The Latest from Iran (27 November): Where Now?

2020 GMT: We've posted news of a campaign, "I Am Atefeh", to express support for Atefeh Nabavi, the first woman jailed for post-election protest.

2015 GMT: Ayatollah JavAdi-Amoli announced, during today's Friday Prayers in Qom, that this was his last sermon. Since June, Javadi-Amoli had expressed his displeasure over post-election events.

NEW Iran: The Campaign to Free Atefeh Nabavi
NEW Iran: A Nobel Gesture from Obama Towards the Green Movement?
NEW Iran’s Nukes: IAEA Non-Resolution on Enrichment Means Talks Still Alive
Iran: Where Now for the Green Wave(s)? A Discussion on (Non)-Violence
Iran: Where Now for the Green Wave(s)? The EA Discussion
Latest Iran Video: BBC’s Neda Documentary “An Iranian Martyr”
NEW Iran MediaWatch: Has “Green Reform” Disappeared in Washington?
NEW Iran: 3 Problems (for the Greens, for the US, for Ahmadinejad
The Latest from Iran (26 November): Corridors of Conflict

1815 GMT: One More Time --- The Talks Go On (But Time for Tehran to Deal). Here's the White House statement on today's IAEA resolution:

Today's overwhelming vote at the IAEA's Board of Governors demonstrates the resolve and unity of the international community with regard to Iran's nuclear program. It underscores broad consensus in calling upon Iran to live up to its international obligations and offer transparency in its nuclear program. It also underscores a commitment to strengthen the rules of the international system, and to support the ability of the IAEA and UN Security Council to enforce the rules of the road, and to hold Iran accountable to those rules. Indeed, the fact that 25 countries from all parts of the world cast their votes in favor shows the urgent need for Iran to address the growing international deficit of confidence in its intentions.

The United States has strongly supported the Director General’s positive proposal to provide Iran fuel for its Tehran Research Reactor - a proposal intended to help meet the medical and humanitarian needs of the Iranian people while building confidence in Iran’s intentions. The United States has recognized Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy and remains willing to engage Iran to work toward a diplomatic solution to the concerns about its nuclear program, if - and only if - Iran chooses such a course. To date, Iran has refused a follow-on meeting to the October 1 meeting with the P5+1 countries if its nuclear program is included on the agenda. Our patience and that of the international community is limited, and time is running out. If Iran refuses to meet its obligations, then it will be responsible for its own growing isolation and the consequences.

Here's what it means:

1. The second enrichment plant at Fordoo near Qom --- of no relevance except as pretext;
2. The El Baradei statement of a "dead end" on verification --- tangential
3. The Iranian response to the Vienna "third-party enrichment" deal --- the be-all and end-all of this meeting.

In other words, this IAEA meeting has been a two-day setpiece to put Tehran's feet to the fire on the October proposal. If Iran now refuses that plan, and if the "West" decides that the Tehran counter-offer of a "swap" is out of bounds, then and only then will there a move beyond engagement. Even then, it is far from clear if that push for sanctions will have any backing from Russia and China.

1455 GMT: Forgive us for being Nukes, Nukes, Nukes, but little else is breaking at the moment. More posturing, this time from Iran's ambassador to the IAEA Ali Asghar Soltanieh, but note that this follows script of keeping channel open for discussions --- "jeopardise" is a mild democratic warning not to go farther:

.Adoption of this resolution is not only unhelpful in improving the current situation, but it will jeopardise the conducive environment vitally needed for success in the process of Geneva and Vienna negotiations expected to lead to a common understanding.

1355 GMT: At some point someone is going to figure out that IAEA members have not forced a showdown with Iran and, indeed, that they have not even moved away from talks and towards further sanctions. Here's the latest coded signal, courtesy of British Foreign Secretary David Miliband:

The resolution passed today by the IAEA Board of Governors sends the strongest possible signal to Iran that its actions and intentions remain a matter of grave international concern. As the resolution makes clear, Iran needs to comply with its obligations both to the IAEA and to the UNSC. Unless it does this, it remains impossible for the international community to have any confidence in Iranian intentions.

Britain and the other members of the E3+3 have made it very clear that our hand is stretched out to Iran. We are waiting for Iran to respond meaningfully. But if it is clear that Iran has chosen not to do so, we will have no alternative but to consider further pressure on Iran, in line with the dual track policy we have been pursuing.

