of the settler colonial system to control the land, and to overcome all legal obstacles to this goal. ¹⁹

The writer Abdelkader Badawi stated that Zionist settler colonial associations played a big role “… Through its expansionist post-occupation settlement activities, which have never been separated from the activity, in support of successive Israeli governments, as well as, the Israeli judicial system. They constituted a tool of the Israeli settler colonial system of control, expropriation, displacement and expulsion…” ²⁰ 

These associations have emerged as “… a representative of the settlers, through the legal cases it filed in the Israeli courts requesting the evacuation of the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood from its Palestinian residents…” ²¹

The Process of Ethnic Cleansing in Sheikh Jarrah

After the occupation of East Jerusalem in 1967, and its illegal annexation of it to Israel by the Zionist entity, “… The residents of The Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood were surprised when two Jewish committees registered, in 1972, the ownership of the Palestinian-owned 18-dunum land, in settler’s name at the Israeli Department of Lands.” ²²

Commenting on the Zionist courts and their arbitrary decisions against the Palestinian population in Sheikh Jarrah, Palestinian-American writer Stephen Salaita wrote that,

Palestinians don’t need to respect the institutions of the Zionist state precisely because those institutions negate the Palestinians’ simplest political imperative: existence. Those institutions represent the machinery of colonization. All settler colonies come equipped with a legal apparatus to validate their cruelty. We cannot expect Western pundits and politicians to question the institutional logic so harmful to Palestinians, for their own legitimacy is contingent on the reproduction of state power. ²³

Salaita elaborates on his explanation of the logic on which the idea is based that “property is Jewish” and that the Zionist state seeks to restore it and return it to Jewish ownership. 

More nonsensically, we’re asked to assign ethnic characteristics to abstractions and inanimate objects. The basis for Israel’s aggression in Sheikh Jarrah (as throughout all of historic Palestine) is repossession of so-called Jewish property. The property, in other words, doesn’t belong to people who happen to be Jewish. The property itself is Jewish—nobody can specify which denomination—and is therefore fit only for a certain kind of inhabitant. The property has some kind of innate disposition. It is apparently capable of worship. It becomes a crass approximation of humanity. Endowing housing units with confessional qualities exemplifies the problem of prioritizing property over sentient life:  a dwelling has no utility beyond the project of demographic engineering. Under the Zionist regime, even brick and mortar are sectarian. ²⁴

Both Noura Erikat and Mariam Barghouthi described the atmosphere at today’s Sheikh Jarrah as being “… practically a war zone as armed Israeli settlers, under the protection of Israeli police, terrorize the Palestinian residents. These are the very settlers who are looking to kick out families, including El-Kurd’s.” ²⁵

The Settlers are Cowardly Thieves

I have observed Zionist colonial settlers for a number of years. I have also studied their conduct and explored their ideology. Based on my close observation of their conduct inside Israel proper, as well as inside the colonized territories of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and the Syrian Heights, I can certainly state the following.

All Zionist settlers are armed militia of fascists, psychologically deranged, cowards as individuals, and work with great passion as mercenaries of the Zionist settler colonial regime. They’re armed with guns and their Jewish religiosity is nothing but a fragile cover to hide their obnoxious behavior. They are inhuman, school dropouts and have a psycho-social willingness to earn their living by theft, bullying and extreme violence. They work in small groups that look like flocks of wild hyenas that go after their victims and keep tirelessly attempting to eat their flesh. They lack any human moral system but they seem to possess a capitalist system of robbers’ morality. In contrast to this distorted human situation, the Zionist and settler colonial class system is ready to defend their violent banditry behavior because it is itself an inhuman system that uses extreme colonial violence against the indigenous Palestinian population. In addition, the Zionist settler regime deploys the settlers in its colonial schemes. Consequently, the Zionist colonial system is extremely violent. It cannot live in tranquility and thus is unable to conduct a calm and civilized dialogue with the indigenous Palestinians.

