Haaretz 20:18 29/01/2008
By Shahar Ilan, Haaretz Correspondent
As a Knesset panel deliberated Tuesday on proposals to ban all gay pride parades in Jerusalem, MK Nissim Ze'ev (Shas) accused the homosexual community of "carrying out the self-destruction of Israeli society and the Jewish people." Ze'ev also said homosexuals were a plague as "toxic as bird flu." The Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee met to debate two bills presented by religious party members which would amend the Jerusalem municipality's Basic Law to prevent gay pride parades from being held within the city limits.
Advertisement
The bills were presented by MK Eli Gabai (National Union - National Religious Party) and MK Yitzhak Vakhnin (Shas). Both bulls were passed in a preliminary reading in the Knesset plenum and have have now been brought for committee deliberations ahead of a first reading. MK Zahava Gal-On (Meretz) said in response to Ze'ev's comments that "when I hear concepts like plague and self-destruction, I don't believe they are in the lexicon of expressions. The capital city does not belong only to the ultra-Orthodox." The chairman of Israel's LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) organization, Michael Hammel, called Ze'ev's words embarrassing and frightening. "The right to march in the capital city is not a local 'Jerusalemite' matter," he said. "This is a culture war, where politicians are trying to turn Jerusalem into their private property." Committee members decided that public figures from the religious and homosexual communities in Jerusalem would meet to discuss the gay pride parade on a separate occasion. MK Yitzhak Levy (NU - NRP) said, "the current situation is that this is a crippled and small protest: once you close a stadium, once you give 100 meters. There should have been a discussion to find new ideas, thus I am calling for a discussion." Noa Setet, who runs Jerusalem's Open House - the organization which has initiated the parade - seconded Levy's suggestion, but added that the group had scheduled two meetings in the past and Levy's aides had canceled both of them. Levy denied having canceled the meeting and said he intended two recruit other public figures from the religious community for the future discussion.
mardi 29 janvier 2008
lundi 28 janvier 2008
Arabs battle for citizenship; State unyielding
Mohammed al-Deik has lived in Israel for 18 years, paid taxes, employed workers in his factory and even married two Israeli citizens and fathered an Israeli girl, but Interior Ministry still refuses to grant him citizenship
Tani Goldstein
Yeditoh Ahranoth Published: 01.28.08, 19:54
They have been living within the Green Line for years, happily married to Israeli women, raising children, and paying taxes. They are not suspected of security or criminal offences, speak fluent Hebrew, and openly declare their love and loyalty for the country. However, people like Mohammed al-Deik face one problem: They were born in the territories and have been consistently denied an Israeli ID card and citizenship.
Al-Deik, 36, is just one example of the phenomenon. He was born in the West Bank and studied architecture at Tel Aviv University. He now owns a furniture factory called Noor located in the settlement of Alei Zahav. The architect's Hebrew is so fluent it is hard for people speaking with him to tell he's not a native-born Israeli.
In 1995, al-Deik married an Israeli-Arab woman from Jaffa named Shiri who soon afterwards gave birth to a baby girl. His marriage to an Israeli citizen enabled al-Deik to be granted the status of resident in 2000 after passing the mandatory security background checks.
The two divorced in 2003 and al-Deik remarried shortly afterwards, this time with Rim Mahmid, an Israeli-Arab woman from Umm al-Fahm.
When al-Deik went to the Interior Ministry to sort out the documentation for his second marriage, he got quite a surprise: "They told me my ID card had been cancelled. I told them I was about to get married and they said that 'Right now you are not married so we can't allow you to keep your status as a resident.'"
After the wedding, al-Deik returned to the ministry and informed officials that he was now married, but they responded that as he was not a citizen of the state it was impossible to even record the union. Since then, he has lived in Israel as an illegal resident.
Mohammed al-Deik (Photo: Tani Goldstein)
Al-Deik has issued a petition to the HIgh Court with the help of Attorney Arif Fairj to be granted Israeli citizenship.
"I feel totally Israeli. I love the state and I am loyal to it. I have a lot of friends here and there is no other place for me to be. There is nothing for me to do in the Palestinian Authority. I don't even have a Palestinian ID card," al-Deik says.
Five years after his second marriage, al-Deik still lives in Umm al-Fahm, pays a mortgage on a house he bought in Jaffa, makes child support payments for his daughter from his previous marriage and is in close contact with her.
However, the Interior Ministry still refuses to grant him a residency permit - much less citizenship.
"I will stay here if they want me to or not, but they're just making my life bitter," he says. "I don't have a passport and I can't travel abroad. My daughter needs my signature to receive a passport and I can't even sign.
"I went through a nasty bureaucratic process to get an ID card and now they want me to go through everything again?
"I'm a good citizen that pays high taxes and employs workers. This country doesn't differentiate between good (people) and bad (people). They're trying to make me seem like a criminal but I'm not willing (to accept it): I'm a law abiding citizen."
The Interior Ministry responded by saying that "in contrast to al-Deik's claims, he does have an active Palestinian ID card in the Palestinian Authority. His status as a temporary resident was revoked in 2003 when he was divorced from his wife.
"Since then, for the past five years, he has been residing in Israel without proper authorization. We were not updated regarding any new marriage and he is currently listed as divorced. His status was made clear to him in 2006, but surprisingly, al-Deik did nothing to change the record."
Tani Goldstein
Yeditoh Ahranoth Published: 01.28.08, 19:54
They have been living within the Green Line for years, happily married to Israeli women, raising children, and paying taxes. They are not suspected of security or criminal offences, speak fluent Hebrew, and openly declare their love and loyalty for the country. However, people like Mohammed al-Deik face one problem: They were born in the territories and have been consistently denied an Israeli ID card and citizenship.
Al-Deik, 36, is just one example of the phenomenon. He was born in the West Bank and studied architecture at Tel Aviv University. He now owns a furniture factory called Noor located in the settlement of Alei Zahav. The architect's Hebrew is so fluent it is hard for people speaking with him to tell he's not a native-born Israeli.
In 1995, al-Deik married an Israeli-Arab woman from Jaffa named Shiri who soon afterwards gave birth to a baby girl. His marriage to an Israeli citizen enabled al-Deik to be granted the status of resident in 2000 after passing the mandatory security background checks.
The two divorced in 2003 and al-Deik remarried shortly afterwards, this time with Rim Mahmid, an Israeli-Arab woman from Umm al-Fahm.
When al-Deik went to the Interior Ministry to sort out the documentation for his second marriage, he got quite a surprise: "They told me my ID card had been cancelled. I told them I was about to get married and they said that 'Right now you are not married so we can't allow you to keep your status as a resident.'"
After the wedding, al-Deik returned to the ministry and informed officials that he was now married, but they responded that as he was not a citizen of the state it was impossible to even record the union. Since then, he has lived in Israel as an illegal resident.
Mohammed al-Deik (Photo: Tani Goldstein)
Al-Deik has issued a petition to the HIgh Court with the help of Attorney Arif Fairj to be granted Israeli citizenship.
"I feel totally Israeli. I love the state and I am loyal to it. I have a lot of friends here and there is no other place for me to be. There is nothing for me to do in the Palestinian Authority. I don't even have a Palestinian ID card," al-Deik says.
Five years after his second marriage, al-Deik still lives in Umm al-Fahm, pays a mortgage on a house he bought in Jaffa, makes child support payments for his daughter from his previous marriage and is in close contact with her.
However, the Interior Ministry still refuses to grant him a residency permit - much less citizenship.
"I will stay here if they want me to or not, but they're just making my life bitter," he says. "I don't have a passport and I can't travel abroad. My daughter needs my signature to receive a passport and I can't even sign.
"I went through a nasty bureaucratic process to get an ID card and now they want me to go through everything again?
"I'm a good citizen that pays high taxes and employs workers. This country doesn't differentiate between good (people) and bad (people). They're trying to make me seem like a criminal but I'm not willing (to accept it): I'm a law abiding citizen."
The Interior Ministry responded by saying that "in contrast to al-Deik's claims, he does have an active Palestinian ID card in the Palestinian Authority. His status as a temporary resident was revoked in 2003 when he was divorced from his wife.
"Since then, for the past five years, he has been residing in Israel without proper authorization. We were not updated regarding any new marriage and he is currently listed as divorced. His status was made clear to him in 2006, but surprisingly, al-Deik did nothing to change the record."
dimanche 27 janvier 2008
Court convicts IDF officer who led troops in W. Bank rampage
Haaretz 17:22 27/01/2008
By Yuval Azoulay and Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondents
An Israel Defense Forces officer who commanded troops implicated in a West Bank rampage that led to the wrongful shooting of a Palestinian civilian last July was convicted on Sunday of a string of serious charges. Deputy Lieutenant Yaakov Gigi was convicted in the framework of a plea bargain of illegal use of a weapon, giving a false confession, overstepping authority in a manner that endangered lives and behavior unsuitable to an army officer. The plea bargain his defense attorney reached with the prosecution dropped charges of wrongful imprisonment and aggravated assault. The prosecution asked the Jaffa military court that tried Gigi to sentence him to 15 months imprisonment, demotion and a suspended sentence.
The sentence will be handed down at a later date. The incident took place in the West Bank town of Dahariya, located south of Hebron. Gigi and five of his men, belonging to the Lavi Battalion of the Kfir Infantry Brigade, commandeered a local taxi, and forcibly removed its passengers. The driver, Mohammed Issa Mahrazeh, was also removed, tied up, placed back in the cab, blindfolded and was held there for the duration of the operation. He sustained bruises. While driving through the town of Dahariya, the troops took note of a Badham Samamra, an 18-year-old civilian approaching the vehicle. According to the indictment, the officer ordered one of the soldiers to "distance" the Samamra from the car with his weapon, knowing that his gun was loaded and cocked, and that the soldier was not trained in operations such as the one they had improvised. The soldier then pointed his weapon out the window of the taxi and shot Samamra. The bullet hit the left shoulder and exited his body through the chest. He was moderately to seriously wounded by the gunshot. The soldiers then abandoned the vehicle, leaving the driver bound in the back seat. During the ensuing investigation, Gigi submitted a false account of the incident, and military sources say he ordered his soldiers to do the same.
By Yuval Azoulay and Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondents
An Israel Defense Forces officer who commanded troops implicated in a West Bank rampage that led to the wrongful shooting of a Palestinian civilian last July was convicted on Sunday of a string of serious charges. Deputy Lieutenant Yaakov Gigi was convicted in the framework of a plea bargain of illegal use of a weapon, giving a false confession, overstepping authority in a manner that endangered lives and behavior unsuitable to an army officer. The plea bargain his defense attorney reached with the prosecution dropped charges of wrongful imprisonment and aggravated assault. The prosecution asked the Jaffa military court that tried Gigi to sentence him to 15 months imprisonment, demotion and a suspended sentence.
The sentence will be handed down at a later date. The incident took place in the West Bank town of Dahariya, located south of Hebron. Gigi and five of his men, belonging to the Lavi Battalion of the Kfir Infantry Brigade, commandeered a local taxi, and forcibly removed its passengers. The driver, Mohammed Issa Mahrazeh, was also removed, tied up, placed back in the cab, blindfolded and was held there for the duration of the operation. He sustained bruises. While driving through the town of Dahariya, the troops took note of a Badham Samamra, an 18-year-old civilian approaching the vehicle. According to the indictment, the officer ordered one of the soldiers to "distance" the Samamra from the car with his weapon, knowing that his gun was loaded and cocked, and that the soldier was not trained in operations such as the one they had improvised. The soldier then pointed his weapon out the window of the taxi and shot Samamra. The bullet hit the left shoulder and exited his body through the chest. He was moderately to seriously wounded by the gunshot. The soldiers then abandoned the vehicle, leaving the driver bound in the back seat. During the ensuing investigation, Gigi submitted a false account of the incident, and military sources say he ordered his soldiers to do the same.
samedi 26 janvier 2008
JCSER: Hebrew Names Instead of Arab Names in Silwan
Date:
1/26/2008
JCSER's Research & Media Unit accused the Jerusalem Municipality of starting a new campaign of Judaizing important sites in Silwan, south of the Old City, by giving Hebrew names to these sites. The unit referred to announcements published by the Jerusalem Municipality and the Israeli Ministry of Transportation during the past few days entitled, 'Development Works in Silwan', attached with a detailed map of the sites to be developed. Their names have been replaced by Hebrew names. The Center's Director Genera, Ziad Al-Hammouri, said, 'Changing the names of Arab sites into Hebrew names is an old policy adopted by the consecutive municipalities. It started in the Old City of Jerusalem when Hebrew names were given to streets, allies, roads, and Islamic religion sites, most importantly the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which is called by the Israelis as the Temple Mount'. He added, 'But the new campaign signifies the volume of changes which the Israelis try to make on the ground of Jerusalem, either by settlement, taking over properties, or giving Hebrew names to important neighborhoods and sits in suburbs adjacent to the Old City'.
1/26/2008
JCSER's Research & Media Unit accused the Jerusalem Municipality of starting a new campaign of Judaizing important sites in Silwan, south of the Old City, by giving Hebrew names to these sites. The unit referred to announcements published by the Jerusalem Municipality and the Israeli Ministry of Transportation during the past few days entitled, 'Development Works in Silwan', attached with a detailed map of the sites to be developed. Their names have been replaced by Hebrew names. The Center's Director Genera, Ziad Al-Hammouri, said, 'Changing the names of Arab sites into Hebrew names is an old policy adopted by the consecutive municipalities. It started in the Old City of Jerusalem when Hebrew names were given to streets, allies, roads, and Islamic religion sites, most importantly the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which is called by the Israelis as the Temple Mount'. He added, 'But the new campaign signifies the volume of changes which the Israelis try to make on the ground of Jerusalem, either by settlement, taking over properties, or giving Hebrew names to important neighborhoods and sits in suburbs adjacent to the Old City'.
A rough guide to Hebron: The world's strangest guided tour highlights the abuse of Palestinians
Yehuda Shaul is a religious Israeli who served in the army. Now he runs guided tours highlighting the abuse of Palestinians. It's controversial and dangerous work – so hy does he do it? Donald MacIntyre finds out on a unique tragical history tour
The Independent Saturday, 26 January 2008
Close to the Tomb of the Patriarchs, the site holy to both Muslims and Jews in Hebron's city centre, Yehuda Shaul, a religious Israeli who served in an elite Army combat unit in the city during the worst of the Palestinian uprising, is trying to guide a tour round four Jewish settlements in the heart of an overwhelmingly Arab city.
It starts in Shuhada Street, which runs through what is now the settlers' security zone, the rows of empty Palestinian shops and houses boarded up with steel shutters, many daubed with Stars of David to show who is in charge here. The only permitted vehicles are those of the settlers and the Israeli military.
