The Latest from Israel-Palestine-Gaza (23 January)

Latest Post: George Mitchell on the Israel-Palestine Issue, 22 October 2008
Related Post: Chomsky on Gaza 2009
Related Post: Enduring America in UCD College Tribune on Gaza
Related Post: Regime Change in Gaza - The Israeli Strategy Continues

2 p.m. An intriguing development, but one which will need some detective work to assess its significance. President Obama “asked Saudi King Abdullah for support in halting weapons smuggling into Gaza and underscored the importance of U.S.-Saudi ties” in a Friday phone call.

The call takes on added significance because an influential member of the Saudi Royal Family, Prince Turki al-Feisal, launched an attack against the Bush Administration’s “poisonous legacy” in a newspaper article on Friday morning, warning, “If the U.S. wants to continue playing a leadership role in the Middle East and keep its strategic alliances intact — especially its ’special relationship’ with Saudi Arabia — it will have to drastically revise its policies vis-a-vis Israel and Palestine.”

So the first message in Obama’s call was not to get active Saudi participation in the naval blockade of Gaza but assurances that Riyadh would not try to undermine it by moving cash and material to Palestinian groups in the area. The second message, however, is more important and hard to decipher:

Do those US-Saudi ties mean that Obama will accept Saudi ideas for Israel-Palestinian negotiations, for example, a revival of the 2002 Mecca proposals that the Bush Administration flagrantly rebuffed? Or is Washington expecting the Saudis to follow the lead of a yet-seen approach that will be unveiled in the visit of George Mitchell to the region?



11:05 p.m. The Egypt-Israel Alliance Restored. This really should be headline news....

The Jerusalem Post reports that Cairo and Tel Aviv have agreed on a plan for up to 1500 Egyptian guards to "secure" the Egypt-Gaza border. Egypt and Israel will cooperate on " intelligence cooperation, obstacles in Sinai and the deployment of new tunnel-detection technology along the border". The plan was approved by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, and Defense Minister Ehud Barak after a late-night meeting on Thursday.

The agreement restores Egyptian-Israeli cooperation on the isolation of Hamas and economic blockade of Gaza after Cairo balked at having an international force patrol the border.

10:45 p.m. France has announced it will be sending a frigate with helicopters to patrol the Gaza coast.

This is the military dimension of the French strategy, working with Israel, the US, and Egypt to block arms supplies to Hamas. The question is the whether the political dimension, in which Paris persuades the Obama Administration to talk to Hamas or (more likely) serves as an interlocutor for quiet discussions, is implemented.

8:43 p.m. Israel continues to restrict aid into Gaza. It is allowing 120 truckloads of food and medicine (compared to traffic last summer of 750 trucks/day), but is blocking transport steel and cement and preventing cash --- even though it comes from the Palestinian Authority --- from reaching Gazans.

8:40 p.m. White House release says President Obama phoned Saudi King Abdullah this afternoon. No other details given.

7:15 p.m. What is the definition of Crocodile Tears? Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on his reaction to a Gazan doctor hearing, live on Israeli television, about the death of three daughters and a niece: "I cried when I saw this. Who didn't? How could you not?"

5:10 p.m. The State Department's Twitterers pass on news of a US interception and two-day search of an Iranian-owned ship in the Red Sea.

No jackpot this time, however, in the quest to link Tehran and Hamas. The ship was carrying artillery shells, but the Gazan organisation doesn't use artillery.

4:20 p.m. Reuters reports the statement of United Nations official John Ging that Israel's invasion of Gaza has strengthened the hand of extremists and that growing Gazan anger can only be assuaged by a credible independent investigation: "The extremists here -- there are more now at the end of this conflict than there were at the start, that's the product of such conflict -- are very confident in their rhetoric that there should be no expectation that justice will be delivered through the rule of law. Now we must prove that wrong,"

3:25 p.m. Pro-Israel Twitterers are pushing the news that twelve representatives of Physicians for Human Rights have been allowed into Gaza by Israeli forces. They might want to reflect on the timing and scale of that "concession", given the more than 2000 Gazans who are still hospitalised with serious injuries. And they want to take note of the sub-headline in the article: "Many families were simply wiped out during IDF offensive".

12:20 p.m. Profiles in Broadcasting Courage. The BBC has refused to air a national humanitarian appeal for Gaza by the Disasters Emergency Committee, an umbrella group for 13 charities. The explanation? ""The decision was made because of question marks about the delivery of aid in a volatile situation and also to avoid any risk of compromising public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in the context of [a] news story."

Special Note: Using that criteria of "impartiality", the BBC would not have aired LiveAid in the midst of the Ethiopian famine (and civil war) in 1984-85.