Some settlers admit that they are thieves who steal Palestinian houses, some of whom openly admit it, such as the settler who lives in half of Mona al-Kurd’s house, where he told her, “If I don’t steal, your house it will be stolen by someone else,” said Mona al-Kurd, a young Palestinian woman who accused him of stealing her home in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of occupied East Jerusalem. ²⁶

Other settlers hide their motives by offering bribes with a threat to the owner of the house. Zuhair Rajabi, who lives in Sheikh Jarrah’s neighborhood in a house with his wife and four children, said the settlers “tried to bribe me by paying 1 million shekels [$300,000], provided I will leave my house quietly. When I refused, they threatened to put me in prison. They then sent the Israeli police to my house to try to arrest me, claiming that I physically attacked the man who was suing me.” ²⁷

These two examples could serve as a proof that the settlers do not own these houses and that the Israeli courts are complicit in the plunder of the indigenous Palestinians.

Inhuman Colonial Brutality

The methods of removing Palestinians from their homes are varied, but some are carried out with extreme cruelty and inhumanity, as happened to the Al-Ghawi family.

Nuha Atiyeh, a resident of Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood recalls the following incident. “I watched the doors of our neighbors, the Al-Ghawi family, crash during a black night. The women were evicted by force and were thrown, in their night clothes, outside their house. This scene doesn’t escape my imagination. I remember taking some clothes from my house and giving them to the women.” ²⁸

As a result of dozens of lawsuits filed by the settlers’ committees at the Zionist Central Court in Jerusalem, the Court issued a decision to vacate against 28 Palestinian nuclear families. The total number of people facing expulsion for settlers reached 500, including 111 children. ^29/sup>

The Central Zionist Court itself ruled that seven other families would leave their homes from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood by August 1, 2021. In total, an additional 58 people, including 17 children, are to be forcibly displaced to allow Jewish settlers to occupy their homes. ³⁰ The Zionist Central Court also ruled that four families — Kurd, Skaif, Qasim and Al-Jawaani — must leave their homes for settlers, or reach an agreement with these settler organizations by paying rent and recognizing settlers as landowners. ³¹

Here we clearly see that there are no limits to settler’s arrogance and no limits to colonial insolence, as aggressors and thieves ask real house owners to pay their rent for their houses to the thieves. Of course, if the real Palestinian house owners had acquiesced to this request, they would have lost their right to property.

Ethnic Cleansing in Silwan

In 2002, the custodian of Absentee Property transferred land from the village of Silwan to the “Benvenesti Development Fund”, whose administration belongs to the settler organization “Ateret Cohanim”. This decision was upheld by the Jerusalem District Court, and the transfer was made without informing the Palestinian residents living on the land since the 1950s, and who have contracts to prove it. ³²

The colonial settlement project in the village of Silwan began “in 2004, when two outposts were established in the village. By 2014, there were six outposts ranging from apartments for individuals and entire buildings. “Since then, the “Ateret Cohanim” committee has submitted eviction orders against other Palestinian families. In 2017, Palestinian residents petitioned the Israeli Supreme Court to challenge the evictions, arguing that in accordance with applicable Ottoman law at that time, the property applied only on buildings, which no longer exist, but not on the same land… ³³

Similar to what happened in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, on 26 May 2021, the Jerusalem District Court held a hearing on the forced eviction of some 108 Palestinians from 18 families from their homes in the Batan al-Hawa neighborhood of Silwan. The Jewish “Benvenisti Development Fund” claims to own 5.2 dunums of the land of Batan al-Hawa neighborhood. ³⁴

Israeli television channel 12 reported that settlers had placed Israeli flags on 15 houses in Silwan after they were captured by the “Ateret Cohanim”, association and handed over to the settlers’ families. The channel noted that these new houses that were seized joined 22 other houses recently captured by “Ateret Cohanim”. ³⁵

It is worth mentioning that the Zionist state has “… A settlement strategy called the “Holy Basin”, consisting of the construction of housing units for settlers and a series of parks themed after Biblical places and figures around the Old City of Jerusalem. The plan would require the expulsion of Palestinian residents from Silwan neighborhoods and then the evacuation of 87 Palestinians from the Batan al-Hawa neighborhood of Silwan, south of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. This will be done for the “Ateret Cohanim” settlers association.