Shaul is seeking to demonstrate to his visitors that the settlements and the formidable military apparatus which protects them have violated the human rights of the Palestinians who live – or increasingly no longer live – in what was once the teeming Arab city centre.
But his every footstep is dogged by another religious Jew conducting a non-stop monologue designed to drown out Shaul's explanation of what his visitors are seeing. "Yehuda Shaul – he helps the Arabs," Baruch Marzel tells them, before making clear his view of the two-state peace deal with the Palestinians which the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, US President George Bush and a majority of the Israeli public say they want. "Do you think if there is going to be an agreement that you will be allowed to pray at this tomb? Only because there are Jews living here can you visit the tomb. He isn't telling you about the 40 terrorist attacks there have been on Jews here. You can visit our Hebron centre and learn the truth about Hebron, not the lies Yehuda Shaul is filling you with."
American-born Marzel – a man to whom the term "right-wing extremist" hardly does justice – had lain in wait for the tour bus near the grave of his fellow settler Baruch Goldstein, who walked into a mosque at the tomb in 1994 with an automatic assault rifle and shot dead 29 Palestinians as they prayed. Marzel, who has a police record for attacks on Palestinians, was a prominent figure in the far right Kach group which was designated a "terrorist" organisation in both Israel and the US after issuing a statement praising the Goldstein massacre. Seven years ago, Marzel held a macabre graveside commemoration for Goldstein, who had been lynched by enraged survivors after the attack. It was a "big party", Marzel said, to mark the anniversary of Goldstein being "murdered by the Arabs" – a somewhat incomplete account of the day in question.
Shaul struggles to conduct his tour against Marzel's noisy filibuster. At one point, Shaul walks across the street to a watching senior police officer and asks him to move Marzel on; the officer replies, "You can carry on. He's not stopping you." When Shaul then turns to Marzel himself and tells him quietly: "You are disturbing us, please can you move?" Marzel replies defiantly: "No. This my house."
This tense little scene underlines – in miniature – one of the looming obstacles facing the current Israeli-Palestinian talks in the wake of this month's visit by President Bush. It is impossible to imagine any final peace deal which does not put Hebron – 12 miles east of the "green line" that marked Israel's eastern border until the Six Day War, and the site of some of the first Jewish settlements on Palestinian land which followed that victory – in the heart of a Palestinian state. When Marzel says "this is my house" it is an understated but forceful reminder that the Hebron settlers may prove the toughest to remove – as they would surely have to be if the occupation is ever to end – of any in the West Bank.
Marzel is not alone in stalking Shaul. Enjoying the sport alongside him is Ofer Ohanna, the settlement security officer, who on a previous visit has goaded Shaul about a recent haircut. Noticing that the (heterosexual) Shaul had sheared off the pony tail which, along with his beard, black velvet kippa (or skullcap) and habitual sandals, has – ironically – long served to make him look like the more hippyish kind of settler, Ohanna had told him he had done it because "your boyfriend wouldn't go to bed with you if you didn't cut it off". Today, another prominent settler, Moshe Ben Batat, marches up to Shaul and demands more chillingly the date of his "mother's remembrance day" because "your mother threw you out of the house and committed suicide". (One – and only one – part of this is true. Shaul's mother did commit suicide, but during a post-natal depression – when Shaul was four years old.) Later still, the vociferous group of Shaul-stalkers is joined by David Wilder, the US-born spokesman of the Hebron settlers. Saying that Shaul's tours are "very dangerous", he adds that Shaul "feeds the enemy and plays into their hands" by criticising the settlers. Wilder sums up his view of Shaul: "Hamas with a kippa."
The man who attracts such hatred from the Hebron settlers has, at only 24, already led a remarkable life. He was described by the celebrated Peruvian writer Mario Vargas Llosa, to whom he acted as a guide in the city two years ago, as "one of the righteous this country has". He was a co-founder of Breaking the Silence, the growing group of dissident ex-soldiers – the core of whom served in Hebron at the peak of the intifada like him – who have testified on the persistent abuses they say the military has committed during the years of warfare.
Stationed in Bethlehem in the last few weeks of his military service he had "an enlightened moment" in which he says he began to understand what one of the group's later publications would call the "terrible moral price" exacted by the occupation from the young soldiers who serve in the West Bank and Gaza. Then and over the time that followed, Shaul began to find himself "in the very terrifying place [where] there is no justification for 90 per cent of the actions you took part in".
Since then he has become a political guide to, and activist in, the part of Hebron which was once its Arab commercial and cultural heart but which is now overwhelmingly dominated by the presence of 800 Jewish settlers. He has conducted or organised more than 200 tours of Israelis – including school and college students in their year before Army service – and foreigners. Last October, he and another ex-combat soldier, Avichai Sharon, briefed the international Middle East envoy Tony Blair on the daunting problems of inner-city Hebron.
To understand what led him to this unusual vocation, you have to climb with Shaul to look over the Palestinian city from a vantage point close to the old Jewish cemetery. As the afternoon muezzins ring out from the mosques, Shaul points out the red-roofed house where his unit's snipers and machine gunners were posted after giving the Palestinian family who lived in it half an hour to leave. At the peak of the intifada in 2002-03, with Palestinian gunmen using mainly assault rifles to shoot towards the settlements to their south at night, the Israeli soldiers were firing back grenades from machine guns.
"A grenade is not a bullet," Shaul explains. "It hits something and explodes, kills everyone in a radius of eight metres and injures everyone in a radius of 16. Secondly a machine gun is not an accurate weapon. You aim it a bit to the left and a bit to the right. If you're a real good operator you'll probably hit your target the fifth time."
Briefed initially by his platoon commander on the task, Shaul says he "freaked out. You still have a sense of a mission, of black and white, and I'm like, 'What's going on here? I'm supposed to shoot grenades into a city where people live?' The first night, you aim in the area of the target and you pull the trigger and you let it go as fast as you could and inside you're praying that the least amount of grenades were fired because if you pull the trigger for a minute around 60 grenades are out."
But as the week wore on, he says, it became "the exciting moment of the day. You're bored. You're stuck in this house. You don't go out. You play it like a video game with your joy-stick on top of the city – boom, boom, boom."
Shaul has no direct evidence of casualties from the salvos he fired – the "worst thing I did" – though he assumes there must have been injuries at the very least. It is something "you would prefer not to think about". And, yes, Palestinian snipers did indeed claim the lives of Jewish victims from the settlements – five since 2000. But Shaul says that the fire to which the military mainly responded in the way he describes habitually fell well short of the settlements.
The Israeli military employed draconian measures in Hebron during the peak of the intifada to protect the settlers – whose right to live in the city is not recognised in international law. These included imposition of curfews in the city centre (377 days in the first three years of the initifada), checkpoints (the UN counted more than 100 in the Israeli controlled sector of the city in 2005), comprehensive house-to- house searches in which Shaul says Palestinian families were sometimes locked into a single room while soldiers grabbed some sleep elsewhere in the house, and a refusal to intervene in many cases when settlers attacked or threw stones at local Palestinians.
According to a report earlier this year from the two most respected Israeli human-rights organisations, B'Tselem and the Association of Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), "violence, arbitrary house searches, seizure of houses, harassment, detaining passers-by, and humiliating treatment have become part of daily reality for Palestinians and have led many of them to move to safer places". And while armed violence has significantly reduced inside the city, most of the restrictions on movement within the area of the settlements have remained. Shaul draws comparisons with other West Bank cities. "Does the IDF [Israeli Defence Force] have posts inside Nablus all the time? No. Inside Jericho? No. Inside Hebron? Yes. Why? Because you have the settlements here. H1 [the outer area of Hebron] is like all the rest of the Palestinian cities and H2 [the centre] is a ghost town; it's missing from the frame."
After a 13-year-old process of closures and segregation which began – ironically – with the Goldstein attack on Palestinians in the mosque, and continued through the intifada, there are now 304 closed shops and warehouses – 218 of them shut down by military order. The whole of the "sterile zone" protecting the settlements is closed to Palestinian vehicles. And the central section of Shuhada Street is closed to Palestinian pedestrians, except for four families who still live on this once densely populated but now desolate artery. The term used by B'Tselem and ACRI for the steady Palestinian depopulation of the area is "enforced eviction". Jan Kristiansen, a former head of the (already decade-old) Temporary International Presence in Hebron, described it as "ethnic cleansing".
An internal 2003 report produced by the Israel Defence Forces's civil administration cited a lengthy series of legal violations – mainly damage, break-ins and seizure of Palestinian property – by Hebron's Jewish settlers as they "consistently and systematically" worked to "establish and expand" their colony. "The leadership selects a target and broadcasts it a number of ways. Youths/teenagers burgle the building and even if they are driven away in the beginning, they eventually succeed. Youths/teenagers empty/burn the contents ... They enter through a common wall/the yard/narrow passageway between the properties without being noticed and begin to settle in." Adding that the activities of Jews in Hebron can be described as "if carried out under the protection of the Israeli regime", the report added: "The State of Israel looks very bad with regard to the rule of law in Hebron."
In December 2006, ACRI challenged the ban on pedestrians using much of Shuhada Street, pointing out that it had not been sanctioned by a written military order. The Army agreed it was indeed a mistake and issued a directive cancelling the prohibition. Some prominent local Palestinians were allowed to walk along the street after detention and body searches, and with a substantial military escort. Within a week the Palestinians were again told they were not allowed to use the route.
"We have a few hundred settlers there," says Shaul. "We don't even question it. They are Israeli citizens and they deserve protection, just like people in Tel Aviv. To give them the protection, we take a lot of things into consideration – we have geography, we have a budget, large numbers of soldiers – but there's one thing we won't take into consideration, and that's 166,000 Palestinians around here. This is the problem of Hebron. Only in this way can you close what used to be the main street for 60 years and then say it was a mistake and continue this mistake."
But, for Shaul, Hebron is also a paradigm of the wider West Bank, almost 40 per cent of which is now reserved for the settlers, along with the military apparatus and the roads – in many cases prohibited to Palestinians – that serve them. "If you zoom out of Hebron, if you look at the segregation, the methods, the tactics, Hebron is like the laboratory where things are tested before being used outside."
Another milestone in the long journey that led Shaul towards this point began early in his Army service. Shaul explains that the seminal historic event in every settler child's early education is the 1929 massacre during the riots against Jewish immigration to Palestine, when 67 Jews were slaughtered on a single day – though 435 survived after being sheltered by their Arab neighbours. And then he recalls how he saw an elderly Palestinian woman coming down from the hillside neighbourhood of Abu Snena to be greeted by settler children throwing stones at her. "I said to a child of about 10, 'What do you think you are doing?' He said, 'Do you know what this woman did in 1929?'"
We are now walking – a privilege exclusive to Israelis and foreigners – along Shuhada Street, past the abandoned stalls of the market area, illegally occupied by eight settler families from Avram Avinu after a Palestinian sniper killed a 10-month-old settler baby, Shalhevet Pass, in 2001. The settlers were finally issued with eviction orders in January 2006 – but then agreed to leave voluntarily after a remarkable deal with the Army under which they would be allowed to return after a few months. The deal was later overruled by Israel's Attorney General Menachem Mazuz.
As we pass to the left, leaving a manned Israeli checkpoint to the right, we come to the surreal lane where two Palestinian families still live amid a dozen settler families. We walk past the Abu Ayesha house, protected by wire mesh from the stones and garbage frequently thrown at it by the settlers. It was against this wire mesh that Jewish settler Yifat Alkobi pressed her face while repeatedly hissing "sharmuta" – whore – at her married Palestinian neighbour. The scene was caught in a video recording given to B'Tselem which shocked many Israeli viewers when it was shown on prime-time TV last January – including Tommy Lapid, the former Israeli Justice Minister who lost many of his family in the Holocaust. "In the years that preceded the Holocaust," he wrote, "behind shuttered windows hid terrified Jewish women, exactly like the Arab woman of the Abu-Ayesha family in Hebron." And where, according to testimony given by Taysir Abu Ayesha, Baruch Marzel broke into the house with 10 other settlers in the winter of 2002, beat him and attempted to drag him into the road before he was rescued by his stick-brandishing father.
And then we arrive at the end of the street and the home of Hani Abu Heikel, whose family was one of those who sheltered more than 400 of the Jews who survived the 1929 massacre. He says that the settlers from the neighbouring Al Bakri house have attacked his house with water pipes in the night, that his car has been attacked and burned four times and that in June most of the trees in the olive grove next to his house were ruined by being set on fire. When his son suggested to soldiers – some of whom, on this occasion, helped put the fire out – that they could identify the culprits by means of the ubiquitous cameras, he was told, says Mr Abu Heikel, that the cameras were for "security" – for the settlers' security, that is. The Abu Heikel family, a fixture of the Yehuda Shaul tours, are as pleased to see him as the settlers are displeased. "Yehuda, Yehuda," two-and-a-half-year-old Yara Abu Heikel shouts excitedly. The fact that Yehuda brings Israelis to the house has been, says Abu Heikel, especially valuable for his children. "I welcome it," he says. "I want them to know that the Israelis are not just the settlers. I wanted to show them that there are Jews who are not in conflict with us."
A tour round the inner city with a senior Israeli military official gives a very different take on Hebron from Shaul's. The official, who insists on anonymity, argues that while Palestinians are restricted in only three per cent of the city, Israelis are either barred or heavily restricted in the other 97 per cent. While ACRI and B'Tselem pointed out that a resident of the Old City wanting to cross one side of Shuhada Street to the other needs to go round the entire city centre and pass through a number of checkpoints, the Army insists that the restrictions on pedestrian movement in the city are "minimal". As for vehicles, the Army says that those carrying supplies like construction materials are allowed through with prior authorisation and that the required detours add only 10 minutes to the journey for Palestinians. The official stresses that the closures are needed for security reasons and insists, "I am responsible for the lives of Palestinians and Israelis. I am not just in charge of the Israelis."
This, of course, goes to the heart of the question of who bears the real burden of keeping the settlers safe. In the words of the ACRI/B'Tselem report, "Israeli law-enforcement authorities and security forces have made the entire Palestinian population pay the price for protecting Israeli settlement in the city." In doing so, it caused "the economic collapse of the centre of Hebron and drove many Palestinians out of the area." The Army repeatedly – and rightly – points out "that the rights of Israeli citizens to live in the city have been authorised by the decisions of the Israeli government." The military official says, moreover, that since the Goldstein massacre, which he adds was a "horrible thing" which brought "shame to the Jewish people all over the world", the principal "targets" of violence here have been not Palestinians but Israelis. "Since 1994 until today Israelis have been targeted by all the organisations of terror," he concludes.