And this position is not altered by Prime Minister Gordon Brown's rhetorical blast: "[Iran] should accept the offers that have been made that they can have civil nuclear power with our support, but they've got to renounce nuclear weapons. I believe the next stage will have to be sanctions if Iran does not respond to what is a very clear vote from the world community."

1210 GMT: We've just posted an urgent assessment on the International Atomic Energy Agency's resolution, passed today, on Iran's nuclear programme. The real significance --- and this is being missed by the media, who are just following the original Reuters report (see Al Jazeera English, for example) --- is that it is a very mild rebuke of Iran. That in turn means talks with Tehran on uranium enrichment are still alive.

1120 GMT: Iran's Nobel Prize Response. We saw this one coming yesterday when we reported on the Iranian Government's seizure of the Nobel Peace Prize medal and diploma of lawyer and human rights activist Shirin Ebadi. Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast said today, "Much the same as European countries, tax evasion is a crime in Iran and individuals would face legal penalties should they commit such an act."

Mehman-Parast added that if Norwegian officials really cared about human rights, they would not have abstained in the United Nations vote on the Goldstone Report on the Gaza War.

1023 GMT: Filmmaker Mohsen Makhmalbaf has won the Freedom to Create Prize, donating the $125,000 prize to non-governmental organisations helping victims of Iran's post-election conflict and dedicating the award to Grand Ayatollah Montazeri. A video of the presentation has been posted on YouTube.

0955 GMT: Nuke Update. Nothing yet coming out of the International Atomic Energy Agency meeting in Vienna. The media, as in this CNN report, is just recycling yesterday's leaked soundbite of Mohammad El Baradei's statement that IAEA analysis of Iran's nuclear status is at a "dead end".

0945 GMT: Dutch television has obtained an interview with Mehdi Karroubi. The exchange is in Farsi with Dutch subtitles.

0830 GMT: Morning Media Moment. Emily Landau of The Jerusalem Post gets in a pre-emptive strike of fanciful "analysis" with her claim, "Dangerous Misreading Iran". That "misreading" is any thought that Iran's position in the nuclear talks is affected by internal development and, in particular, the post-12 June tensions:

The confusion emanating from Iran is simply the most recent manifestation of a well-known pattern that has been repeated in different forms for close to seven years. The "yes, no, maybe" answers from Iran are the tactic that serves its overall strategy in the nuclear realm.

Which would be a fair hypothesis if Landau produced a paragraph, a sentence, even a few words setting out this "well-known pattern". She doesn't.

The serious point here is a leading Israeli academic, "the director of the Arms Control and Regional Security Project, Institute for National Security Studies, Tel Aviv University", could show not one scrap of perception about the internal dynamics behind Iran's nuclear programme and foreign policy. Instead, "analysis" rests on the unshakeable position: There Cannot (and Should Not) Be a Deal with Iran.

At least the headline's good: I just suspect it's better applied to the author than to her straw-person targets.

0755 GMT: The international media are likely to be dominated today by speculations and leaks about the second day of discussions at the International Atomic Energy Agency on Iran's nuclear programme.

So, before getting drawn into that issue, we've taken the time --- with the help of readers and fellow bloggers --- to post two discussions about the next steps for the Green Wave(s). The use of the plural is deliberate, as you'll soon see in the debate on the evolving nature of the movement(s); the other, equally important discussion is on non-violence as protest moves towards 16 Azar (7 December) . So is our desire in posting them, not for a conclusive answer but for reflection on how and where protest and resistance develop in this marathon conflict.

Middle East Inside Line: Israel's Lieberman Renews Attack on Palestinian Authority

Middle East Inside Line: Threats Begin To Fly Between Palestine & Israel

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman stated on Monday that the Palestinian Authority was playing an "ugly and double game," by seeking Israel's support in crushing Hamas while submitting simultaneous complaints to the international community. He said:

During Operation Cast Lead, the Palestinian Authority pressured us to crush Hamas. Then, a month later, they submitted a complaint against us to the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

Even before the Goldstone Commission published its damning report about Israel's offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, there were a thousand complaints against Israel at the ICC, a large number of them encouraged by the PA.