Since 1995, the Israeli Antiquities Authority has been excavating sites in Silwan with the official support of the Settlers’ Foundation “Ire David” (the city of David), in order to create a new tourist attraction and find evidence of the 3,000-year-old “City of David”. ³⁶

The group, which aims to expand the presence of settlers within the predominantly Palestinian neighborhoods of East Jerusalem around and inside the Old City, sued the residents of Batan al-Hawa, a district of Silwan, claiming that the land belonged to Yemeni Jews during the Ottoman period until 1938, when the residents were transferred to another location by the British Mandate authorities because of political tensions. ³⁷

It is worth mentioning that the Zionist policy of uprooting and ethnic cleansing has been followed in a number of places in Palestinian geography such as the Red Khan, Jaffa, Hebron, the village of Al-Walajeh, and the Palestinian Negev region. These remain tense hotbeds ignited by right-wing leaders who have lost their minds. But this fire will burn their fingers and will increase the determination of the indigenous Palestinian population to unite efforts, escalate the struggle and continue the process of liberation.

The essence of Zionist claims about the property is that it is “Jewish property”, some of which belonged to Jews 3,000 years ago, and some of which belonged to Jews a little more than one hundred years ago. These allegations give no regard to modern laws in determining the legal acquisition of real estate, which have changed radically from the time of the Greeks, the Romans, the Mongols and the Vikings, where the property belonged to the usurper and the occupier, not to the indigenous peoples who lived above these properties.

This Zionist nonsense is sponsored and adopted by the Zionist colonial bodies, and those who defend them from Arab protectorates and vassals, European and American imperialists, and by the Zionist and reactionary Arab media, who are hostile to the rights of the Palestinian Arab people in their homeland especially their right to self-determination. 

It is scientifically known that the Jewish Torah does not constitute an official and credible document that is recognized by international law and therefore, can be presented in modern courts as a document of legal ownership. Moreover, God has not been recognized as a feudal landlord who owns the lands of the peoples and can distribute them to whoever he wants and denies them from whoever he wants. Consequently, the British imperialist Lord Balfour does not own Palestine, nor does the extremist right wing President Donald Trump own the colonized land of Palestine or the colonized Syrian Golan Heights, so he has no right to give these lands to the Zionist settler colonialists. 

It should be added that many of the historical events and “facts” mentioned in the Torah were partly a form of broad religious fiction and partly came out of the misappropriation of the heritage of Mesopotamian civilizations. The Torah has no solid scientific credibility, and whoever adopts it reflects the fact that he lacks credible legal documents. Therefore, the claims by the Zionist settler colonialists to their right to own Palestinian land and real estate based on the Torah are fragile and null and void because the real owners were and still are the Arab Palestinians, who are the indigenous people of Palestine, which constitutes a part of the greater Syrian motherland.

International Law is not a Tool in the Service of Zionist Settler Colonialism.

International law prohibits the occupying power from imposing its laws on the inhabitants of the area it has occupied because it is a war zone outside the sovereignty of the belligerent state. International law also prohibits the belligerent occupying power from transferring its citizens to live within the area it has occupied. Moreover, the occupying power may not change the laws in force within the occupied zone.

The Al-Haq human rights foundation stated that,

… the legal framework applicable in occupied East Jerusalem is international humanitarian and international human rights law. Israel is specifically prohibited from annexing the occupied territory under Article 47 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. As such, Israel’s application of its domestic law, including the Legal and Administrative Matters Law in 1970, and provisions of Israel Tenancy law are not only wrongful acts in violation of international law, of which there can be no recognition, but acts which third States must collectively work to bring to an end. ³⁸

There are clear obligations under Article 43 of the Hague Regulations, to continue the status quo ante bellum including the preservation of private tenancy rights, which are further protected as private property of the civilian population under Article 46 of the Hague Regulations. In particular, such acts amount to forcible transfer, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, and war crimes and crimes against humanity within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. ³⁹

American imperialism helps Zionist colonialism, embraces its wars of aggression and provides it with money and weapons. The imperialist West abandoned the Palestinian people, and the son-in-law of the American President, the Zionist Jared Kushner, who financed the right-wing settlement movement in Israel, was given absolute authority to fabricate “A peace process”, aided by the regimes of colonial mercenaries in the Gulf, the most important of which is the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, who just imprisoned his relatives, after he ordered the assassination of the Saudi opposition journalist Jamal Al-Khashoukji. 