Certainly, since the beginning of the intifada, Palestinian militants have killed 17 members of the security forces and five civilians – including 10-month-old Shalhevet Pass, shot by a Palestinian sniper in 2001. In Hebron as a whole, according to the ACRI/B'Tselem report, the security forces killed 88 Palestinians in the same period "at least 46 of whom (including nine minors) were not taking part in hostilities at the time they were killed". In addition two Palestinians were killed by settlers, one of them 14-year-old Nasseem Jamjoum, gunned down at her home by settlers in 2003 on the rampage after the shooting of a soldier/settler outside the city. No one was indicted for that shooting.
The official says that because "Hamas terror is strong" in the area, the soldiers consist of "the best units in the Israeli Army" – inevitably trained to defeat the militants rather than to keep the peace between civilian populations, But despite the human-rights groups' well-documented charge that soldiers repeatedly fail to intervene when an Israeli attacks a Palestinian or his property, the army insists that soldiers are under orders to do so. In general, the military official says, violent incidents between Palestinians and Israelis have fallen 50 per cent in 2006-07 from the level in 2003-04.
The official insists – rightly – that the decision about whether to allow settlements in Hebron is a matter for the politicians and not the military. But he is also clearly sympathetic to the argument that the Jews had a right after the Six Day War to reclaim property that had been historically Jewish. On the subject of the progressive takeover of Arab property since 1967, he repeatedly draws a distinction – not recognised in international law – between property that was historically Jewish and property that wasn't. He points, for example, to the Beit Hadassah settlement (which was taken over by settlers in 1979 though even Menachem Begin, the right-wing Likud Prime Minister at the time, was strongly opposed to the move). "This was a hospital that served all the neighbourhood, Jews and Muslims, until most of the staff were killed in the 1929 massacre," says the military official. "When Germany gave back property which had been taken from Jews, people in Israel were very proud," he says. "If we hadn't had the war in 1967 the emotion about recovering the property [in Hebron] would be the same."
For Yehuda Shaul, however, that argument – that there were always Jews in Hebron in the past – is no different from that of the "right of return" to Israel claimed by the families of Palestinian refugees who were forced to flee their homes in what is now Israel during the war of 1948, a claim consistently rejected by both Israel and the international community. And the argument that alternative routes, however tiresome, exist for Palestinians to the one through the old city centre of Hebron is as tenable as if "you said to people in West Jerusalem, you can no longer use Mahane Yehuda [the main Jewish market in the city] and Jaffa Street [the main artery of Jewish West Jerusalem]; you are going to have to go round it."
Nor is he impressed, as a religious Jew, by the argument that the settlers are needed to establish the right of Jews to pray at the Tomb of the Patriarchs. While even some Palestinians have suggested that in the event of a Palestinian State there could be guaranteed "safe passage" for those Jews who would want to pray at the Tomb, Shaul doubts that would be realistic, pointing out that no such permission existed before the occupation. Instead he suggests the price being paid is too high simply to "control the city of the patriarchs" and to allow access to the Tomb for the minority of religious Jews who use it now. "All this was done on the back of thousands of Palestinians who were more or less expelled from their lives," he says. "This is not Jewish. I'm an Israeli, I'm a Jew and I care what my society looks like, about what are the values that are at the heart of my country. And Hebron is a huge problem for my society and my country. There is a clear plan to cause the Arab population to leave the centre of Hebron."
Shaul doesn't for a moment deny the threat to settlers and soldiers. "You don't have to teach me about security problems," he tells today's visitors about his period serving in the city. "Hebron was a very dangerous place. Israelis were killed. But what we are doing on this tour is asking: what are the red lines we cannot cross?" David Wilder retorts: "His red line is that we shouldn't be here."
Many – possibly even a majority – of Israelis would indeed agree that the settlers should not be in Hebron. After the Goldstein massacre, Yitzhak Rabin wanted to expel them but was advised that it was politically impossible. Shaul does not use his tours to urge the withdrawal of the settlements from Hebron. Instead, "We just ask them: 'What do you think? You saw the price in human rights, in morality, in the lack of law, the price that Palestinians pay for 800 settlers in the heart of their city. And you saw the price the Israeli regime pays and Israeli society pays for running this place and you have to decide for yourself.'"
The Independent Saturday, 26 January 2008
Close to the Tomb of the Patriarchs, the site holy to both Muslims and Jews in Hebron's city centre, Yehuda Shaul, a religious Israeli who served in an elite Army combat unit in the city during the worst of the Palestinian uprising, is trying to guide a tour round four Jewish settlements in the heart of an overwhelmingly Arab city.
It starts in Shuhada Street, which runs through what is now the settlers' security zone, the rows of empty Palestinian shops and houses boarded up with steel shutters, many daubed with Stars of David to show who is in charge here. The only permitted vehicles are those of the settlers and the Israeli military.
Shaul is seeking to demonstrate to his visitors that the settlements and the formidable military apparatus which protects them have violated the human rights of the Palestinians who live – or increasingly no longer live – in what was once the teeming Arab city centre.
But his every footstep is dogged by another religious Jew conducting a non-stop monologue designed to drown out Shaul's explanation of what his visitors are seeing. "Yehuda Shaul – he helps the Arabs," Baruch Marzel tells them, before making clear his view of the two-state peace deal with the Palestinians which the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, US President George Bush and a majority of the Israeli public say they want. "Do you think if there is going to be an agreement that you will be allowed to pray at this tomb? Only because there are Jews living here can you visit the tomb. He isn't telling you about the 40 terrorist attacks there have been on Jews here. You can visit our Hebron centre and learn the truth about Hebron, not the lies Yehuda Shaul is filling you with."
American-born Marzel – a man to whom the term "right-wing extremist" hardly does justice – had lain in wait for the tour bus near the grave of his fellow settler Baruch Goldstein, who walked into a mosque at the tomb in 1994 with an automatic assault rifle and shot dead 29 Palestinians as they prayed. Marzel, who has a police record for attacks on Palestinians, was a prominent figure in the far right Kach group which was designated a "terrorist" organisation in both Israel and the US after issuing a statement praising the Goldstein massacre. Seven years ago, Marzel held a macabre graveside commemoration for Goldstein, who had been lynched by enraged survivors after the attack. It was a "big party", Marzel said, to mark the anniversary of Goldstein being "murdered by the Arabs" – a somewhat incomplete account of the day in question.
Shaul struggles to conduct his tour against Marzel's noisy filibuster. At one point, Shaul walks across the street to a watching senior police officer and asks him to move Marzel on; the officer replies, "You can carry on. He's not stopping you." When Shaul then turns to Marzel himself and tells him quietly: "You are disturbing us, please can you move?" Marzel replies defiantly: "No. This my house."
This tense little scene underlines – in miniature – one of the looming obstacles facing the current Israeli-Palestinian talks in the wake of this month's visit by President Bush. It is impossible to imagine any final peace deal which does not put Hebron – 12 miles east of the "green line" that marked Israel's eastern border until the Six Day War, and the site of some of the first Jewish settlements on Palestinian land which followed that victory – in the heart of a Palestinian state. When Marzel says "this is my house" it is an understated but forceful reminder that the Hebron settlers may prove the toughest to remove – as they would surely have to be if the occupation is ever to end – of any in the West Bank.
Marzel is not alone in stalking Shaul. Enjoying the sport alongside him is Ofer Ohanna, the settlement security officer, who on a previous visit has goaded Shaul about a recent haircut. Noticing that the (heterosexual) Shaul had sheared off the pony tail which, along with his beard, black velvet kippa (or skullcap) and habitual sandals, has – ironically – long served to make him look like the more hippyish kind of settler, Ohanna had told him he had done it because "your boyfriend wouldn't go to bed with you if you didn't cut it off". Today, another prominent settler, Moshe Ben Batat, marches up to Shaul and demands more chillingly the date of his "mother's remembrance day" because "your mother threw you out of the house and committed suicide". (One – and only one – part of this is true. Shaul's mother did commit suicide, but during a post-natal depression – when Shaul was four years old.) Later still, the vociferous group of Shaul-stalkers is joined by David Wilder, the US-born spokesman of the Hebron settlers. Saying that Shaul's tours are "very dangerous", he adds that Shaul "feeds the enemy and plays into their hands" by criticising the settlers. Wilder sums up his view of Shaul: "Hamas with a kippa."
The man who attracts such hatred from the Hebron settlers has, at only 24, already led a remarkable life. He was described by the celebrated Peruvian writer Mario Vargas Llosa, to whom he acted as a guide in the city two years ago, as "one of the righteous this country has". He was a co-founder of Breaking the Silence, the growing group of dissident ex-soldiers – the core of whom served in Hebron at the peak of the intifada like him – who have testified on the persistent abuses they say the military has committed during the years of warfare.
Stationed in Bethlehem in the last few weeks of his military service he had "an enlightened moment" in which he says he began to understand what one of the group's later publications would call the "terrible moral price" exacted by the occupation from the young soldiers who serve in the West Bank and Gaza. Then and over the time that followed, Shaul began to find himself "in the very terrifying place [where] there is no justification for 90 per cent of the actions you took part in".
Since then he has become a political guide to, and activist in, the part of Hebron which was once its Arab commercial and cultural heart but which is now overwhelmingly dominated by the presence of 800 Jewish settlers. He has conducted or organised more than 200 tours of Israelis – including school and college students in their year before Army service – and foreigners. Last October, he and another ex-combat soldier, Avichai Sharon, briefed the international Middle East envoy Tony Blair on the daunting problems of inner-city Hebron.
To understand what led him to this unusual vocation, you have to climb with Shaul to look over the Palestinian city from a vantage point close to the old Jewish cemetery. As the afternoon muezzins ring out from the mosques, Shaul points out the red-roofed house where his unit's snipers and machine gunners were posted after giving the Palestinian family who lived in it half an hour to leave. At the peak of the intifada in 2002-03, with Palestinian gunmen using mainly assault rifles to shoot towards the settlements to their south at night, the Israeli soldiers were firing back grenades from machine guns.
"A grenade is not a bullet," Shaul explains. "It hits something and explodes, kills everyone in a radius of eight metres and injures everyone in a radius of 16. Secondly a machine gun is not an accurate weapon. You aim it a bit to the left and a bit to the right. If you're a real good operator you'll probably hit your target the fifth time."
Briefed initially by his platoon commander on the task, Shaul says he "freaked out. You still have a sense of a mission, of black and white, and I'm like, 'What's going on here? I'm supposed to shoot grenades into a city where people live?' The first night, you aim in the area of the target and you pull the trigger and you let it go as fast as you could and inside you're praying that the least amount of grenades were fired because if you pull the trigger for a minute around 60 grenades are out."
But as the week wore on, he says, it became "the exciting moment of the day. You're bored. You're stuck in this house. You don't go out. You play it like a video game with your joy-stick on top of the city – boom, boom, boom."
Shaul has no direct evidence of casualties from the salvos he fired – the "worst thing I did" – though he assumes there must have been injuries at the very least. It is something "you would prefer not to think about". And, yes, Palestinian snipers did indeed claim the lives of Jewish victims from the settlements – five since 2000. But Shaul says that the fire to which the military mainly responded in the way he describes habitually fell well short of the settlements.
The Israeli military employed draconian measures in Hebron during the peak of the intifada to protect the settlers – whose right to live in the city is not recognised in international law. These included imposition of curfews in the city centre (377 days in the first three years of the initifada), checkpoints (the UN counted more than 100 in the Israeli controlled sector of the city in 2005), comprehensive house-to- house searches in which Shaul says Palestinian families were sometimes locked into a single room while soldiers grabbed some sleep elsewhere in the house, and a refusal to intervene in many cases when settlers attacked or threw stones at local Palestinians.
According to a report earlier this year from the two most respected Israeli human-rights organisations, B'Tselem and the Association of Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), "violence, arbitrary house searches, seizure of houses, harassment, detaining passers-by, and humiliating treatment have become part of daily reality for Palestinians and have led many of them to move to safer places". And while armed violence has significantly reduced inside the city, most of the restrictions on movement within the area of the settlements have remained. Shaul draws comparisons with other West Bank cities. "Does the IDF [Israeli Defence Force] have posts inside Nablus all the time? No. Inside Jericho? No. Inside Hebron? Yes. Why? Because you have the settlements here. H1 [the outer area of Hebron] is like all the rest of the Palestinian cities and H2 [the centre] is a ghost town; it's missing from the frame."
After a 13-year-old process of closures and segregation which began – ironically – with the Goldstein attack on Palestinians in the mosque, and continued through the intifada, there are now 304 closed shops and warehouses – 218 of them shut down by military order. The whole of the "sterile zone" protecting the settlements is closed to Palestinian vehicles. And the central section of Shuhada Street is closed to Palestinian pedestrians, except for four families who still live on this once densely populated but now desolate artery. The term used by B'Tselem and ACRI for the steady Palestinian depopulation of the area is "enforced eviction". Jan Kristiansen, a former head of the (already decade-old) Temporary International Presence in Hebron, described it as "ethnic cleansing".
An internal 2003 report produced by the Israel Defence Forces's civil administration cited a lengthy series of legal violations – mainly damage, break-ins and seizure of Palestinian property – by Hebron's Jewish settlers as they "consistently and systematically" worked to "establish and expand" their colony. "The leadership selects a target and broadcasts it a number of ways. Youths/teenagers burgle the building and even if they are driven away in the beginning, they eventually succeed. Youths/teenagers empty/burn the contents ... They enter through a common wall/the yard/narrow passageway between the properties without being noticed and begin to settle in." Adding that the activities of Jews in Hebron can be described as "if carried out under the protection of the Israeli regime", the report added: "The State of Israel looks very bad with regard to the rule of law in Hebron."
In December 2006, ACRI challenged the ban on pedestrians using much of Shuhada Street, pointing out that it had not been sanctioned by a written military order. The Army agreed it was indeed a mistake and issued a directive cancelling the prohibition. Some prominent local Palestinians were allowed to walk along the street after detention and body searches, and with a substantial military escort. Within a week the Palestinians were again told they were not allowed to use the route.
"We have a few hundred settlers there," says Shaul. "We don't even question it. They are Israeli citizens and they deserve protection, just like people in Tel Aviv. To give them the protection, we take a lot of things into consideration – we have geography, we have a budget, large numbers of soldiers – but there's one thing we won't take into consideration, and that's 166,000 Palestinians around here. This is the problem of Hebron. Only in this way can you close what used to be the main street for 60 years and then say it was a mistake and continue this mistake."