Lieberman placed the bomb in the hands of Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas with an accusation which might be aimed at increasing the tension between Hamas and the PA. This is highly likely to bring out a more sharp-tongued Abbas, determined to save his position, while also providing relatively easy conditions for the Netanyahu government to "cope with" the demands of the international community regarding Palestine.

Transcript & Analysis: Netanyahu in US - Waiting for Obama, Talking about "Small" Israel

Middle East Inside Line: Syria’s Assad Launches Fierce Criticism of Israel
Palestine Video: The Separation Wall Falls (Again)
Mahmoud Abbas: “Israel Does Not Want Peace but We Do”

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee?Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is in the US. He was supposed to meet President Barack Obama, but last-minute rescheduling by the White House is now seen as an indication of "strained relations".

On Monday, Netanyahu spoke at the Jewish Federations of North America General Assembly, portraying Israel as "a small yet great Jewish state". That fits Netanyahu's emphasis on security, with "small" Israel surrounded by enemies, and the rejection of a Palestinian state with a military and a continued blockade of Gaza. It leads to Israel's concern that Mahmoud Abbas will not be seeking re-election as President of the West Bank and its headlining of the "existential threat" of Iran.

Netanyahu thanked Obama and the US Congress for opposing the Goldstone Report on Gaza. He also made clear, however, that small Israel cannot withstand an influx of refugees (i.e., the "right of return" demanded since 1948 by Palestinians) and preconditions restricting Israeli settlements. So "small" Israel and the "big" US remain deadlocked on a way forward in talks over Palestine.

The full transcript:

My dear friends, leaders of the Jewish communities of North America,

We are a small people but a great people; a people generous enough to pave a path toward a lasting peace; a people brave enough to thwart the dangers that confront us; and a people creative enough to once again help steer humanity towards a better future for all.

The history of the Jewish people has been marked by a paradox. We are at once both small and great. We are few in number but luminous in achievement. In the ancient world, the Jews were a small people on the foothills of Asia touching the Mediterranean. But in Alexandria some 2200 years ago, the Bible was translated into Greek, and the world has never been the same since.

The Jews brought to civilization at least three big ideas: the idea of monotheism, the belief that all people have innate rights that transcend the power of kings, and a prophetic vision of universal peace.

It is impossible to fully describe the revolutionary impact of these ideas throughout history, nor the poetic power of the Biblical stories that overshadowed much of the literature of the ancient world.

As in antiquity so in modernity.

Israel is one of the world's smallest countries. But our success in science and technology, agriculture, medicine, and the arts belies our size. And on this continent, the Jewish community accounts for less than 2 percent of the population, yet its creative accomplishments in every field are legend and legendary.

In modern times, Jews everywhere have made extraordinary contributions to humanity.

So, smallness and greatness have thus accompanied our people throughout nearly 4,000 years of our history. But our conspicuous achievements often masked our small size and the vulnerability that comes with being small.

Being prominent but small, we often could not defend ourselves against larger foes who envied our achievements, despised the ideas we championed, and periodically sought to expel or even annihilate us outright.

The rebirth of Israel did not eliminate such attacks. But it fundamentally changed our ability to repel them.

In 1948, some 600,000 Jews, their backs against the sea, fended off the assault of much larger enemies sworn to our destruction. We were aided by many of our fellow American Jews. You gave money, arms, and most important, tremendous moral support.

You helped Israel absorb waves of immigrants, you spearheaded the historic struggle to free Soviet Jewry and you have tirelessly worked to strengthen the American-Israeli alliance which is a cornerstone of Israel?s security. Today, you support Birthright, Masa and Nefesh B? Nefesh ? these are programs that promote Aliyah and strengthen Jewish identity, thereby ensuring that our numbers are not further diminished and dwindled by the forces of assimilation.

Strengthening Jewish identity can no longer be a task exclusively for the Diaspora.

It is increasingly the responsibility of the Jewish State. Over a decade ago, I was proud to be the first Prime Minister to allocate state funds to bolster Jewish identity outside of Israel.

And I assure you that in my second term, I intend to do even more.

The result of our joint efforts has been a stronger Israel. And only a strong Israel can achieve peace. But even a strong Israel is still a small Israel. And a small Israel demands a secure peace. Peace in our land, the peace of Jerusalem, our eternal capital, is one of our oldest longings, expressed in our Psalms and our prayers.