Expected Results of a Deteriorating Zionist Path

Many indications are that the Zionist settlement entity will continue its Judaization quest in colonized East Jerusalem, but during this insane colonial quest, it has transformed East Jerusalem into the world’s most tense outpost that will become the poorest, most racist and most heinous “capital.” No matter how much the colonial mentality brings about more racist laws and more inhumane practices, the situation that is formed before the eyes of the peoples of the world will make the Zionist entity a rogue, aggressive, hideous and repulsive state.

The deteriorating path chosen by the extreme right-wing leadership of the Zionist entity has generated a severe political crisis that has shown a deep structural imbalance in the level of political leadership, which in turn has produced a turbulent political right, fragmented, and does not benefit, either from elections or from democracy to get out of its acute crisis. This deteriorating path has also produced a Zionist voter with callous consciousness, racial intolerance and ideological blindness. This deteriorated situation has produced more failed leadership than its predecessor. After four parliamentary elections that produced repeated results, the Zionist entity got itself into a fiasco that has no equivalent in the world. It is a lost entity that cannot save itself from the path of deterioration because it is the same path that South Africa followed until the world came to save it from its fiasco by imposing on it a solution that it does not desire.

Here it appears that the Palestinian steadfastness and determination to fight for its patriotic rights, with the assistance of Arab and international solidarity, will lead the Zionist regime to choose a solution similar to that chosen by South Africa. The Palestinian national struggle will not be extinguished, as it is developing and promoted by the united efforts of workers, and progressive elements in the Middle Class. During its development, all the reactionary elements, Palestinian, Arab and international, who together are attempting to preserve the dissonant parts of a rogue state that insists on falling, will disappear forever.

References

1. Arnaout, Abdul Rauf, “Sheikh Jarrah: Guests, Tenants and Settlers”, Palestinian Studies Foundation, https://www.palestine-studies.org, access to the site on 1-6-2021
2. Scholch, Alexander, “Jerusalem in 19th Century (1831 – 1917 AD)” in Jerusalem in History, Edited by K.J. Asali. 1989. ISBN 0-905906-70-5. Page 234. Quoting Muhammad Adib al-Amiri, “Al Quds al-‘Arabiyya“, Amman, 1971, page 12 and ‘Arif al-‘Arif, “Al-Nakba“, vol 2, Sidon and Beirut, page 490 (90%). As quoted by: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, “Old City” (Jerusalem), https://en.wikipedia.org,1-6-2021.
3. Dumper, Michael (2017). Najem, Tom; Molloy, Michael J.; Bell, Michael; Bell, John (eds.). “Contested Sites in Jerusalem: The Jerusalem Old City Initiative”. Routledge. p. 156. ISBN 978-1-317-21344-4. As quoted by: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, “Old City” (Jerusalem), https://en.wikipedia.org,1-6-2021.
4. Livia, Uzi and Aboksis, Ariel, “For the development of the country and for the benefit of its citizens” (in Hebrew), https://web.archive.org, 30-10-2017
5. 2. See Ilan Papi’s Book, Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine https://www.ebay.com, 9-6-2021
6. Alsaafin, Linah, “What is happening in occupied East Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah?”, https://www.aljazeera 
7. Badawi, Abdel Kader, “Nahalat Chamoun”: A private settler’s company and the arm of the Israeli government in the case of the displacement of the people of Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood”, https://www.madarcenter.org,17-5-2021
8. Jundi, Aseel, “Neighborhood’s resilient women say ‘we will not leave’”, https://www.middleeasteye.net, 11-5-2021
9.  Salaita, Steve,  “Sheikh Jarrah: Zionism Distilled to Its Purest Expression”, https://alethonews.com, 12-5-2021
10. Erakat, Noura, and Barghouti, Mariam, “Sheikh Jarrah highlights the violent brazenness of Israel’s colonialist project”, https://www.washingtonpost.com, 10-5-2021
11.  AL JAZEERA AND NEWS AGENCIES, “Video shows Israeli settler trying to take over Palestinian house”, https://www.aljazeera.com, 4-5-2021
12. Kunzl, Kelly, “Families face imminent evictions in East Jerusalem”, The Electronic Intifada, https://electronicintifada.net, 24-12-2020
13. Jundi, Aseel, “Neighborhood’s resilient women say ‘we will not leave’”, https://www.middleeasteye.net, 11-5-2021
14. Linah, Alsaafin, “What is happening in occupied East Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah?”, https://www.aljazeera.com, 1-5-2021
15. Palestine Chronicle, “East Jerusalem: Jewish Settlers Seize 15 Palestinian Homes in Silwan”, https://www.palestinechronicle.com, 8-4-2021
16. MEE staff, “Not just Sheikh Jarrah: Palestinians elsewhere are facing forced eviction”, https://www.middleeasteye.net, 11-5-2021
17. AL-JAZERA AND NEWS AGENCIES, “Hundreds hurt as Palestinians protest evictions in Jerusalem”,  https://www.aljazeera.com, 8-5-2021