But, for Shaul, Hebron is also a paradigm of the wider West Bank, almost 40 per cent of which is now reserved for the settlers, along with the military apparatus and the roads – in many cases prohibited to Palestinians – that serve them. "If you zoom out of Hebron, if you look at the segregation, the methods, the tactics, Hebron is like the laboratory where things are tested before being used outside."
Another milestone in the long journey that led Shaul towards this point began early in his Army service. Shaul explains that the seminal historic event in every settler child's early education is the 1929 massacre during the riots against Jewish immigration to Palestine, when 67 Jews were slaughtered on a single day – though 435 survived after being sheltered by their Arab neighbours. And then he recalls how he saw an elderly Palestinian woman coming down from the hillside neighbourhood of Abu Snena to be greeted by settler children throwing stones at her. "I said to a child of about 10, 'What do you think you are doing?' He said, 'Do you know what this woman did in 1929?'"
We are now walking – a privilege exclusive to Israelis and foreigners – along Shuhada Street, past the abandoned stalls of the market area, illegally occupied by eight settler families from Avram Avinu after a Palestinian sniper killed a 10-month-old settler baby, Shalhevet Pass, in 2001. The settlers were finally issued with eviction orders in January 2006 – but then agreed to leave voluntarily after a remarkable deal with the Army under which they would be allowed to return after a few months. The deal was later overruled by Israel's Attorney General Menachem Mazuz.
As we pass to the left, leaving a manned Israeli checkpoint to the right, we come to the surreal lane where two Palestinian families still live amid a dozen settler families. We walk past the Abu Ayesha house, protected by wire mesh from the stones and garbage frequently thrown at it by the settlers. It was against this wire mesh that Jewish settler Yifat Alkobi pressed her face while repeatedly hissing "sharmuta" – whore – at her married Palestinian neighbour. The scene was caught in a video recording given to B'Tselem which shocked many Israeli viewers when it was shown on prime-time TV last January – including Tommy Lapid, the former Israeli Justice Minister who lost many of his family in the Holocaust. "In the years that preceded the Holocaust," he wrote, "behind shuttered windows hid terrified Jewish women, exactly like the Arab woman of the Abu-Ayesha family in Hebron." And where, according to testimony given by Taysir Abu Ayesha, Baruch Marzel broke into the house with 10 other settlers in the winter of 2002, beat him and attempted to drag him into the road before he was rescued by his stick-brandishing father.
And then we arrive at the end of the street and the home of Hani Abu Heikel, whose family was one of those who sheltered more than 400 of the Jews who survived the 1929 massacre. He says that the settlers from the neighbouring Al Bakri house have attacked his house with water pipes in the night, that his car has been attacked and burned four times and that in June most of the trees in the olive grove next to his house were ruined by being set on fire. When his son suggested to soldiers – some of whom, on this occasion, helped put the fire out – that they could identify the culprits by means of the ubiquitous cameras, he was told, says Mr Abu Heikel, that the cameras were for "security" – for the settlers' security, that is. The Abu Heikel family, a fixture of the Yehuda Shaul tours, are as pleased to see him as the settlers are displeased. "Yehuda, Yehuda," two-and-a-half-year-old Yara Abu Heikel shouts excitedly. The fact that Yehuda brings Israelis to the house has been, says Abu Heikel, especially valuable for his children. "I welcome it," he says. "I want them to know that the Israelis are not just the settlers. I wanted to show them that there are Jews who are not in conflict with us."
A tour round the inner city with a senior Israeli military official gives a very different take on Hebron from Shaul's. The official, who insists on anonymity, argues that while Palestinians are restricted in only three per cent of the city, Israelis are either barred or heavily restricted in the other 97 per cent. While ACRI and B'Tselem pointed out that a resident of the Old City wanting to cross one side of Shuhada Street to the other needs to go round the entire city centre and pass through a number of checkpoints, the Army insists that the restrictions on pedestrian movement in the city are "minimal". As for vehicles, the Army says that those carrying supplies like construction materials are allowed through with prior authorisation and that the required detours add only 10 minutes to the journey for Palestinians. The official stresses that the closures are needed for security reasons and insists, "I am responsible for the lives of Palestinians and Israelis. I am not just in charge of the Israelis."
This, of course, goes to the heart of the question of who bears the real burden of keeping the settlers safe. In the words of the ACRI/B'Tselem report, "Israeli law-enforcement authorities and security forces have made the entire Palestinian population pay the price for protecting Israeli settlement in the city." In doing so, it caused "the economic collapse of the centre of Hebron and drove many Palestinians out of the area." The Army repeatedly – and rightly – points out "that the rights of Israeli citizens to live in the city have been authorised by the decisions of the Israeli government." The military official says, moreover, that since the Goldstein massacre, which he adds was a "horrible thing" which brought "shame to the Jewish people all over the world", the principal "targets" of violence here have been not Palestinians but Israelis. "Since 1994 until today Israelis have been targeted by all the organisations of terror," he concludes.
Certainly, since the beginning of the intifada, Palestinian militants have killed 17 members of the security forces and five civilians – including 10-month-old Shalhevet Pass, shot by a Palestinian sniper in 2001. In Hebron as a whole, according to the ACRI/B'Tselem report, the security forces killed 88 Palestinians in the same period "at least 46 of whom (including nine minors) were not taking part in hostilities at the time they were killed". In addition two Palestinians were killed by settlers, one of them 14-year-old Nasseem Jamjoum, gunned down at her home by settlers in 2003 on the rampage after the shooting of a soldier/settler outside the city. No one was indicted for that shooting.
The official says that because "Hamas terror is strong" in the area, the soldiers consist of "the best units in the Israeli Army" – inevitably trained to defeat the militants rather than to keep the peace between civilian populations, But despite the human-rights groups' well-documented charge that soldiers repeatedly fail to intervene when an Israeli attacks a Palestinian or his property, the army insists that soldiers are under orders to do so. In general, the military official says, violent incidents between Palestinians and Israelis have fallen 50 per cent in 2006-07 from the level in 2003-04.
The official insists – rightly – that the decision about whether to allow settlements in Hebron is a matter for the politicians and not the military. But he is also clearly sympathetic to the argument that the Jews had a right after the Six Day War to reclaim property that had been historically Jewish. On the subject of the progressive takeover of Arab property since 1967, he repeatedly draws a distinction – not recognised in international law – between property that was historically Jewish and property that wasn't. He points, for example, to the Beit Hadassah settlement (which was taken over by settlers in 1979 though even Menachem Begin, the right-wing Likud Prime Minister at the time, was strongly opposed to the move). "This was a hospital that served all the neighbourhood, Jews and Muslims, until most of the staff were killed in the 1929 massacre," says the military official. "When Germany gave back property which had been taken from Jews, people in Israel were very proud," he says. "If we hadn't had the war in 1967 the emotion about recovering the property [in Hebron] would be the same."
For Yehuda Shaul, however, that argument – that there were always Jews in Hebron in the past – is no different from that of the "right of return" to Israel claimed by the families of Palestinian refugees who were forced to flee their homes in what is now Israel during the war of 1948, a claim consistently rejected by both Israel and the international community. And the argument that alternative routes, however tiresome, exist for Palestinians to the one through the old city centre of Hebron is as tenable as if "you said to people in West Jerusalem, you can no longer use Mahane Yehuda [the main Jewish market in the city] and Jaffa Street [the main artery of Jewish West Jerusalem]; you are going to have to go round it."
Nor is he impressed, as a religious Jew, by the argument that the settlers are needed to establish the right of Jews to pray at the Tomb of the Patriarchs. While even some Palestinians have suggested that in the event of a Palestinian State there could be guaranteed "safe passage" for those Jews who would want to pray at the Tomb, Shaul doubts that would be realistic, pointing out that no such permission existed before the occupation. Instead he suggests the price being paid is too high simply to "control the city of the patriarchs" and to allow access to the Tomb for the minority of religious Jews who use it now. "All this was done on the back of thousands of Palestinians who were more or less expelled from their lives," he says. "This is not Jewish. I'm an Israeli, I'm a Jew and I care what my society looks like, about what are the values that are at the heart of my country. And Hebron is a huge problem for my society and my country. There is a clear plan to cause the Arab population to leave the centre of Hebron."
Shaul doesn't for a moment deny the threat to settlers and soldiers. "You don't have to teach me about security problems," he tells today's visitors about his period serving in the city. "Hebron was a very dangerous place. Israelis were killed. But what we are doing on this tour is asking: what are the red lines we cannot cross?" David Wilder retorts: "His red line is that we shouldn't be here."
Many – possibly even a majority – of Israelis would indeed agree that the settlers should not be in Hebron. After the Goldstein massacre, Yitzhak Rabin wanted to expel them but was advised that it was politically impossible. Shaul does not use his tours to urge the withdrawal of the settlements from Hebron. Instead, "We just ask them: 'What do you think? You saw the price in human rights, in morality, in the lack of law, the price that Palestinians pay for 800 settlers in the heart of their city. And you saw the price the Israeli regime pays and Israeli society pays for running this place and you have to decide for yourself.'"
Stop bribing people to move to Israel
Haaretz Last update - 06:39 26/01/2008
Not in it for the money
By Daniel Orenstein
It's customary in Israel to receive a new arrival with a "baruch habah" ("welcome," but literally, "blessed be the one who has come"), to which the customary response is "baruch hanimtzah" ("blessed be the one who is [already] here"). As I read of the recent obsessive efforts by the Ministry of Absorption and private organizations to convince Israelis abroad and other Jews to come home, I keep repeating that latter phrase in my head. The Israeli government should be thinking about it as well. Last year, I returned to Israel with my family after six years in the United States. It was a purely ideological move: We wanted to be in Israel and be part of that sometimes seemingly anachronistic effort to create a progressive Jewish state. We happily accepted the minimal financial aid we were offered by the Ministry of Absorption (reduced-price tickets on El Al). Upon our return we were met with a barrage of bills: The National Insurance Institute wanted their NIS 4,000 in unpaid bills from the period we were abroad; the Israel Broadcasting Authority wanted another NIS 3,000 in TV fees from the years we were gone (we paid the first bill, but are appealing the second one). Furthermore, I will have to pay for private health insurance for the next 10 months. You may think I am noting these financial burdens simply to fulfill my national duty to complain, but my real point is that none of these deterred us. We want to live here.
I'm not alone. For various reasons, more than 10,000 American citizens immigrated to Israel between 2000 and 2006. Another 18,000 came from Europe (excluding the former Soviet Union) and 1,400 from Canada, New Zealand and Australia. In addition, 38,000 Israelis abroad decided to return to Israel between 2002 and 2005. In the absence of the specter of rampant anti-Semitism or economic collapse, we can assume they came because they were ideologically driven or they simply saw Israel as their home, and not because someone was paying them to move.
Migration experts speak in terms of "push and pull" factors that influence people. On the one hand, the place where they are may be increasingly unwelcoming - perhaps due to poverty, war, lack of opportunities and the like. On the other hand, it may be that immigrants are pulled by the lure of economic promise or of a better life for them and their children. When the combined push-and-pull factors overpower the justification for staying in situ, people pick up and move. Israelis move abroad (and nearly 100,000 did so between 2002 and 2005) for many reasons, although it's a safe assumption that most are seeking a better life - materially, spiritually, socially. Life in Israel, rewarding as it may be, is tense politically and is also expensive. On the international front, we continue to live in a constant state of conflict with the Palestinians and enemies further away. On the home front, we have a deteriorating education system and a health care system that is becoming increasingly expensive for citizens.
Israelis see promise overseas. In response, our Ministry of Absorption recently announced a plan to entice ex-pat Israelis to come home through a package of economic incentives - in particular, by eliminating some of the unexpected bills that greeted us when we arrived. Additionally, the private immigration advocacy group Nefesh B'Nefesh, funded by philanthropists and by the Israeli government, is offering Jewish doctors (MDs, not PhDs) $60,000 to move to Israel.
I am not asking to have those privileges extended to me and my cohort - those who moved here prior to the increased incentives package. On the contrary, I suggest we reconsider the incentives. And perhaps we can consider a slightly larger reapportionment of government largesse. By closing the Ministry of Absorption, we could disperse its NIS 1.4-billion budget to benefit Israelis who live here - immigrants and long-time residents alike. The Education Ministry could use the additional funds to raise the salaries of teachers and university professors. The Environment Ministry, which currently gets less than 15 percent of the budget that the Absorption Ministry has, could use the money to clean up our rivers, air and land. The Science Ministry, which gets only half what the Absorption Ministry does, could stimulate basic research and strengthen Israel's research and development prowess. And those $60,000 grants could go to local doctors and hospitals in appreciation of their service.
Since the immigration waves of the 1990s, which increased Israel's population by more than 20 percent in less than a decade, there is scarcely a responsibility belonging to the Absorption Ministry that couldn't reasonably be reassigned to a different ministry. We have a Foreign Ministry that can represent us abroad. We have ministries of health, welfare, housing and education that can also tend to the special needs of new immigrants.
For added benefit, these ministries cater to the needs of all Israelis (Jewish, Muslim and Christian), and thus they need not be part of a discriminatory governmental system in which, under the code "immigrant," Israel's Jewish citizens get preferential treatment over its Arab ones. Stop pandering to the Israelis who have decided to seek their fortunes abroad, or to Jews who are happy where they currently live. We can show them some respect for their decision - and some self-respect as well. By investing in those who live here, we will not only weaken the "push" factors that may cause future generations of Israelis to leave, but we will strengthen the "pull" factors that will bring Israeli ex-pats and other potential immigrants to Israel. They will come, not for a bribe, but for quality of life, education, social services and a clean environment. Always bless and welcome those who come. But invest in those who are here.
Daniel Orenstein is a postdoctoral fellow at the Technion Faculty of Architecture and Town Planning and a lecturer at the Arava Institute for Environmental Studies.
Not in it for the money
By Daniel Orenstein
It's customary in Israel to receive a new arrival with a "baruch habah" ("welcome," but literally, "blessed be the one who has come"), to which the customary response is "baruch hanimtzah" ("blessed be the one who is [already] here"). As I read of the recent obsessive efforts by the Ministry of Absorption and private organizations to convince Israelis abroad and other Jews to come home, I keep repeating that latter phrase in my head. The Israeli government should be thinking about it as well. Last year, I returned to Israel with my family after six years in the United States. It was a purely ideological move: We wanted to be in Israel and be part of that sometimes seemingly anachronistic effort to create a progressive Jewish state. We happily accepted the minimal financial aid we were offered by the Ministry of Absorption (reduced-price tickets on El Al). Upon our return we were met with a barrage of bills: The National Insurance Institute wanted their NIS 4,000 in unpaid bills from the period we were abroad; the Israel Broadcasting Authority wanted another NIS 3,000 in TV fees from the years we were gone (we paid the first bill, but are appealing the second one). Furthermore, I will have to pay for private health insurance for the next 10 months. You may think I am noting these financial burdens simply to fulfill my national duty to complain, but my real point is that none of these deterred us. We want to live here.