Peace between Israel and our Arab neighbors: the first and immediate result would spare our children the horrors of war. It would spare our children the horrors of war. It would spare our grandchildren the horrors of war. What a great gift.

Peace could usher in a new age of economic progress for the benefit of all. We have already signed peace agreements, two of them, with Egypt and Jordan. And we are eager to achieve peace with all our other neighbors, especially with the Palestinians.

I believe there is no time to waste. We need to move towards peace with a sense of urgency and a sense of purpose. I want to be clear. My goal is not to have endless negotiations. My goal is not negotiations for negotiations sake. My goal is to reach a peace treaty, and soon.

But to get a peace agreement, we must start negotiating. Let's stop talking about negotiations. Let's start moving.

This past June at Bar-Ilan University, I put forward a vision of peace that has united the vast majority of Israelis.

In this vision of two states for two peoples, a demilitarized Palestinian state would recognize the Jewish state.

Now, what do I mean by a Jewish state? It is a state in which all individuals and all minorities have equal individual rights. Yet our national symbols, language and culture spring from the heritage of the Jewish people. And most important, any Jew from anywhere in the world has a right to immigrate to Israel and become a citizen.

I want to make it clear: Any Jew, of any denomination, will always have the right to come home to the Jewish state. Religious pluralism and tolerance will always guide my policy.

What does a Jewish state mean for the Palestinians? They must abandon the fantasy of flooding Israel with refugees, give up irredentist claims to the Negev and Galilee, and declare unequivocally that the conflict is finally over.

Yet, even after we achieve peace it may take years for the spirit of peace to permeate most levels of Palestinian society. Therefore, any peace agreement we sign today must include ironclad security measures that will protect the State of Israel.

Here comes that paradox again.

Israel is powerful but small. No matter where our final borders are drawn, Israel will remain exceedingly small. I am not sure you know how small Israel is. The United States and Canada are each roughly 400 times the size of Israel and the Arab world is 500 times the size of Israel. Egypt alone is roughly 40 times larger and even a small country like Jordan, our neighbor to the east, is almost four times as big. Israel is bigger than Rhode Island, but that's about it.

Small countries are not necessarily insecure. Belgium and Luxemburg are small but they today are not insecure. Yet if their neighbors included radical regimes bent on their conquest and destruction with terror proxies firing thousands of missiles on their people, believe me, they would feel insecure. Anyone would.

Because of our small size and the radical and violent neighborhood in which we live, Israel faces security threats like that of no other nation.

A few facts to drive the point home.

A few days ago, the Israeli navy interdicted a ship carrying hundreds of tons of rockets and explosives from Iran bound for Hezbollah via Syria. Last week, Hamas tested a rocket with a range of nearly 40 miles.

Now, for a large country, that might not be too consequential. But in tiny Israel, Hamas and Hezbollah now have the power to reach Tel Aviv.

Israel's security therefore requires that any territory vacated in a future peace agreement must be effectively demilitarized.

An effective demilitarizion of Palestinian areas is an essential component of peace recognized by successive American presidents. I want to assure you Israel is willing to make great concessions for peace. But there can be no concessions on Israel's security. We have to ensure that weapons do not flow into the Palestinian areas in the West Bank, which overlooks Tel Aviv and surrounds Jerusalem.

We cannot permit another Gaza or South Lebanon in the heart of the country. What we want is a durable peace, a peace that can be defended. We fervently hope that such a peace will hold, but we must be prepared to defend ourselves in case it doesn?t.

The UN report on Gaza, which falsely accuses Israel of war crimes for legitimately defending itself against real war criminals, in effect seeks to deprive us of the right of self-defense. This report must be firmly rejected.

We are proud of the Israeli Defense Forces. We are proud of our sons and daughters who are defending our country every day. We know that our army, Israel's army, is as moral as any army on earth. In supporting the IDF and rejecting this report you're sending a message to terrorists that they cannot get away with firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians.

And you do something else. You support peace. For only an Israel that can defend itself is an Israel that can take further risks for peace.

I thank President Obama for resolutely opposing this twisted UN resolution.