11:10 a.m. The excellent analyst Jim Lobe finds grounds for optimism both in the appointment of George Mitchell as President Obama's envoy to the Middle East and in Obama's statement yesterday.

11:05 a.m. Just to highlight the Fatah-Hamas struggle and the possible "blowback" from Israeli operations --- it's Hamas, not Fatah, who is stronger in both Gaza and the West Bank --- Donald Macintyre offers this assessment in The Independent of London:

The sharp decline in support for Fatah and the discrediting of Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority, because of his inertia during the 22-day Gaza war, will make it very difficult for the US and the EU to pretend that Fatah are the true representatives of the Palestinian community.

10:55 a.m. Saudi Arabian Prince Turki al-Faisal has fired a warning shot at Washington over Israel, Palestine, and Gaza, writing in The Financial Times: "Unless the new U.S. administration takes forceful steps to prevent any further suffering and slaughter of Palestinians, the peace process, the U.S.-Saudi relationship and the stability of the region are at risk."

Turki isn't just "a member of the Saudi royal family". He's a former leader of Saudi intelligence services and a former Saudi ambassador to Britain. Consider the Obama Administration put on notice. Any Saudi backing of the attempt to knock off Hamas is now outweighed by the need to condemn Israel for its military and political approach: "If the U.S. wants to continue playing a leadership role in the Middle East and keep its strategic alliances intact -- especially its 'special relationship' with Saudi Arabia -- it will have to drastically revise its policies vis-a-vis Israel and Palestine."

10:50 a.m. Twitter One-Liner of the Morning: "Best thing about appointment of George Mitchell as Middle East envoy is it effectively puts demonic Tony Blair out of a job."



10:30 a.m. We've posted a separate blog,  The Strategy for Gaza Unravels, on Israel's attempt to tie reconstruction aid for Gaza to regime change, toppling Hamas and re-installing the Palestinian Authority.

Morning update (8:45 a.m. Israel/Gaza time): CNN carries a tip-of-the-iceberg story about the central battle over Who Runs Gaza?: "Rival Factions  Trade Accusations Over Spying, Violence". It reports on Hamas accusations of spying for Israel by Fatah members and on counter-accusations that Hamas has carried out "punishment shootings".

The story is mainly a recap of information which has been out for days, although it does add some detail. Fatah is alleging that at least 175 of its members have been rounded up and tortured, while the neighbours of Hamas leader Saed Siam, killed in an Israeli airstrike last week, are claiming that informers pinpointed the house for the Israelis.

What is missing in the article is any recognition of the wider political struggle to lead Gaza, including the linking of the Israeli attacks to plans to return the Palestinian Authority to power.

Comments

[Rajan]

Since its very birth as a nation over 60 years ago, Israel’s popularity among the Muslim population in the entire world has been a steady, enviable zero per cent. Obviously, its popularity cannot sink below zero per cent. Even George W Bush failed to attain this rare distinction in popularity polls at the end of his ‘distinguished and illustrious’ Presidency for such a long period! Hence, I don’t think that any ordinary Israeli citizen and, certainly, the Israeli government leaders lose any sleep worrying about their popularity level among the global Muslim population and also, to a great extent, in the rest of the world.
The Jews were there practicing their religion and way of life centuries before Jesus Christ and Prophet Mohammed came on the scene. After all, Jesus himself was a Jew. During these centuries over their entire long history, the Jews had been hated, persecuted, reviled, ridiculed, abused, hunted, tortured, gassed, murdered, slaughtered and massacred but they have managed to survive nonetheless. At long last, they have acquired a sliver of land which they have embraced as their ‘homeland’. No power on earth will be able to dislodge them from this piece of land which they will defend at any cost and with all the weapons they have at their disposal. If they go down, they will take all their enemies with them, too and they have the means to do it; have no doubt about it.
To set records straight, I am not a Jew.
There are two major issues (among others) today which divide the Islamic nations from the rest of the world: Palestine and Kashmir.
The Palestine problem can probably be resolved if Israel agrees to retreat behind the pre-1967 borders, including dismantling of all its (illegal) settlements on the West Bank and at least partition of or joint ownership of Jerusalem. Even if this most unlikely arrangement is agreed to by a majority on both sides of the divide, there will still be hard-core Islamic jihadists who will refuse to recognize Israel and will be satisfied only with its total obliteration from the world map and who will continue to fight on indefinitely regardless of consequences. Hence, there is very little chance for peace to be restored in the Middle East in the near or distant future.
As for the Kashmir issue, Pakistan will never rest until the entire Kashmir valley is handed over to it on a platter. But India does not appear to be in a mood to oblige. The Indian government bristles at the very mention of Kashmir as a disputed territory by a representative of any foreign government, as witnessed in the extremely violent reaction to the British Foreign Secretary’s unguarded remarks during his visit to the Indian capital a few days ago. Hence, there is absolutely no chance that the Kashmir problem will achieve a lasting solution any time soon.
The sum and substance of this brief analysis is that the antipathy between the Muslims and the rest of the world will continue unabated until Kingdom come.
The alternative solution would be for all the other religious groups like the Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Pagans and even Atheists to convert themselves to Muslims and rid themselves of the stigma of being called ‘infidels’. Even after that impossible and improbable Utopia takes shape, Shias and Sunnis will still be killing each other!
So, one may ask, where is the end? The short answer is: Nuclear Armageddon and total extinction of the human race!!