I'm not alone. For various reasons, more than 10,000 American citizens immigrated to Israel between 2000 and 2006. Another 18,000 came from Europe (excluding the former Soviet Union) and 1,400 from Canada, New Zealand and Australia. In addition, 38,000 Israelis abroad decided to return to Israel between 2002 and 2005. In the absence of the specter of rampant anti-Semitism or economic collapse, we can assume they came because they were ideologically driven or they simply saw Israel as their home, and not because someone was paying them to move.
Migration experts speak in terms of "push and pull" factors that influence people. On the one hand, the place where they are may be increasingly unwelcoming - perhaps due to poverty, war, lack of opportunities and the like. On the other hand, it may be that immigrants are pulled by the lure of economic promise or of a better life for them and their children. When the combined push-and-pull factors overpower the justification for staying in situ, people pick up and move. Israelis move abroad (and nearly 100,000 did so between 2002 and 2005) for many reasons, although it's a safe assumption that most are seeking a better life - materially, spiritually, socially. Life in Israel, rewarding as it may be, is tense politically and is also expensive. On the international front, we continue to live in a constant state of conflict with the Palestinians and enemies further away. On the home front, we have a deteriorating education system and a health care system that is becoming increasingly expensive for citizens.
Israelis see promise overseas. In response, our Ministry of Absorption recently announced a plan to entice ex-pat Israelis to come home through a package of economic incentives - in particular, by eliminating some of the unexpected bills that greeted us when we arrived. Additionally, the private immigration advocacy group Nefesh B'Nefesh, funded by philanthropists and by the Israeli government, is offering Jewish doctors (MDs, not PhDs) $60,000 to move to Israel.
I am not asking to have those privileges extended to me and my cohort - those who moved here prior to the increased incentives package. On the contrary, I suggest we reconsider the incentives. And perhaps we can consider a slightly larger reapportionment of government largesse. By closing the Ministry of Absorption, we could disperse its NIS 1.4-billion budget to benefit Israelis who live here - immigrants and long-time residents alike. The Education Ministry could use the additional funds to raise the salaries of teachers and university professors. The Environment Ministry, which currently gets less than 15 percent of the budget that the Absorption Ministry has, could use the money to clean up our rivers, air and land. The Science Ministry, which gets only half what the Absorption Ministry does, could stimulate basic research and strengthen Israel's research and development prowess. And those $60,000 grants could go to local doctors and hospitals in appreciation of their service.
Since the immigration waves of the 1990s, which increased Israel's population by more than 20 percent in less than a decade, there is scarcely a responsibility belonging to the Absorption Ministry that couldn't reasonably be reassigned to a different ministry. We have a Foreign Ministry that can represent us abroad. We have ministries of health, welfare, housing and education that can also tend to the special needs of new immigrants.
For added benefit, these ministries cater to the needs of all Israelis (Jewish, Muslim and Christian), and thus they need not be part of a discriminatory governmental system in which, under the code "immigrant," Israel's Jewish citizens get preferential treatment over its Arab ones. Stop pandering to the Israelis who have decided to seek their fortunes abroad, or to Jews who are happy where they currently live. We can show them some respect for their decision - and some self-respect as well. By investing in those who live here, we will not only weaken the "push" factors that may cause future generations of Israelis to leave, but we will strengthen the "pull" factors that will bring Israeli ex-pats and other potential immigrants to Israel. They will come, not for a bribe, but for quality of life, education, social services and a clean environment. Always bless and welcome those who come. But invest in those who are here.
Daniel Orenstein is a postdoctoral fellow at the Technion Faculty of Architecture and Town Planning and a lecturer at the Arava Institute for Environmental Studies.
jeudi 24 janvier 2008
Rebranding the left - a worrying trend towards a bi-national state, by Rami Livni
By Rami Livni
Haaretz 24.1.2008
A worrying change has been evolving among the Israeli left in recent years. The traditional peace-camp solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - two nations, two states - has fallen out of favor, and its supporters' ranks have dwindled. Instead, other voices have been advocating, with increasing confidence, a single bi-national state. The two-state option is increasingly seen as anachronistic, conservative, overly Zionist and unjust. At the very least, it is seen as an option that has lost its formerly exciting, subversive spirit. The one-state advocates still don't have a joint program or political front, but the balance within the left is changing. The peace organizations' conference in Madrid exploded last month after radical leftist activists refused to sit in the same hall with Peace Now representatives, claiming they were "an arm of the occupation." They drafted a document focusing on the one-state principle.
The drift toward one state is obvious in the Arab leadership in Israel. The Arab legal organization Adalah has recently revoked its traditional stand and called for the creation of a single constitutional state between the Jordan and the sea. Even Hadash is drawing away de facto from the two-state idea. It is not advocating one state, but it has tucked away what until recently used to be its historical banner. It would be a mistake to underestimate this process, with the claim that it involves Arabs and a handful of people on Sheinkin and at Tel Aviv University. Even if this idea's supporters are a minority, they are affecting the left-wing's discourse, re-demarcating the borders of what is "just" and "moral" and damaging the sense of justice and inner conviction of a wider left-wing circle. Granted, even people in the political center, the prime minister and those further right, are already talking about a Palestinian state and dividing Israel, but it is not clear if they are committed to implementing the two-state plan or are merely being dragged toward it due to changing circumstances. If the two states for two nations vision loses its active, dedicated public of supporters - its activist, ideological engine - its implementation is in danger. Therefore the two-state solution must regain its inner justification, vitality and moral urgency - or in marketing jargon, it must be rebranded. For only this concept will bring about a radical change in the lives of Israelis and Palestinians. Its justification derives from being realistic. Advocating one state does nothing more than support the status quo - perpetuating occupation and suffering. The two-state solution is not only more practical, but more just and moral as well. It is unjust to deny the Jews self-definition in their own state, and immoral to deny the Palestinians self-definition in theirs. Sovereignty, borders, an ethnic-based national identity and an independent government for each nation is the right political order. This is the outline of the historic compromise between the two nations, and the natural and just evolution of the two national movements. It may appear like a paradox, but only national identity can be a positive force that would save both nations from eternal war. Only an independent Palestinian state, even on a small territory, not a binational state, could channel its people's energies to build a thriving society, a source of identification for Palestinians inside and outside it. Only such a state would tell the Palestinians' national narrative and process the Nakba memory constructively. It would provide a solution for the Palestinians' identity crisis, which was created following the 1948 war, and end the anomaly of the Palestinian existence without a homeland.
The writer is a journalist.
Haaretz 24.1.2008
A worrying change has been evolving among the Israeli left in recent years. The traditional peace-camp solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - two nations, two states - has fallen out of favor, and its supporters' ranks have dwindled. Instead, other voices have been advocating, with increasing confidence, a single bi-national state. The two-state option is increasingly seen as anachronistic, conservative, overly Zionist and unjust. At the very least, it is seen as an option that has lost its formerly exciting, subversive spirit. The one-state advocates still don't have a joint program or political front, but the balance within the left is changing. The peace organizations' conference in Madrid exploded last month after radical leftist activists refused to sit in the same hall with Peace Now representatives, claiming they were "an arm of the occupation." They drafted a document focusing on the one-state principle.
The drift toward one state is obvious in the Arab leadership in Israel. The Arab legal organization Adalah has recently revoked its traditional stand and called for the creation of a single constitutional state between the Jordan and the sea. Even Hadash is drawing away de facto from the two-state idea. It is not advocating one state, but it has tucked away what until recently used to be its historical banner. It would be a mistake to underestimate this process, with the claim that it involves Arabs and a handful of people on Sheinkin and at Tel Aviv University. Even if this idea's supporters are a minority, they are affecting the left-wing's discourse, re-demarcating the borders of what is "just" and "moral" and damaging the sense of justice and inner conviction of a wider left-wing circle. Granted, even people in the political center, the prime minister and those further right, are already talking about a Palestinian state and dividing Israel, but it is not clear if they are committed to implementing the two-state plan or are merely being dragged toward it due to changing circumstances. If the two states for two nations vision loses its active, dedicated public of supporters - its activist, ideological engine - its implementation is in danger. Therefore the two-state solution must regain its inner justification, vitality and moral urgency - or in marketing jargon, it must be rebranded. For only this concept will bring about a radical change in the lives of Israelis and Palestinians. Its justification derives from being realistic. Advocating one state does nothing more than support the status quo - perpetuating occupation and suffering. The two-state solution is not only more practical, but more just and moral as well. It is unjust to deny the Jews self-definition in their own state, and immoral to deny the Palestinians self-definition in theirs. Sovereignty, borders, an ethnic-based national identity and an independent government for each nation is the right political order. This is the outline of the historic compromise between the two nations, and the natural and just evolution of the two national movements. It may appear like a paradox, but only national identity can be a positive force that would save both nations from eternal war. Only an independent Palestinian state, even on a small territory, not a binational state, could channel its people's energies to build a thriving society, a source of identification for Palestinians inside and outside it. Only such a state would tell the Palestinians' national narrative and process the Nakba memory constructively. It would provide a solution for the Palestinians' identity crisis, which was created following the 1948 war, and end the anomaly of the Palestinian existence without a homeland.
The writer is a journalist.
Israel-PA military cooperation improves in the West Bank
Haaretz 02:46 24/01/2008
By Yuval Azoulay, Haaretz Correspondent
Military cooperation with the Palestinian Authority has improved in recent months, even though defense officials Wednesday criticized the conduct of the Palestinian Preventive Security Service in the shooting attack near Mt. Hebron three weeks ago. In that attack, off-duty Israel Defense Forces soldiers David Rubin and Ahikam Amihai were killed. Both suspects in the shooting, who turned themselves in immediately after the incident, were sentenced earlier this week by a Palestinian court to 15 years in prison and were jailed in Hebron. Some IDF officers compared the conditions in PA prisons to summer camp. In addition, without a green light from Jerusalem, the Israeli security forces cannot take action to capture perpetrators.
Advertisement
Nevertheless, the IDF enjoys complete freedom of action in the cities of the West Bank. In 2007 the number of meetings between Israeli and Palestinian officers defined as "significant" more than doubled. Before the formation of Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad's government last June, the IDF permitted Palestinian forces to carry out 46 armed operations in West Bank cities. Since June, the number climbed to 371. Some reservations have been expressed about the defense establishment's policy. One is that these operations should not take place in places with high levels of friction with the Jewish population.
By Yuval Azoulay, Haaretz Correspondent
Military cooperation with the Palestinian Authority has improved in recent months, even though defense officials Wednesday criticized the conduct of the Palestinian Preventive Security Service in the shooting attack near Mt. Hebron three weeks ago. In that attack, off-duty Israel Defense Forces soldiers David Rubin and Ahikam Amihai were killed. Both suspects in the shooting, who turned themselves in immediately after the incident, were sentenced earlier this week by a Palestinian court to 15 years in prison and were jailed in Hebron. Some IDF officers compared the conditions in PA prisons to summer camp. In addition, without a green light from Jerusalem, the Israeli security forces cannot take action to capture perpetrators.
Advertisement
Nevertheless, the IDF enjoys complete freedom of action in the cities of the West Bank. In 2007 the number of meetings between Israeli and Palestinian officers defined as "significant" more than doubled. Before the formation of Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad's government last June, the IDF permitted Palestinian forces to carry out 46 armed operations in West Bank cities. Since June, the number climbed to 371. Some reservations have been expressed about the defense establishment's policy. One is that these operations should not take place in places with high levels of friction with the Jewish population.
PM completely freezes new construction in W. Bank settlements
Haaretz 18:51 24/01/2008
By Nadav Shragai, Haaretz Correspondent
Israel has completely frozen all new construction in West Bank settlements, despite recent comments by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that Israel would treat construction in the major settlement blocs differently from building in most settlements. Olmert has categorically denied approval for all new construction tenders, including in the so-called consensus settlement blocs, which Israel intends to keep in any future peace accord with the Palestinians. The freeze also applies to the construction of public institutions, including schools and kindergartens.
Olmert recently sent an official letter to relevant cabinet ministers instructing them to refrain from authorizing any construction in the West Bank without his and Defense Minister Ehud Barak's prior approval. Several days ago, the prime minister met with Ma'aleh Adumim Mayor Benny Kashriel, who asked Olmert to approve several construction plans -including in the controversial E1 corridor linking Ma'aleh Adumim to Jerusalem. Olmert refused, saying the issue was sensitive in terms of relations with the United States and the Palestinian Authority. Kashriel also asked Olmert to approve tenders for the completion of the settlement's 07 neighborhood. Barak approved the construction during his term as prime minister, and the new neighborhood was to have a total of 3,500 housing units - 2,000 of which have been built and sold, and another 1,100 of which are currently under construction. Most of the units that are under construction have also been sold. The Housing Ministry was to issue tenders for the remaining 400 homes, but Kashriel says Olmert refused to approve the request. Kashriel also asked Olmert to authorize the construction of schools and kindergartens in the 07 neighborhood, but said this request was also denied. "I told the prime minister that I need another school and more kindergartens, by September, otherwise I'll bring the children to his office and they can study there," said Kashriel. Mayors and council chairmen in other consensus settlements have also reported a total freeze on construction in recent weeks, including Efrat in the Etzion bloc south of Jerusalem, as well as Ariel in the northern West Bank. Olmert has in the past defined those settlements as part of the consensus blocs, but is currently refusing to approve the construction of new housing units - including within the settlements' current urban boundaries. The prime minister has denied authorizations for the construction of schools and kindergartens in these settlements as well. According to information made public several days ago, Barak had ordered settlement construction frozen beyond the parameters set forward by Olmert. Among other things, the defense minister said his approval is even needed for the private purchase of a home that has already been built. Barak's order came against the backdrop of a bitter legal battle over settlers' purchase of the disputed "Peace House" in the divided West Bank city of Hebron. Yesha: No Israeli government has ever been so anti-settlements Yesha Council of Settlements Chiarman Danny Dayan said no Israeli government has ever taken such a hard-line stance against the settlement enterprise as the Olmert and Barak government. Dayan confirmed that the freeze has applied to the consensus blocs, which former prime minister Ariel Sharon said the U.S. had recognized. During an Ariel city council emergency held recently, Mayor Ron Nahman declared "an open war by the town of Ariel and its residents against the government of Israel and its head, Ehud Olmert." Nahman called Olmert's cabinet a destructive government that has "trampled civil rights in the State of Israel." Nahman said he will lead protests that will shut down Tel Aviv, if necessary. Some 18,000 people reside within the jurisdiction of the Ariel Regional Council, which formed a headquarters to lead the struggle against the settlement freeze. A joint forum of all West Bank local authority heads met for the first time several days ago, and also decided to launch a campaign against what they called "the While Paper policy of the Israeli government against its citizens," in reference to the British document that severely limited Jewish immigration to mandate-era Palestine.