Zuhair Sabbagh is a writer on Israeli and Palestinian issues. He has published a number of books and research articles in both English and Arabic. He holds a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Manchester, United Kingdom. He lives in Nazareth, Palestine

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

يوم القدس مجدداً

 ناصر قنديل

– بعد شهر من انطلاق معركة سيف القدس، شهد خلاله كيان الاحتلال عمليات فك وتركيب سياسيّة عبرت عن نتائج الفشل السياسي والعسكري خلال المعركة، والذهاب الى ارتضاء الوصاية الأميركيّة طلباً للحماية، وتلبية شروطها بإزاحة بنيامين نتنياهو من رئاسة الحكومة، تعود القضايا التي فجّرت المعركة الى الواجهة مجدداً، المستوطنون يمسكون بدفة القرار الميداني في شارع الكيان ويقودون الصف السياسي، وقد حسموا أمرهم بالمضي في عمليات التطهير العرقي داخل الأراضي المحتلة عام 48 وفي القدس تحقيقاً لدولتهم اليهودية. وبالمقابل الجيل الفلسطيني الثالث أو جيل الألفية الثالثة الناهض لمواجهة توحّش المستوطنين وانكشاف كذبة الديمقراطية، والجامع للضفة الغربية والقدس والأراضي المحتلة عام 48، بعدما منح مشاريع التفاوض والرهانات الفصائليّة المتقابلة أكثر من عقدين خسر خلالهما الفلسطينيون مزيداً من الأرض واختلّ خلالهما ميزان السكان أكثر لصالح مزيد من الاستيطان، ومع هذا الجيل وخلفه تقف قوى صاعدة في الفصائل، وخصوصاً في قوى المقاومة، أعادت ترتيب أوراقها على قاعدة بناء قدرات الردع، وحسمت هويتها ضمن محور المقاومة، واستثمرت على انتصاراته في الإقليم، واعادت تصويب البوصلة بعيداً عن لعبة المصالح الفئوية والسلطوية المحلية.

– الصدام يبدو حتمياً، بين المسارين الحاكمين لمستقبل حركة الكيان ومستوطنيه، وحركة الشعب الفلسطيني والقوى الصاعدة فيه، ومأزق الأميركيين يأتي من كونهم لم يستوعبوا حجم التغيير الجاري على الضفتين، فهم لا زالوا ينظرون للقضية الفلسطينية بعين اللحظة التي سبقت زمن دونالد ترامب وبنيامين نتنياهو، عشية نهاية ولاية الرئيس الأميركي الأسبق بيل كلينتون ورئيس حكومة الكيان السابق ايهودا باراك والزعيم الفلسطيني الراحل ياسر عرفات، وفشل مفاوضات عام 2000 في كامب ديفيد، ويتحدّثون عن حل الدولتين كإطار عاجز عن الإجابة على قضية الاستيطان في الضفة، وعاجز عن الإجابة عن تساؤلات أبناء مناطق الـ48 وعاجز عن الإجابة على الأسئلة التي يطرحها مصير القدس، وسقف ما يسعى اليه الأميركيون هو تهدئة للتهدئة، أو تفاوض للتفاوض، لأن المطلوب نزع فتيل التصعيد الذي يخشاه الأميركيون كمدخل لحرب إقليمية تهدّد بها قوى محور المقاومة، دفاعاً عن القدس، كما يخشون قيام كيان الاحتلال بتوريطهم بحرب إقليمية لنسف مفاوضاتهم الهادفة للعودة الى الاتفاق النووي مع إيران، كما هو تماماً حالهم مع نتنياهو.