I applaud the overwhelming vote last week in the American Congress condemning this biased report.

I know there are many Canadian friends with us here today. I wish to extend my thanks to Prime Minister Harper for his staunch support for Israel's right of self-defense.

Last week, I watched a joint exercise of the IDF and some 1400 American soldiers to improve Israel's defense against incoming missiles. I salute these American soldiers, and I thank their President, their Commander in Chief, President Obama for his commitment to Israel's security. On behalf of the people of Israel, I send my condolences to the American servicemen and women who were killed at Fort Hood last week.

My friends, my government is working to advance peace and we are not just talking.

We have removed hundreds of security checkpoints and roadblocks in the West Bank. I personally extended the hours of operation on the Allenby Bridge and I've removed bureaucratic hurdles to Palestinian economic development.

These efforts, along with measures taken by the Palestinian Authority to improve security, have spurred an unmatched boom in the West Bank and has made life better for ordinary Palestinians.

For the first time in years, businesses, banks and industry are sprouting. Restaurants, theaters, and shopping malls are overflowing. Thousands and thousands of Palestinian jobs are being created.

I think we can do a lot more to improve the reality on the ground, and we will. I intend to do a lot more.

Prosperity can help advance peace - but only so far. To truly resolve the outstanding issues between us, we must begin and complete peace negotiations.

We should not place preconditions for holding talks. Such obstacles to talks were never set in the 16 years of Israeli-Palestinian dialogue. From the day my government was sworn in seven months ago, I have been calling for peace negotiations to start.

I said I would go anywhere, anytime to advance peace. And no Israeli government has been so willing to restrain settlement activity as part of an effort to re-launch peace talks. So I say today to the leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas: let us seize the moment to reach an historic agreement. Let us begin talks immediately.

I know there are many skeptics. I am not one of them. I believe that peace is possible. I know how committed the Israeli people are to peace and how committed I am to make peace. But I need and we need a determined Palestinian partner as well. A partner willing to shoulder the risk and burdens as we are.

I believe that with good will and with courageous leadership on both sides, and no less important, with the continued support of the United States, peace can become a reality. We can surprise a skeptical world.

Achieving peace is a great challenge facing Israel. At the United Nations in September, I spoke of another great challenge: preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapons capability. The Iranian regime tyrannizes its own people, sponsors and supplies terrorism, and openly pledges to wipe Israel off the map. Imagine how much more dangerous this regime would be if it had atomic bombs.

The responsible members of the international community must unite to prevent this grave threat to the peace of the entire world.

I support President Obama's continued efforts toward these ends, and I appreciate the firm position taken by the leading European countries. We must not succumb to the Iranian regime?s deceit and cunning. We must stand together to stop Tehran from realizing its nuclear ambitions.

In addition to achieving peace and preventing a nuclear Iran, there is a third momentous challenge before us ? reducing the world?s dependence on oil.

This would help cleanse our world after more than a century of industrial pollution.

It would help our economies by decreasing our dependence on depleting resources. And it would end the massive transfer of wealth to some of the world's most odious exporters of terrorism and fanaticism.

Here's the question: can we dramatically reduce our dependence on oil?

Remember, sometimes, one or two inventions can change centuries of habit. For many centuries, salt was highly valued for preserving food. Caravans of camels carried it across the deserts, and it was nearly worth its weight in gold. The salt trade helped build economic empires, and the world?s dependence on salt showed no signs of slackening.

But then came two inventions: canning and refrigeration. Virtually overnight, salt lost its immense value. The same thing may happen to oil. Scientific and technological breakthroughs could dramatically reduce the world?s dependence on petroleum. And Israel could play an important role in making that happen.

You know, of course, about our high-tech companies and venture capital funds, our engineers and scientists, our patents and our Nobel laureates. In biotech and agro-tech, in solar energy and desalination, and in many other fields, Israeli innovation is transforming the way we live.

Two perceptive writers recently wrote a book called, "the Start-Up Nation." We are the start-up nation. Now we must use our minds to help achieve breakthroughs in the field of clean energy. For example, Israel could apply its unique expertise to the juncture of water and energy. The global need for water is rapidly increasing. Yet, a third of the cost of producing clean water is energy. Sea-water in abundance can be readily desalinated with solar power and channeled inland.