By Nadav Shragai, Haaretz Correspondent
Israel has completely frozen all new construction in West Bank settlements, despite recent comments by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that Israel would treat construction in the major settlement blocs differently from building in most settlements. Olmert has categorically denied approval for all new construction tenders, including in the so-called consensus settlement blocs, which Israel intends to keep in any future peace accord with the Palestinians. The freeze also applies to the construction of public institutions, including schools and kindergartens.
Olmert recently sent an official letter to relevant cabinet ministers instructing them to refrain from authorizing any construction in the West Bank without his and Defense Minister Ehud Barak's prior approval. Several days ago, the prime minister met with Ma'aleh Adumim Mayor Benny Kashriel, who asked Olmert to approve several construction plans -including in the controversial E1 corridor linking Ma'aleh Adumim to Jerusalem. Olmert refused, saying the issue was sensitive in terms of relations with the United States and the Palestinian Authority. Kashriel also asked Olmert to approve tenders for the completion of the settlement's 07 neighborhood. Barak approved the construction during his term as prime minister, and the new neighborhood was to have a total of 3,500 housing units - 2,000 of which have been built and sold, and another 1,100 of which are currently under construction. Most of the units that are under construction have also been sold. The Housing Ministry was to issue tenders for the remaining 400 homes, but Kashriel says Olmert refused to approve the request. Kashriel also asked Olmert to authorize the construction of schools and kindergartens in the 07 neighborhood, but said this request was also denied. "I told the prime minister that I need another school and more kindergartens, by September, otherwise I'll bring the children to his office and they can study there," said Kashriel. Mayors and council chairmen in other consensus settlements have also reported a total freeze on construction in recent weeks, including Efrat in the Etzion bloc south of Jerusalem, as well as Ariel in the northern West Bank. Olmert has in the past defined those settlements as part of the consensus blocs, but is currently refusing to approve the construction of new housing units - including within the settlements' current urban boundaries. The prime minister has denied authorizations for the construction of schools and kindergartens in these settlements as well. According to information made public several days ago, Barak had ordered settlement construction frozen beyond the parameters set forward by Olmert. Among other things, the defense minister said his approval is even needed for the private purchase of a home that has already been built. Barak's order came against the backdrop of a bitter legal battle over settlers' purchase of the disputed "Peace House" in the divided West Bank city of Hebron. Yesha: No Israeli government has ever been so anti-settlements Yesha Council of Settlements Chiarman Danny Dayan said no Israeli government has ever taken such a hard-line stance against the settlement enterprise as the Olmert and Barak government. Dayan confirmed that the freeze has applied to the consensus blocs, which former prime minister Ariel Sharon said the U.S. had recognized. During an Ariel city council emergency held recently, Mayor Ron Nahman declared "an open war by the town of Ariel and its residents against the government of Israel and its head, Ehud Olmert." Nahman called Olmert's cabinet a destructive government that has "trampled civil rights in the State of Israel." Nahman said he will lead protests that will shut down Tel Aviv, if necessary. Some 18,000 people reside within the jurisdiction of the Ariel Regional Council, which formed a headquarters to lead the struggle against the settlement freeze. A joint forum of all West Bank local authority heads met for the first time several days ago, and also decided to launch a campaign against what they called "the While Paper policy of the Israeli government against its citizens," in reference to the British document that severely limited Jewish immigration to mandate-era Palestine.
mardi 22 janvier 2008
High Court suggests compromise on buses segregating men, women
Haaretz 22:59 22/01/2008
By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent, and Reuters
The High Court of Justice on Tuesday told the Transportation Ministry to look into problems on bus routes in Orthodox areas that separate men and women, following the petition of the religious author Naomi Ragen and the Religious Action Center. A number of female passengers said they were humiliated and even attacked for not using seats reserved for women at the back of some publicly-funded buses, or because of their clothing. Justices Elyakim Rubinstein, Salim Joubran and Yoram Danziger stopped short of ordering bus companies to stop the "mehadrin" lines but asked the Transportation Ministry to form a committee within 30 days to study the problems and recommend changes.
"We think the transportation minister [Shaul Mofaz] should create such a forum as soon as possible to allow him to hear from the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) public and from the petitioners and their supporters," the court said. The row over Israel's buses underscores the schism between its ultra-Orthodox minority - who believe women should wear long skirts and stay away from men in public - and those who want to keep the country, and its public transport, secular. The controversy started several years ago when, in order to compete with private firms, Israel's publicly-funded bus companies introduced separate seating on some routes through Orthodox areas. Women who board these buses sit at the back. In theory, wearing a long skirt and sitting in the women's section is voluntary, but several secular women have reported being abused, verbally and physically, for not doing so. Anat Hoffman, head of the Religious Action Center, the advocacy arm of the Reform Judaism movement which helped bring the lawsuit, said she was glad the high court saw the need to address problems created by the policy. "We welcome the idea to create a forum that will seriously examine the issue and examine real ways to address the needs of a diverse public without hurting the right of privacy," Hoffman said.
By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent, and Reuters
The High Court of Justice on Tuesday told the Transportation Ministry to look into problems on bus routes in Orthodox areas that separate men and women, following the petition of the religious author Naomi Ragen and the Religious Action Center. A number of female passengers said they were humiliated and even attacked for not using seats reserved for women at the back of some publicly-funded buses, or because of their clothing. Justices Elyakim Rubinstein, Salim Joubran and Yoram Danziger stopped short of ordering bus companies to stop the "mehadrin" lines but asked the Transportation Ministry to form a committee within 30 days to study the problems and recommend changes.
"We think the transportation minister [Shaul Mofaz] should create such a forum as soon as possible to allow him to hear from the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) public and from the petitioners and their supporters," the court said. The row over Israel's buses underscores the schism between its ultra-Orthodox minority - who believe women should wear long skirts and stay away from men in public - and those who want to keep the country, and its public transport, secular. The controversy started several years ago when, in order to compete with private firms, Israel's publicly-funded bus companies introduced separate seating on some routes through Orthodox areas. Women who board these buses sit at the back. In theory, wearing a long skirt and sitting in the women's section is voluntary, but several secular women have reported being abused, verbally and physically, for not doing so. Anat Hoffman, head of the Religious Action Center, the advocacy arm of the Reform Judaism movement which helped bring the lawsuit, said she was glad the high court saw the need to address problems created by the policy. "We welcome the idea to create a forum that will seriously examine the issue and examine real ways to address the needs of a diverse public without hurting the right of privacy," Hoffman said.
Official: Jerusalem construction tenders beyond Green Line now need prime minister's approval
By Nadav Shragai
Haaretz 22.1.2008
The Housing Ministry has stopped publishing tenders for state construction in Jerusalem neighborhoods beyond the Green Line without the prime minister's approval, a Housing Ministry official told a Knesset panel yesterday. The panel - a sub-committee of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, headed by MK Otniel Schneller (Kadima) - met at the request of MKs Reuven Rivlin (Likud) and Zeev Elkin (Kadima) to discuss "the construction suspension" in West Bank settlements. "All construction beyond the Green Line, even in Jerusalem, requires the housing minister and prime minister's approval," said Sara Zimmerman of the Housing Ministry.
She said she no longer was issuing tenders to build in the Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem without such approval. The MKs concluded that this includes neighborhoods such as Ramot, Gilo, Armon Hanatziv, Neve Yaakov, Pisgat Zeev and the area near Route 1, even though they are under Israeli law and within Jerusalem's jurisdiction. "The damned truth has been revealed. Olmert's new position wipes out Sharon's achievements," Rivlin said. He said Sharon had received a letter from U.S. President George W. Bush recognizing the settlement blocs. Schneller said that the "scandal caused by issuing the Har Homa building tenders two days before Bush's visit" brought about the present situation. Even worse, he said, the panel found that even construction for "humanitarian needs" like kindergartens and schools in West Bank settlements had been suspended. Ma'aleh Adumim mayor Benny Kashriel and other West Bank settlement heads reported an acute housing and school shortage, and said that the Defense Minister would not allow construction. The prime minister's media adviser denied that the construction in Jerusalem had been suspended. He said the prime minister had voiced his position on this issue in the news conference with Bush and that it had been passed on to the ministers.
Haaretz 22.1.2008
The Housing Ministry has stopped publishing tenders for state construction in Jerusalem neighborhoods beyond the Green Line without the prime minister's approval, a Housing Ministry official told a Knesset panel yesterday. The panel - a sub-committee of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, headed by MK Otniel Schneller (Kadima) - met at the request of MKs Reuven Rivlin (Likud) and Zeev Elkin (Kadima) to discuss "the construction suspension" in West Bank settlements. "All construction beyond the Green Line, even in Jerusalem, requires the housing minister and prime minister's approval," said Sara Zimmerman of the Housing Ministry.
She said she no longer was issuing tenders to build in the Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem without such approval. The MKs concluded that this includes neighborhoods such as Ramot, Gilo, Armon Hanatziv, Neve Yaakov, Pisgat Zeev and the area near Route 1, even though they are under Israeli law and within Jerusalem's jurisdiction. "The damned truth has been revealed. Olmert's new position wipes out Sharon's achievements," Rivlin said. He said Sharon had received a letter from U.S. President George W. Bush recognizing the settlement blocs. Schneller said that the "scandal caused by issuing the Har Homa building tenders two days before Bush's visit" brought about the present situation. Even worse, he said, the panel found that even construction for "humanitarian needs" like kindergartens and schools in West Bank settlements had been suspended. Ma'aleh Adumim mayor Benny Kashriel and other West Bank settlement heads reported an acute housing and school shortage, and said that the Defense Minister would not allow construction. The prime minister's media adviser denied that the construction in Jerusalem had been suspended. He said the prime minister had voiced his position on this issue in the news conference with Bush and that it had been passed on to the ministers.
samedi 19 janvier 2008
Canada takes close allies U.S., Israel off torture watchlist
Haaretz Last update - 19:20 19/01/2008
By News Agencies
Canada's foreign ministry, responding to pressure from close allies, said on Saturday it would remove the United States and Israel from a watch list of countries where prisoners risk being tortured. Both nations expressed unhappiness after it emerged that they had been listed in a document that formed part of a training course manual on torture awareness given to Canadian diplomats. Canadian Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier said he regretted the embarrassment caused by the public disclosure of the manual, which also classified some U.S. interrogation techniques as torture.
"It contains a list that wrongly includes some of our closest allies. I have directed that the manual be reviewed and rewritten," Bernier said in a statement. "The manual is neither a policy document nor a statement of policy. As such, it does not convey the government's views or positions." The document - made available to media outlets - embarrassed the minority Conservative government, which is a close ally of both the United States and Israel. "We find it to be offensive for us to be on the same list with countries like Iran and China. Quite frankly it's absurd," U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins told The Associated Press. "For us to be on a list like that is just ridiculous." He said the U.S. does not authorize or condone torture. "We think it should be removed and we've made that request. We have voiced our opinion very forcefully," Wilkins said. A spokesman at the Israeli embassy said Israel forbids torture. "Israel's Supreme Court is on record as expressly prohibiting any type of torture. If Israel is included in the list in question, the ambassador of Israel would expect its removal," spokesman Michael Mendel said.
Asked why the two countries had been put on the list, a spokesman for Bernier said: "The training manual purposely raised public issues to stimulate discussion and debate in the classroom." The government inadvertently released the manual to lawyers for Amnesty International who are working on a lawsuit involving alleged abuse of Afghan detainees by local Afghan authorities, after the detainees were handed over by Canadian troops. No one from Amnesty was immediately available for comment.
Under "definition of torture" the document lists U.S. interrogation techniques such as forced nudity, isolation, sleep deprivation and blindfolding prisoners. It also mentions the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, where a Canadian man is being held. The man, Omar Khadr, has been in Guantanamo Bay for five years. He is accused of killing a U.S. soldier during a clash in Afghanistan in 2002, when he was 15. Canada has long publicly said it accepts U.S. assurances that Khadr is being treated humanely. One of Khadr's lawyers, Dennis Edney, said the document shows Canada says one thing publicly but believes something else privately. "Canada was well aware that Omar Khadr's allegations of being tortured had a ring of truth to it. Canada has not once raised the protection of Omar Khadr when there are such serious allegations," Edney said. "What does that say to you about Canada's commitment to the rule of law and human rights. It talks on both sides of its face."
Other countries on the watch list include Syria, China, Iran, Afghanistan, Mexico and Saudi Arabia. The foreign ministry launched the torture awareness course after Ottawa was rapped for the way it handled the case of Canadian engineer Maher Arar, who was deported from the United States to Syria in 2002. Arar says he was tortured repeatedly during the year he spent in Damascus prisons. An official inquiry into the affair showed Canadian diplomats had not been trained to detect whether detainees might have been abused.
By News Agencies
Canada's foreign ministry, responding to pressure from close allies, said on Saturday it would remove the United States and Israel from a watch list of countries where prisoners risk being tortured. Both nations expressed unhappiness after it emerged that they had been listed in a document that formed part of a training course manual on torture awareness given to Canadian diplomats. Canadian Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier said he regretted the embarrassment caused by the public disclosure of the manual, which also classified some U.S. interrogation techniques as torture.
"It contains a list that wrongly includes some of our closest allies. I have directed that the manual be reviewed and rewritten," Bernier said in a statement. "The manual is neither a policy document nor a statement of policy. As such, it does not convey the government's views or positions." The document - made available to media outlets - embarrassed the minority Conservative government, which is a close ally of both the United States and Israel. "We find it to be offensive for us to be on the same list with countries like Iran and China. Quite frankly it's absurd," U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins told The Associated Press. "For us to be on a list like that is just ridiculous." He said the U.S. does not authorize or condone torture. "We think it should be removed and we've made that request. We have voiced our opinion very forcefully," Wilkins said. A spokesman at the Israeli embassy said Israel forbids torture. "Israel's Supreme Court is on record as expressly prohibiting any type of torture. If Israel is included in the list in question, the ambassador of Israel would expect its removal," spokesman Michael Mendel said.
Asked why the two countries had been put on the list, a spokesman for Bernier said: "The training manual purposely raised public issues to stimulate discussion and debate in the classroom." The government inadvertently released the manual to lawyers for Amnesty International who are working on a lawsuit involving alleged abuse of Afghan detainees by local Afghan authorities, after the detainees were handed over by Canadian troops. No one from Amnesty was immediately available for comment.