– الفراغ الاستراتيجي قائم بنظر الفلسطينيين، فالأميركيون لم ينجحوا بترميم ما فقدوه خلال عقدين من حضور ونفوذ ومقدرات في المنطقة، وصعود محور المقاومة فرصة يجب الاستثمار عليها، ومنازلة القدس التي تبدو اليوم حدثاً متوقعاً، لا يمكن أن تنتهي بلا غالب ولا مغلوب، كما حاول نتنياهو تصوير نهاية معركة سيف القدس، بينما يعلم الجميع أن وقف المعركة دون توقف الصواريخ الفلسطينية التي أمطرت مدن الكيان، وفشلت القبة الحديدية بصدّها، ودون حرب بريّة ردعها وجود صواريخ الكورنيت التي ظهرت في الأيام الأولى للمعركة، قد تمّ بطلب نتنياهو تسليماً بالفشل، بعد رفضه لطلبات أميركية وأوروبية متكررة لوقف النار، وهذا الفراغ الإستراتيجي قائم بنظر قادة المستوطنين، الذين يريدون فرض اختبار الخيارات على الحكومة الجديدة التي يترأسها أحد رموز الاستيطان نفتالي بينيت، واستثمار حاجة نتنياهو لإحراج الحكومة وإذلالها في الميدان وتظهير خضوعها لواشنطن، واستعراض القوة بوجهها، ما يجعل مشهد التصعيد الاحتمال الأشد قوة لما سيحدث اليوم.

– الدعوة لمسيرة الأعلام الصهيونية في القدس اليوم ومقابلها الدعوة للنفير الوطني الفلسطيني لنصرة القدس، يضع القدس في واجهة الأحداث العالمية، ولم يغب عن بيان الدعوة للنفير الوطني الذي أصدرته لجنة المتابعة الوطنية للفلسطينيين في الأراضي المحتلة عام 48، دعوة قوى المقاومة في غزة ولبنان للاستنفار تحسباً لمسار الأمور، ما يجعل الأمور مفتوحة على كل الاحتمالات، والباب الوحيد لنجاح محاولات منع التصعيد هو منع المستوطنين من الاقتراب من الأحياء العربية في القدس ومن المسجد الأقصى، وإن حدث ذلك تحقق انتصار كبير بفرض قواعد اشتباك تجعل القدس خطاً أحمر غير قابل للانتهاك، وإن لم يحدث فالمواجهة ستتسع وتكبر ولا أحد يستطيع رسم سقوف مسبقة لها.

مقالات مرتبطة

• القدس أول اختبارات حكومة بينيت ومعادلة إن عدتم عدنا
• إسرائيل الجديدة أمام أولى «مغامراتها»: معادلة «غزة – القدس» لم تُطوَ
• المقاومة تستبق «مسيرة الأعلام»: كلّ السيناريوات حاضرة
• ما بعد «سيف القدس»: قائمة «المفاجآت» تطول
• الإمارات والبحرين «تهرولان» لتهنئة الحكومة الإسرائيلية
• هل ستندلع حرب أهليَّة في “إسرائيل”؟
• إعلام إسرائيلي: قلَق.. وتعزيز “القبة الحديدية” خشية من صواريخ حماس
• فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية: على الاحتلال تحمُّل تداعيات تنفيذ “مسيرة الأعلام”
• رهانات بايدن بوجه موسكو وبكين فاشلة
• «إسرائيل» بدون نتنياهو ما الذي سيتغيّر…؟
• هدف مشترك لماكرون وأردوغان في ليبيا وسورية ومحادثة أطول من المقرّر بينهما!

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Zionist Academics Take The Side Of State Power

11 June 2021

by Lawrence Davidson

Part I—Tensions in Academia

The growing divide in the United States between Zionists and supporters of Palestinian rights has led to pronounced tensions in academia. Much has been said about increasing pro-Palestinian student protests as well as the activities of pro-Israel boards of governors, presidents, deans, etc. The latter try to guard their campuses from pro-Palestinian faculty, student clubs, invited speakers and the like.

These tensions have found yet another academic front on which to contest. There are two historical associations in the U.S. for scholars of Middle East studies reflecting opposing attitudes toward Israel and its behavior toward the Palestinians. And this divide presents us with a dichotomy of values at the professional academic level.