[Mae]

Complain to the BBC here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

This is my second message (getting a bit angry)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am protesting in strongest terms that the BBC has refused to air the Disaster Emergency Committee's appeal for Gaza. I have been shocked by the BBC's one sided coverage of the Israelis' attack on Gaza but this latest decision proves that you have abandoned all principles of ethical broadcasting.

The reasons quoted in your decision are utter nonsense - delivering emergency aid in natural or man-made disaster areas is always dangerous. In the current conflict, however, the continuing blockade to humanitarian aid by Israel is the biggest problem. Please allow the humanitarian aid agencies to decide for themselves whether this is a danger they can face or not.

Withholding humanitarian aid from a civilian population in a conflict such as this is illegal. By refusing to air the appeal the BBC is complicit in this cruel and barbaric action.

As for your second reason, I stopped believing in your impartiality after the first week of this inhumane war on the Gazans. Your refusal to air an appeal made by humanitarian agencies rushing to help innocent civilians caught between the conflict parties proves that you have not been impartial during this conflict. This aid is not for Hamas, it is for the Palestinian people - you have just condemned them to prolonged suffering.

I am bitterly disappointed in the BBC and disgusted with this inhumane and immoral decision. If you have any decency left you will change this indefensible decision.

Yours

[ChrisE]

Did anyone watch the channel four program on reporting in Gaza last night? It was quite interesting- with interviews with the head of news at Sky, BBC, C4 and Al Jazeera. The BBC admitted they had more complaints for being pro-Israeli than Palestinian.

There was also interesting comments on how Mark Regev had pissed off the NYT by claming they had independently verified that Hamas mortars had come from the UN compound. In fact, they had simply reported that one witness had seen mortar fire coming from somewhere vaguely near the building.

You can probably catch it on 4 on demand (if you live in the UK)

I think the backdrop to BBC coverage is the claims that it was too pro-Palestinian in 2005- which provoked a governor's report and new guidlines.

[Scott Lucas]

Professor David Lloyd of the University of Southern California has sent Enduring America this e-mail:

Press Release

January 22, 2009

U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel Joins International Calls
To Boycott Israeli Academic and Cultural Institutions

Contacts:
Sherna Berger Gluck, shernagluck@gmail.com; Jess Ghannam, jess.ghannam@gmail.com; David Lloyd, davidcll@usc.edu; and Sunaina Maira, smaira@ucdavis.edu

As educators of conscience, we have been unable to stand by and watch in silence Israel’s indiscriminate assault on the Gaza Strip and its educational institutions.
Accordingly, in response to the call by the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) and by more than 500 Israeli citizens to foreign embassies in Tel Aviv, we call for:
(1) Refraining from participation in any form of academic and cultural cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli institutions that do not vocally oppose Israeli state policies against Palestine;
(2) Advocating a comprehensive boycott of Israeli institutions at the national and international levels, including suspension of all forms of funding and subsidies to these institutions;
(3) Promoting divestment and disinvestment from Israel by international academic institutions;
(4) Working toward the condemnation of Israeli policies by pressing for resolutions to be adopted by academic, professional and cultural associations and organizations;
(5) Supporting Palestinian academic and cultural institutions directly without requiring them to partner with Israeli counterparts as an explicit or implicit condition for such support.