Under "definition of torture" the document lists U.S. interrogation techniques such as forced nudity, isolation, sleep deprivation and blindfolding prisoners. It also mentions the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, where a Canadian man is being held. The man, Omar Khadr, has been in Guantanamo Bay for five years. He is accused of killing a U.S. soldier during a clash in Afghanistan in 2002, when he was 15. Canada has long publicly said it accepts U.S. assurances that Khadr is being treated humanely. One of Khadr's lawyers, Dennis Edney, said the document shows Canada says one thing publicly but believes something else privately. "Canada was well aware that Omar Khadr's allegations of being tortured had a ring of truth to it. Canada has not once raised the protection of Omar Khadr when there are such serious allegations," Edney said. "What does that say to you about Canada's commitment to the rule of law and human rights. It talks on both sides of its face."
Other countries on the watch list include Syria, China, Iran, Afghanistan, Mexico and Saudi Arabia. The foreign ministry launched the torture awareness course after Ottawa was rapped for the way it handled the case of Canadian engineer Maher Arar, who was deported from the United States to Syria in 2002. Arar says he was tortured repeatedly during the year he spent in Damascus prisons. An official inquiry into the affair showed Canadian diplomats had not been trained to detect whether detainees might have been abused.
jeudi 17 janvier 2008
Jenin, Jenin
Haaretz 17.1.2008
By Gideon Levy
It's cold in the alleys of the Jenin refugee camp; it's even colder indoors. Cold that is absorbed between the thin walls at night is trapped in the unheated, frozen spaces, even when the sun rises. Wrapped in their coats, their teeth chattering from the cold, the people sit and switch between Al-Aqsa, the Hamas TV channel, and Falastin, the Fatah channel, spending their empty days staring. One sees mainly dead bodies on these channels. Bodies carried to ambulances, bodies lying in refrigerators, and for the sake of variety, the injured being rushed to neglected hospitals, mainly in Gaza. A daily loop of death. In the home of Jamal Zbeidi, a member of the camp committee, the television also silently spews out pictures of death. We have visited his home dozens of times, but he has never sounded so desperate, he has never been so totally hopeless about everything - the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Israel, the United States, the Arab world, the entire world. In the streets, barefoot children with no future are playing with junk. The camp's pathetic Internet cafe was deserted this week, as does the entry checkpoint to the city from Israel. We were delayed at this checkpoint for nearly three hours this week because of the Israel Defense Forces' cumbersome and absurd bureaucracy. Military vehicles are almost the only cars still entering the heavy iron gate at the entrance to Jenin, a major Palestinian city. Jenin is the most dying city in the territories; its refugee camp is the epitome of desperation and danger.
The pictures of death from Gaza reach Jenin on television, but young people are killed here as well, almost every week. The latest victim fell in the neighboring village of Al Yamun. Fawaz Frihat was 17 and a half when he died. The IDF invades the city's refugee camp every night, sowing panic and sleeplessness. There are almost no wanted men left here, but the IDF doesn't give up. "Nobody knows where we're going," says Zbeidi, beginning his depressing monologue. A few days ago the Palestinians once again confiscated his Subaru, his second car to be taken this way. When we visited the camp in the summer we saw the first one being confiscated. Zbeidi feels humiliated. He says the police sell the stolen cars to spare-parts dealers who take them apart and use the money to renovate their offices. Zbeidi bought the car for NIS 2,500, but the PA forces lie in wait every time people leave the camp. The Palestinian soldiers never dare to enter the camp itself. The residents' bitterness toward the PA is reaching new heights: "Has the PA already solved the refugee problem? Removed the Israeli occupation? Protected the residents from the IDF? And now only the problem of the stolen vehicles remains," Zbeidi adds bitterly. After his second car was confiscated, Zbeidi's youngest son, who is around 15, went to the Palestinian police checkpoint and tried to grab a weapon from a policeman. He wanted to avenge the blow to his father's dignity, and in the end was arrested for a few days. It could have been worse. As decided in the agreement for disarming wanted men, Jamal's famous nephew, Zakariya Zubeidi, spends his nights at police headquarters - and his days in idleness. Zakariya's three brothers are all imprisoned in Israeli jails. "Nobody knows where we're going," repeats his uncle Jamal, "and the civil war is approaching. "Israel has won. There has never been a situation like this. Everyone wants only his life. People have lost all hope. Abu Mazen [PA President Mahmoud Abbas] is going against the people. With his peace we won't get anywhere. Abu Mazen is talking to the Israelis, and do you think he'll get anything? Nothing. He can talk to them forever and won't get anything. Hamas is no different. Let all the parties and organizations tell us where we're going. Nobody knows anything, nobody is doing anything for the people. Neither Abu Mazen nor Hamas. "People watch the Falastin station and try to believe what Abu Mazen is saying. Afterward they switch to Al-Aqsa and believe what Hamas is saying. They are killing each other and both make arrests, and everyone is lying. It's all a lie. Abbas arrests Hamas in the West Bank, Haniyeh and aZahar arrest Fatah in Gaza, everybody makes a video clip on his television station and the Palestinians spends all day between Fatah and Hamas," he says, referring to two top Hamas leaders in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh and Mahmoud al-Zahar. "And Israel - nobody remembers what Israel is doing to us. Everyone is busy with the civil war. In Gaza people are killed every day by Israel, every day four or five, and Haniyeh and Zahar don't care." A few minutes' drive to the northwest and we're in the village of Al Yamun. Only isolated posters in the streets commemorate the latest victim, Fawaz Frihat. Death, even that of a high school student from the village, has become banal here, boring routine. Once the entire village would be covered with mourning posters for its fallen, but no longer. A few days ago the U.S. president visited not far from here as the crow flies, on the summit of the Mount of Beatitudes, but who cares. On the balcony of the fallen boy's home sit his gloomy-looking family and friends. His picture, courtesy of Islamic Jihad, is pasted on the wall of the house, and in it he is armed nearly head to foot. Fawaz was also armed at his death, and his friends and relatives say little about him or the circumstances of his killing. His father, Awani, 49, who is wearing a kaffiyeh and looks much older than his age, worked in Israel until the tragedy, excavating the Carmel Tunnel. All week long he would sleep in an apartment in Tirat Hacarmel and return home to Al Yamun on Thursdays. On Saturday two weeks ago he parted from his son for the last time. Last Monday night they called him at the apartment and informed him that his son had been killed. He returned home immediately, and is very worried that he will not be able to go back to work in Israel. Bereaved Palestinian fathers are automatically denied the right to work in Israel, for fear they will take revenge. That Monday, Fawaz and his brother Mohammed, who is sitting with us now, got up in the morning. It was a school holiday because of the Muslim new year, so Fawaz stayed home. As a 12th grader he was studying for his matriculation exams. His father says that that morning his private math tutor came to the house. Nobody on the balcony is willing to say whether Fawaz was active in Islamic Jihad's military arm, the Al-Quds Brigades, as is claimed; nobody ever saw him armed before. He went out at noon to pray in the mosque and didn't return. A Palestinian Web site reports that he was armed with a homemade rifle when he was killed by IDF soldiers. Fawaz was killed in Wadi Hassan, the valley dividing Al Yamun and Burkin, west of Jenin. The three friends who went out with him that day to the wadi were arrested in the village after fleeing from the area where he was killed. Before that they managed to tell Mohammed, the brother, that Fawaz had been standing armed at the side of the road warning drivers that the IDF was in the area. Mohammed says his brother was the one who opened fire on the soldiers, and they returned fire. A claim heard on the balcony, to the effect that his body was brought to the hospital in handcuffs, was quickly refuted: In the afternoon we drove to the Red Crescent offices in Jenin, where the ambulance drivers who delivered Fawaz's body after his death told us he was not handcuffed. The death certificate was signed by Dr. Mohammed Abadi of the Martyr Dr. Khalil al-Suleiman Hospital - named after the director of the emergency room of the Jenin hospital who was killed in an ambulance during the IDF invasion during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. Dr. Abadi says: "Fawaz Frihat arrived dead at the hospital from shots fired by the Israeli occupation forces, which hit him in the following places: a bullet in his left wrist, a bullet in the stomach, a bullet in the chest, a bullet in the left shoulder and in the right foot and left foot - two bullets in each foot." Back at Zbeidi's house, "Everyone who can, leaves," he says at supper, which is served in the spirit of the times, without meat. "Everyone is afraid of the PA. You can't say a word. Say a word and you'll be arrested. But you think about Fatah and ask: What have they done for us? And you think about Hamas and ask: What have they done for us? If you meet someone on the road now and ask him - 'Where are you going?' - he won't be able to answer. Nobody knows where he's going. "Listen, I'm pleased that Zakariya wasn't killed all these years. But is this his fate? Walking around the streets doing nothing? A year and a half ago the armed men were still in control here. Now nobody's in control. The war against stolen cars and that's it. Israel has won." Evening fell on the houses in the camp. On the slopes we saw groups of young people making bonfires to warm up and pass another evening somehow. At about 2 A.M. or a half hour later the IDF will come again. The IDF Spokesperson confirms that while on patrol, the IDF did shoot in the direction of an armed individual, who was a known Islamic Jihad activist. The army further emphasizes that Fawaz Frihat was armed. The incident was investigated and it was found that the IDF force acted in accordance with regulations.
By Gideon Levy
It's cold in the alleys of the Jenin refugee camp; it's even colder indoors. Cold that is absorbed between the thin walls at night is trapped in the unheated, frozen spaces, even when the sun rises. Wrapped in their coats, their teeth chattering from the cold, the people sit and switch between Al-Aqsa, the Hamas TV channel, and Falastin, the Fatah channel, spending their empty days staring. One sees mainly dead bodies on these channels. Bodies carried to ambulances, bodies lying in refrigerators, and for the sake of variety, the injured being rushed to neglected hospitals, mainly in Gaza. A daily loop of death. In the home of Jamal Zbeidi, a member of the camp committee, the television also silently spews out pictures of death. We have visited his home dozens of times, but he has never sounded so desperate, he has never been so totally hopeless about everything - the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Israel, the United States, the Arab world, the entire world. In the streets, barefoot children with no future are playing with junk. The camp's pathetic Internet cafe was deserted this week, as does the entry checkpoint to the city from Israel. We were delayed at this checkpoint for nearly three hours this week because of the Israel Defense Forces' cumbersome and absurd bureaucracy. Military vehicles are almost the only cars still entering the heavy iron gate at the entrance to Jenin, a major Palestinian city. Jenin is the most dying city in the territories; its refugee camp is the epitome of desperation and danger.
The pictures of death from Gaza reach Jenin on television, but young people are killed here as well, almost every week. The latest victim fell in the neighboring village of Al Yamun. Fawaz Frihat was 17 and a half when he died. The IDF invades the city's refugee camp every night, sowing panic and sleeplessness. There are almost no wanted men left here, but the IDF doesn't give up. "Nobody knows where we're going," says Zbeidi, beginning his depressing monologue. A few days ago the Palestinians once again confiscated his Subaru, his second car to be taken this way. When we visited the camp in the summer we saw the first one being confiscated. Zbeidi feels humiliated. He says the police sell the stolen cars to spare-parts dealers who take them apart and use the money to renovate their offices. Zbeidi bought the car for NIS 2,500, but the PA forces lie in wait every time people leave the camp. The Palestinian soldiers never dare to enter the camp itself. The residents' bitterness toward the PA is reaching new heights: "Has the PA already solved the refugee problem? Removed the Israeli occupation? Protected the residents from the IDF? And now only the problem of the stolen vehicles remains," Zbeidi adds bitterly. After his second car was confiscated, Zbeidi's youngest son, who is around 15, went to the Palestinian police checkpoint and tried to grab a weapon from a policeman. He wanted to avenge the blow to his father's dignity, and in the end was arrested for a few days. It could have been worse. As decided in the agreement for disarming wanted men, Jamal's famous nephew, Zakariya Zubeidi, spends his nights at police headquarters - and his days in idleness. Zakariya's three brothers are all imprisoned in Israeli jails. "Nobody knows where we're going," repeats his uncle Jamal, "and the civil war is approaching. "Israel has won. There has never been a situation like this. Everyone wants only his life. People have lost all hope. Abu Mazen [PA President Mahmoud Abbas] is going against the people. With his peace we won't get anywhere. Abu Mazen is talking to the Israelis, and do you think he'll get anything? Nothing. He can talk to them forever and won't get anything. Hamas is no different. Let all the parties and organizations tell us where we're going. Nobody knows anything, nobody is doing anything for the people. Neither Abu Mazen nor Hamas. "People watch the Falastin station and try to believe what Abu Mazen is saying. Afterward they switch to Al-Aqsa and believe what Hamas is saying. They are killing each other and both make arrests, and everyone is lying. It's all a lie. Abbas arrests Hamas in the West Bank, Haniyeh and aZahar arrest Fatah in Gaza, everybody makes a video clip on his television station and the Palestinians spends all day between Fatah and Hamas," he says, referring to two top Hamas leaders in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh and Mahmoud al-Zahar. "And Israel - nobody remembers what Israel is doing to us. Everyone is busy with the civil war. In Gaza people are killed every day by Israel, every day four or five, and Haniyeh and Zahar don't care." A few minutes' drive to the northwest and we're in the village of Al Yamun. Only isolated posters in the streets commemorate the latest victim, Fawaz Frihat. Death, even that of a high school student from the village, has become banal here, boring routine. Once the entire village would be covered with mourning posters for its fallen, but no longer. A few days ago the U.S. president visited not far from here as the crow flies, on the summit of the Mount of Beatitudes, but who cares. On the balcony of the fallen boy's home sit his gloomy-looking family and friends. His picture, courtesy of Islamic Jihad, is pasted on the wall of the house, and in it he is armed nearly head to foot. Fawaz was also armed at his death, and his friends and relatives say little about him or the circumstances of his killing. His father, Awani, 49, who is wearing a kaffiyeh and looks much older than his age, worked in Israel until the tragedy, excavating the Carmel Tunnel. All week long he would sleep in an apartment in Tirat Hacarmel and return home to Al Yamun on Thursdays. On Saturday two weeks ago he parted from his son for the last time. Last Monday night they called him at the apartment and informed him that his son had been killed. He returned home immediately, and is very worried that he will not be able to go back to work in Israel. Bereaved Palestinian fathers are automatically denied the right to work in Israel, for fear they will take revenge. That Monday, Fawaz and his brother Mohammed, who is sitting with us now, got up in the morning. It was a school holiday because of the Muslim new year, so Fawaz stayed home. As a 12th grader he was studying for his matriculation exams. His father says that that morning his private math tutor came to the house. Nobody on the balcony is willing to say whether Fawaz was active in Islamic Jihad's military arm, the Al-Quds Brigades, as is claimed; nobody ever saw him armed before. He went out at noon to pray in the mosque and didn't return. A Palestinian Web site reports that he was armed with a homemade rifle when he was killed by IDF soldiers. Fawaz was killed in Wadi Hassan, the valley dividing Al Yamun and Burkin, west of Jenin. The three friends who went out with him that day to the wadi were arrested in the village after fleeing from the area where he was killed. Before that they managed to tell Mohammed, the brother, that Fawaz had been standing armed at the side of the road warning drivers that the IDF was in the area. Mohammed says his brother was the one who opened fire on the soldiers, and they returned fire. A claim heard on the balcony, to the effect that his body was brought to the hospital in handcuffs, was quickly refuted: In the afternoon we drove to the Red Crescent offices in Jenin, where the ambulance drivers who delivered Fawaz's body after his death told us he was not handcuffed. The death certificate was signed by Dr. Mohammed Abadi of the Martyr Dr. Khalil al-Suleiman Hospital - named after the director of the emergency room of the Jenin hospital who was killed in an ambulance during the IDF invasion during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. Dr. Abadi says: "Fawaz Frihat arrived dead at the hospital from shots fired by the Israeli occupation forces, which hit him in the following places: a bullet in his left wrist, a bullet in the stomach, a bullet in the chest, a bullet in the left shoulder and in the right foot and left foot - two bullets in each foot." Back at Zbeidi's house, "Everyone who can, leaves," he says at supper, which is served in the spirit of the times, without meat. "Everyone is afraid of the PA. You can't say a word. Say a word and you'll be arrested. But you think about Fatah and ask: What have they done for us? And you think about Hamas and ask: What have they done for us? If you meet someone on the road now and ask him - 'Where are you going?' - he won't be able to answer. Nobody knows where he's going. "Listen, I'm pleased that Zakariya wasn't killed all these years. But is this his fate? Walking around the streets doing nothing? A year and a half ago the armed men were still in control here. Now nobody's in control. The war against stolen cars and that's it. Israel has won." Evening fell on the houses in the camp. On the slopes we saw groups of young people making bonfires to warm up and pass another evening somehow. At about 2 A.M. or a half hour later the IDF will come again. The IDF Spokesperson confirms that while on patrol, the IDF did shoot in the direction of an armed individual, who was a known Islamic Jihad activist. The army further emphasizes that Fawaz Frihat was armed. The incident was investigated and it was found that the IDF force acted in accordance with regulations.