The oldest of these is the Middle East Studies Association (MESA). It was founded in 1966 and currently has a membership of more than 2700. It also serves as a “constituent society of thirty-six affiliated organizations.” It puts out a quarterly journal and has an active Committee on Academic Freedom. MESA is a very successful learned society. Its scholars cover all of the Middle East and North Africa. It is dedicated to high standards of scholarship and diversity of interpretation.

By the 2000s the debate within academia over the expansionist nature of Israel and its treatment of conquered Palestinians was heating up. Because most of MESA members have a broad knowledge of the area, a sense of local perspectives, and also know the history of the Arab Israeli conflict, their positions tend to be critical of Israeli behavior and American support for it. And that led to an organizational split.

In 2007 two scholars, Bernard Lewis and Fouad Ajami, decided to start a rival organization, the Association for the Study of the Middle East and Africa (ASMEA). They did so because, according to them, MESA was “dominated by academics who have been critical of Israel and America’s role in the Middle East.”

One might wonder why the position taken by many MESA members upset Lewis and Ajami. After all, debating issues from an historical perspective is, in part, what academics are supposed to do. If MESA was allegedly “dominated” by those critical of Israeli behavior, Lewis and Ajami’s answer was to establish a “politicized” organization “dominated” by Zionists. It made little sense in terms of dialog, but tactically it fit right in with how Zionists—those who uphold the legitimacy of a Jewish state in Palestine—react to criticism.

Over the last quarter century, a common tactic of Zionists has been to withdraw from public debate and, where they can, bring about enforced silence of anyone who is critical of Israel. That, of course, is what those pro-Israeli academic administrators and boards were and are doing. Part of this effort entails labelling those critical of Israel as anti-Semites. This stratagem is generally used to shut down negative assessments in the West. Seeking to expand the scope of this effort, ASMEA’s much lauded founder, Bernard Lewis, who died in May of 2018, sought to defame Islam with the same charge. That approach is carried on by ASMEA. The organization awards a Bernard Lewis Prize, a description of which quotes Lewis, “to an astonishing degree, the ideas, the literature, even the crudest inventions of the Nazis and their predecessors have been internalized and Islamized.” In competition for this award, young Middle East scholars are encouraged by ASMEA to identify Muslim Arab opposition to Israel with anti-Semitism.

Part II—Expressing Values

The two organizations have recently shown where this tension has taken them in terms of human rights. This was occasioned by the recent outbreak Palestinian resistance caused by threats of evictions (ethnic cleansing) of Arab families in Jerusalem, and aggressive Israeli actions at the site of Al-Aqsa Mosque. The latter actions, in particular, triggered rocket attacks from Gaza.

Here is part of a long and detailed MESA statement. The shorter ASMEA statement is given in full:

MESA (21 May 2021) Issued by the organization’s Board of Directors.

“The Board of Directors of the Middle East Studies Association of North America condemns the ongoing and intensified Israeli government assault on the Palestinians of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip and those who are Israeli citizens. During May 7–20, 2021, Israeli military attacks on the occupied Gaza Strip damaged at least 51 educational facilities, including 2 kindergartens, 46 schools, 1 university, 1 vocational training center, and 1 Ministry of Education facility—among other vital infrastructure. Israeli air strikes and tank shells directly hit a number of these buildings. The deadly conditions created by the Israeli military attacks in Gaza forced all schools to remain closed for at least five days after the end of the Eid al-Fitr holiday, affecting the lives and access to education of 591,685 students. In addition, Israeli military strikes internally displaced at least 66,000 Palestinians who then sought refuge in 58 schools run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), causing further disruptions to the population’s education–indeed, to their lives. …

“There is little doubt that successive Israeli governments across the political spectrum have carried out a decades-long attack on Palestinian students, teachers, and educational facilities. Indeed, this attack is part of a broader political, administrative, and legal system of racial discrimination and domination—regularly enforced through violence—that has defined the Israeli government’s treatment of the Palestinian people. And, as the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem and the international non-governmental organization Human Rights Watch have found, the Israeli government’s purposeful and systematic privileging of Jewish Israelis while dominating and oppressing the Palestinian people amounts to apartheid.”