Israel’s latest assault on Gaza has killed at least 1300 Palestinians, one third of them children, and injured 5300 or more. Israel has targeted civilians, using internationally-proscribed phosphorous bombs, deprived them of power, water and other means to life, and sought to destroy the infrastructure of Palestinian civil society, including hospitals, administrative buildings and UN facilities. It has targeted with peculiar consistency educational institutions of all kinds. Since December 27, Israel has deliberately bombed the Islamic University of Gaza, the Ministry of Education, the American International School, at least ten UNRWA schools, one of which was sheltering displaced Palestinian civilians, and tens of other schools and educational facilities. Each of these acts constitutes a breach of international law and a probable war crime. The unilateral ceasefire declared by Israel puts an end temporarily to the most brutal slaughter of civilians, but it inaugurates a new phase of occupation of Gaza. It is not a solution but a continuation by familiar means of the ongoing destruction of Palestinian civil society.

This most recent Israeli onslaught against Palestinian academic institutions is not exceptional, but is part of Israel’s deliberate destruction of Palestinian educational and research institutions. Over the course of its 40-year long occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, Israel has systematically deprived Palestinian children and youth of education, daily threatening their lives and restricting their access to schools and universities. Palestinians, who live as second-class citizens in Israel, face systematic educational discrimination education there too: although Palestinian-Israelis make up 20 percent of Israel’s population, they constitute only 10 percent of its undergraduate student body, and only 1 percent of its university faculty. During the illegal siege of Gaza over the past year and a half, Israel intensified the destruction of the educational infrastructure that has been completed during the current war. These continual violations show no sign of diminishing and Israeli academic institutions and most Israeli academics have by their silence been complicit with these attacks.

We believe that non-violent external pressure on Israel, in the form of an academic, cultural and economic boycott of Israel, can help bring an end to the ongoing massacres of civilians and an end the occupation of Gaza and Palestine. We therefore urge a comprehensive boycott, including divestment, political sanctions, and the immediate halt to all military aid, sales and deliveries to Israel. However, as educators of conscience, we specifically call for an academic and cultural boycott of Israeli institutions as a key element in this larger action.

We urge our colleagues, nationally, regionally, and internationally, to stand up against Israel’s ongoing scholasticide and to support the non-violent call for academic boycott, disinvestment, and sanctions.

This boycott should be maintained until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by:

1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall;

2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and

3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.

[Dave]

Welcome to the new McCarthyism. Why would American academics eliminate freedom of expression and impose limits on academic discourse?? This is exactly the same thing British academics did a couple of years ago.

Also, most Israeli academics lean to the left. A policy of isolating them will only drive them to the right, strengthening the right-wing politicians.

What would American academics think if their colleagues in Europe and the Arab world halted all academic and cultural exchanges with them because of America's war in Iraq?

If I was a left-leaning professor at an Israeli institution that was blacklisted by this group......I would be annoyed.

[Macdougal]

I agree, it’s pretty much the same old self inflated tripe that seems to infect so much of the academic world. Can they honestly make the connection that by boycotting academic institutions (you know, the places where people come to engage on these sorts of things) they are actually going to have any positive effect at all (beyond enhancing their own “liberal-intellectual” credentials)?

They have to be a very un-pragmatic bunch if they are getting excited by taking out their frustrations on the Israeli 40-something tweed brigade. Honestly, do they think preventing Yitzak from going abroad to discuss his latest research in queer cinema and mainstream American film is going to have any impact on the strategic imperatives of the Israeli Defence Forces?

I mean, perhaps focusing what little influence they can muster (call a spade a spade people, this is a different country…) on HELPING the people that are actually involved, through aid and other existing channels, they might be able to do something positive, instead of damaging the careers and opportunities of people who would probably agree with them anyway.

On a different note, more people have died in the eastern Congo this year than in the past 10 years of Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Fancy a boycott there too? Maybe in Sudan, Russia/Chechnya? I’m sure they can think of a few more for me to boycott for good measure.

[Rajan]

I am rather intrigued to note that Israel did not order all the UN-sponsored services to be suspended immediately and all the UN Agencies out of the Gaza strip before they commenced their military assault on the Hamas on the plea that they could not guarantee the safety of the UN personnel. This is what the Americans did before the start of the Iraq war against Saddam Hussain in 2003. If they had done this, they could have avoided all the accusations of deliberately targeting the UN that are being thrown at them now.

Is there any plausible reason why Israel did not or could not take this sensible precautionary step?

[Westin]

The American academics who seek to boycott the Israeli academics for the actions of the Israeli government are, no doubt, a bunch of ignorant hypocrites. It does not seem to have dawned on their silly, minuscule brains that mere possession of thermonuclear weapons with their awesome capacity to lay flat entire megacities and spread radioactive dust far and wide contains the implicit threat that civilians including women and children will never be given any special quarter in any war. Why, then, following their own convoluted logic, have these professorial geniuses not boycotted themselves because the US government possesses a nuclear arsenal which can destroy the entire world and the human civilization in it many times over?