Having mastered both of these technologies, Israel can make a decisive contribution to alleviating water shortages around the world, especially in the growing economies of Asia and the parched expanses of the Middle East.

I am in the process of establishing a national commission that will bring together Israel's finest scientists, businessmen and engineers. We hope to work with other governments and experts to dramatically reduce our dependence on oil in the next decade, providing an example to be emulated by the rest of the world.

If we could cross the oceans, fly the skies, and reach the moon, we should be able to harness water, wind and sun to power our world.

My friends,

I know that these three enormous challenges ? achieving peace, preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and developing alternative energies - seem daunting.

But I want you to remember another mission whose success seemed completely implausible when Theodore Herzl embarked on it over a century ago.

The challenges confronting Herzl's vision of a Jewish state were not less than overwhelming. Most of the world's Jews lived in Europe and had no intention of moving to the barren land of their forefathers.

Few saw the clouds gathering on the horizon. Fewer still saw the need for action. But with a clear plan and a prophetic sense of urgency, Herzl helped the Jewish people overcome their tragic condition of powerlessness.

His implausible idea gathered so much force that within a few decades our people emerged from the worst massacre in history to establish an independent state in our ancestral homeland. And then our small people then dedicated itself to the great task of building a modern Jewish state.

In an understandable moment of frustration, Herzl lamented, "The tragedy of the Jewish people is that we do not believe in ourselves."

But Herzl did not lose faith. He said, "We are strong enough to form a state." "We possess all the human and material resources for this purpose."

If we will it, he famously said, it is no dream.

My friends,

We have learned from history that if the Jewish people are united and determined, if we harness our hopes and our dreams, the hardest tasks are within our reach.

Two Birds, One Stone: Netanyahu Attacks UN & Iran

Israel-Palestine: UN General Assembly Endorses Goldstone Report on Gaza
Iran-Israel Ship Encounter: Hezbollah & Syria Call Reject Claims of Tel Aviv’s “Pirates”

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

On Thursday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu targeted Iran and United Nations. He linked his twin targets through the incident of the ship, allegedly carrying tons of weapons for Hezbollah from Iran, intercepted by Israeli forces:

The bulk of the shipment included rockets whose aim is to hurt our citizens and kill as many civilians as possible. This constitutes a war crime. This is a war crime which Iran intends to commit again in the future.

This gave Netyanahu the opportunity to slide towards his second target, a United Nations which just happened to be considering the Goldstone Report on Gaza:

The UN General Assembly should have investigated and condemned this crime [by Iran and Hezbollah] and the UN Security Council should have convened a special session to debate this incident.

The international community should be focusing on this, but instead, the world condemns Israel and the Israel Defense Forces and undermines our right to self defense [through consideration of the Goldstone Report].

Israel-Palestine: UN General Assembly Endorses Goldstone Report on Gaza

Two Birds, One Stone: Netanyahu Attacks UN & Iran
Palestine: The Reactions to the Election Bluff of Mahmoud Abbas
U.S. House of Representatives Opposes the Goldstone Report
Israel-Palestine: Clinton’s Cairo Visit Pushes Talks Into the Distance

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

On Thursday, the 192-member United Nations General Assembly adopted the Goldstone Report on the Gaza War.  Its resolution called on the Israeli government to carry out an "independent and credible" internal investigation and on the "Palestinian side" to carry out an investigation of alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity by Hamas. The resolution also includes a recommendation that the signatories of the fourth Geneva Convention convene in emergency session to discuss Israel's violations of the treaty. Palestinians rejected the British-French proposal to send the resolution back to Geneva for further consideration by the UN Human Rights Council.

In the Assembly, 114 countries voted in favor, 18 opposed, 44 abstained, and 16 were absent. The United States and Israel voted No. The European Union was split --- while Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, and the Czech Republic opposed the resolution, Britain and France abstained.

Although the decision of the Assembly are non-binding, they can put pressure on parties for further action. In particular, it bolsters the call of the Goldstone Report for the Security Council to intervene if Palestinians and Israelis fail to launch credible investigations within three months.

Israel's top UN official, Gabriela Shalev, said: "Rather than discuss how to better stop terrorist groups who deliberately target civilians, this body launches yet another campaign against the victims of terrorism, the people of Israel."