ASMEA (25 May 2021) Issued by the organization’s Chairman, Professor Norman Stillman

“The recent wave of violence in the ongoing struggle between Israel and Hamas has left many members of our community of scholars deeply concerned. While we hope and pray no harm befalls any of our members, anywhere, and their loved ones, ASMEA remains committed to our founding principles as an academic association.

“As scholars, we believe in the pursuit of objective truth when studying and teaching the issues and topics affecting the regions of our academic concern. We recognize that these principles can create division and disagreement, but so long as scholarship contributes to the body of knowledge, we welcome and encourage vigorous debate.

“We stand behind and support our members in Israel and deride those more intent on infusing the academic landscape with pointless over-politicization and rank partisanship than restoring balance to the Academy and protecting academic freedom in Middle East and African studies, and related disciplines.”

There are a couple of things to note about these two statements: (1) The MESA statement is issued in support of the Palestinians, and specifically their collective human right to education. It contains assertions about the Israeli violations of that right—assertions that can be fact checked. The statement also references the reports of international organizations concerned with civil and human rights. (2) The ASMEA statement claims objectivity and a willingness to debate, but then proceeds to defame and trivialize those who disagree with their position—“those more intent on infusing the academic landscape with pointless over-politicization and rank partisanship.” Actually, one can characterize this charge as a psychological projection of the statement’s author who, being a Zionist stalwart must be, by definition, both politicized and partisan. The statement also makes no reference to the Palestinian situation under Israeli rule and reduces the struggle to one between Hamas and Israeli—an objectively incorrect and thus untrue assertion. This reductionist gambit is used by almost all contemporary supporters of Israel.

Part III—Crossing the Rubicon

There is a Rubicon (a fundamental crossing point) that all Jewish intellectuals are now confronting. Whether or not one crosses this line reveals the nature of their values. To cross it is to take the side of human rights and the rule of law. To refuse to cross is to take the side of state power—in this case, to align with the power of a proven apartheid state.

To add context to this choice, consider the case of Eva Illouz, a professor of sociology at Hebrew University. On 14 April 2014, she wrote an essay for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz entitled, “Is It Possible to be a Jewish Intellectual?” In this piece she sets forth two opposing positions: one is the Zionist/Israeli demand for the primacy of “ahavat Israel,” or the “love of the Jewish nation and people”–-the claim that all Jews have a “duty of the heart” to be loyal to the “Jewish nation.” The other position is that of the lone intellectual (here her model is the philosopher Hannah Arendt), whose obligation is to maintain the “disinterested intelligence” necessary to “speak truth to power.”
 
Illouz explains that Zionists have a “suspicion of critique” and use “the memorialization of the Shoah” (the Holocaust) and “ahavat Israel” to mute it. “The imperative of solidarity brings with it the injunction to not oppose or express publicly disagreement with official Jewish bodies.” It is within this context that she can ask if it is still possible to be a Jewish intellectual. Illouz’s conclusion is that it has become exceedingly difficult to be so because the demands for Jewish solidarity are particularly “brutal.” And then she makes her choice and, if you will, crosses the Rubicon. “In the face of the ongoing, unrelenting injustices toward Palestinians and Arabs living in Israel, his/her moral duty is to let go, achingly, of that solidarity.”

It is not difficult to recognize that ASMEA stands at the bank of this Rubicon and refuses to cross. The organization’s values do not reflect any devotion to universal principles such as human rights and the rule of law, much less “objective truth.” Their leadership, at least, has no interest in critiquing the use of power but rather is dedicated to protecting and enhancing the interests of a specific power. The values exalted here are the parochial codes those intellectuals (among others) use to rationalize service to a state even when it turns criminal. The independent-minded, outspoken intellectuals, such as Eva Illouz, demanding broader moral integrity and responsibility from their contemporaries, are rarities.

Part IV—Conclusion

Any speculation about which side of the Rubicon line “History” favors is really silly. Historical prediction, like the weather, is a short-range affair. However, one might sense a present shift in sentiment in the U.S. and the Western world generally. It is an apparent shift in favor of the Palestinians and against apartheid Israel. One might even hazard a guess that the shift will continue to grow. Why so? The reason is straightforward and quite simple. It should continue to grow just as long as Israel does not stop. That is, as long as it continues to evolve as a racist state—simultaneously destroying human rights and international law.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!