mercredi 16 janvier 2008
The horror of Amona
Haaretz 23:17 16/01/2008
By Alexander Yakobson
There is certainly more than one reason for the ongoing scandal regarding the non-evacuation of the illegal West Bank outposts, a matter on which the prime minister and defense minister trade accusations in a way that sounds farcical. But it's clear that one of the reasons is the trauma of Amona. The government fears that outpost evacuation will be accompanied by serious violence and that it will be the one to pay the public price, which is what happened following the 2006 evacuation of the Amona outpost. Those who organized the violence at Amona, then, achieved their goal - belligerent intimidation of the government. They stated from the beginning that they would oppose the evacuation with force - with great force - and they kept to their word, winning big from the fact that the suppression of the violence they instigated looked bad on camera. I saw a live television broadcast that showed mounted police twice attempting to disperse the crowd without using their clubs. Both times, they were warded off with a shower of stones that were big enough to be seen clearly on the screen. The third time, the mounted police used their clubs, and naturally, this looked bad. Of course, the evening news showed just the third attack, and since then those images have been broadcast again and again.
This doesn't mean that there wasn't also excessive and superfluous police violence, or that the police should be exempt from criticism. But in order to determine that police used excessive force, one must first accurately describe the force used against them, and that is something people tend not to do within the pseudo-humanitarian discourse developing in the wake of these events. This discourse refuses to view keeping Israeli police officers' skulls intact as a humanitarian consideration. In addition, even when the police are legitimately criticized for an excess reaction to violence, it is the instigators of the violence who must be condemned first and foremost. Under no circumstances should they be allowed to gain political profit from the result of the confrontation they forced on the police. The heroes and supporters of Amona are not alone. In its investigation of the October 2000 riots, which led to the deaths of 13 Arabs during clashes with police, the Or Commission - which did not shy away from criticizing the police - wrote the following about the conduct of Arab public officials. "A pattern of threats of serious violence and of the use of violence for the sake of achieving various goals was engendered... Ahead of 2000, and during that year [there was] a significant increase in the frequency and intensity of clashes with police. Even though the slide from organized protests to unrestrained riots was consistently repeated, the Arab leadership did not make an effort to stop the deterioration toward violence... In addition, in the days following each event, public officials, in their statements and speeches, tended to heap praise on the protest activities, including violent activities." The leaders described thus by the Or Commission emerged victorious in the public debate that developed after the publication of the commission's report, since that debate focused entirely on criticism of the police. This was the case even though the commission determined that before and during the riots, Arab leaders "transmitted messages encouraging violence," that "the intensity of the violence and aggression... was very high," and that this included "live fire in isolated cases." But who got to hear about the live fire? Not even one percent of the public debate dealt with that. Police brutality against civilians is a real risk everywhere, and in Israel it's clear that Arab civilians are at greater risk than Jewish ones. We must deal with this risk - but fairly, without the language laundering that covers up deliberate political violence, and without rewarding that violence.
By Alexander Yakobson
There is certainly more than one reason for the ongoing scandal regarding the non-evacuation of the illegal West Bank outposts, a matter on which the prime minister and defense minister trade accusations in a way that sounds farcical. But it's clear that one of the reasons is the trauma of Amona. The government fears that outpost evacuation will be accompanied by serious violence and that it will be the one to pay the public price, which is what happened following the 2006 evacuation of the Amona outpost. Those who organized the violence at Amona, then, achieved their goal - belligerent intimidation of the government. They stated from the beginning that they would oppose the evacuation with force - with great force - and they kept to their word, winning big from the fact that the suppression of the violence they instigated looked bad on camera. I saw a live television broadcast that showed mounted police twice attempting to disperse the crowd without using their clubs. Both times, they were warded off with a shower of stones that were big enough to be seen clearly on the screen. The third time, the mounted police used their clubs, and naturally, this looked bad. Of course, the evening news showed just the third attack, and since then those images have been broadcast again and again.
This doesn't mean that there wasn't also excessive and superfluous police violence, or that the police should be exempt from criticism. But in order to determine that police used excessive force, one must first accurately describe the force used against them, and that is something people tend not to do within the pseudo-humanitarian discourse developing in the wake of these events. This discourse refuses to view keeping Israeli police officers' skulls intact as a humanitarian consideration. In addition, even when the police are legitimately criticized for an excess reaction to violence, it is the instigators of the violence who must be condemned first and foremost. Under no circumstances should they be allowed to gain political profit from the result of the confrontation they forced on the police. The heroes and supporters of Amona are not alone. In its investigation of the October 2000 riots, which led to the deaths of 13 Arabs during clashes with police, the Or Commission - which did not shy away from criticizing the police - wrote the following about the conduct of Arab public officials. "A pattern of threats of serious violence and of the use of violence for the sake of achieving various goals was engendered... Ahead of 2000, and during that year [there was] a significant increase in the frequency and intensity of clashes with police. Even though the slide from organized protests to unrestrained riots was consistently repeated, the Arab leadership did not make an effort to stop the deterioration toward violence... In addition, in the days following each event, public officials, in their statements and speeches, tended to heap praise on the protest activities, including violent activities." The leaders described thus by the Or Commission emerged victorious in the public debate that developed after the publication of the commission's report, since that debate focused entirely on criticism of the police. This was the case even though the commission determined that before and during the riots, Arab leaders "transmitted messages encouraging violence," that "the intensity of the violence and aggression... was very high," and that this included "live fire in isolated cases." But who got to hear about the live fire? Not even one percent of the public debate dealt with that. Police brutality against civilians is a real risk everywhere, and in Israel it's clear that Arab civilians are at greater risk than Jewish ones. We must deal with this risk - but fairly, without the language laundering that covers up deliberate political violence, and without rewarding that violence.
mardi 15 janvier 2008
Diplomat: U.S. firmly opposes all W. Bank, E. J'lem construction
Haaretz 14:02 15/01/2008
By Barak Ravid and Nadav Shragai, Haaretz Correspondents
The United States clarified to Israel during U.S. President George Bush's visit this week that it disapproves of all building in East Jerusalem and the West Bank - including in the large settlement blocs, a senior Western diplomat said Tuesday. The diplomat added that Israel and the U.S. differ on their interpretation of the letter President Bush sent to former prime minister Ariel Sharon in April, 2004. "The letter refers to major population centers and not the settlement blocs, while stressing that everything must also be decided in the negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians," the diplomat said.
According to the diplomat, Bush is steadfast in his objection of building in West Bank settlements and East Jerusalem. "The American government also opposes constuction due to the natural growth of the present settlers", he said. He added, however, that if progress is made on border issues it may help to resolve the settlement issue. "When the route of the permanent border becomes clearer, the locations where Israel can and cannot build will also be clearer." The diplomat also said that the U.S. supports the opening of the Gaza checkpoints, especially the Karni crossing, by manning them with forces subordinate to Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. "The Bush administration is willing to examine creative ideas", the diplomat said, "the goal is to destabilize Hamas and the opening of checkpoints for the transfer of good would advance this goal." Israel begins constructing 60 new homes in East Jerusalem Meanwhile, construction has begun on another 60 housing units in the Jewish neighborhood of Maaleh Hazeitim, in East Jerusalem's Ras al-Amud section. Fifty-one Jewish families already live in the small neighborhood, built on land purchased 15 years ago by the American millionaire Irwin Moskowitz, patron of the Ateret Cohanim organization. The neighborhood's initial construction provoked an international storm in September 1997, and the United States pressured Israel not to go ahead with the plan. The pressure was rebuffed by former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and backed by Jerusalem's mayor at the time, Ehud Olmert. The new construction, with a municipal permit, is being carried out by Kedumim 3000, a company headed by Nachman Zoldan, father of Ido Zoldan who was murdered two months ago in a terror attack near Kedumim. Right-wing activists ascribe great significance to widening Jewish construction in Ras al-Amud, and to realizing ownership of lots and buildings that it has managed to acquire in recent years in that vicinity. According to their thinking, Maaleh Hazeitim makes it harder to create a Palestinian territorial corridor, a sort of "safe passage" between the West Bank to the east, and the Temple Mount. In the past, Israeli-Palestinian talks included the idea of establishing such a corridor running through the old Jericho road, the Mount of Olives region, Motta Gur Street, up to the Lion's Gate and to the Temple Mount.
By Barak Ravid and Nadav Shragai, Haaretz Correspondents
The United States clarified to Israel during U.S. President George Bush's visit this week that it disapproves of all building in East Jerusalem and the West Bank - including in the large settlement blocs, a senior Western diplomat said Tuesday. The diplomat added that Israel and the U.S. differ on their interpretation of the letter President Bush sent to former prime minister Ariel Sharon in April, 2004. "The letter refers to major population centers and not the settlement blocs, while stressing that everything must also be decided in the negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians," the diplomat said.
According to the diplomat, Bush is steadfast in his objection of building in West Bank settlements and East Jerusalem. "The American government also opposes constuction due to the natural growth of the present settlers", he said. He added, however, that if progress is made on border issues it may help to resolve the settlement issue. "When the route of the permanent border becomes clearer, the locations where Israel can and cannot build will also be clearer." The diplomat also said that the U.S. supports the opening of the Gaza checkpoints, especially the Karni crossing, by manning them with forces subordinate to Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. "The Bush administration is willing to examine creative ideas", the diplomat said, "the goal is to destabilize Hamas and the opening of checkpoints for the transfer of good would advance this goal." Israel begins constructing 60 new homes in East Jerusalem Meanwhile, construction has begun on another 60 housing units in the Jewish neighborhood of Maaleh Hazeitim, in East Jerusalem's Ras al-Amud section. Fifty-one Jewish families already live in the small neighborhood, built on land purchased 15 years ago by the American millionaire Irwin Moskowitz, patron of the Ateret Cohanim organization. The neighborhood's initial construction provoked an international storm in September 1997, and the United States pressured Israel not to go ahead with the plan. The pressure was rebuffed by former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and backed by Jerusalem's mayor at the time, Ehud Olmert. The new construction, with a municipal permit, is being carried out by Kedumim 3000, a company headed by Nachman Zoldan, father of Ido Zoldan who was murdered two months ago in a terror attack near Kedumim. Right-wing activists ascribe great significance to widening Jewish construction in Ras al-Amud, and to realizing ownership of lots and buildings that it has managed to acquire in recent years in that vicinity. According to their thinking, Maaleh Hazeitim makes it harder to create a Palestinian territorial corridor, a sort of "safe passage" between the West Bank to the east, and the Temple Mount. In the past, Israeli-Palestinian talks included the idea of establishing such a corridor running through the old Jericho road, the Mount of Olives region, Motta Gur Street, up to the Lion's Gate and to the Temple Mount.
lundi 14 janvier 2008
Haaretz probe: Shin Bet count of Gaza civilian deaths is too low
Haaretz 11:22 14/01/2008
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent
Israeli security forces killed 810 Palestinians in the Gaza Strip in 2006 and 2007, Shin Bet security service chief Yuval Diskin reported Sunday at the weekly cabinet briefing in Jerusalem. He estimated that some 200 of those killed were not clearly linked to terrorist organizations. However, an examination by Haaretz reveals that the number of Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces stands at 816 during those two years, and that of them, 360 were civilians who were not affiliated with any armed organizations. Data from B'Tselem, the Israeli human rights organization, show that 152 of the casualties were under age 18, and 48 were under the age of 14. According to Diskin, 356 Palestinian Gazans were killed in 2006, and an additional 454 in 2007.
Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter, also present at the briefing, said that "about five percent of the militants in the Gaza Strip have been killed," adding that their number today is estimated at some 20,000. He said he was pleased with the results of the fighting against militants in the Strip, noting that Israel's security forces target terrorists while the Palestinians target civilians. "This asymmetry is part of a war of attrition: Sderot's residents are still leaving the city." Dichter went on to say that the war that is being waged against the Israel Defense Forces and Israel "is not being checked, but is actually intensifying." He added that the IDF's modus operandi in Gaza must be changed with the aim of ending the war against the terror organizations there. Minister and former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon disagreed with Dichter. "We should [continue to] pursue the same policy in Gaza, which is so far proved effective in combating Hamas." Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak concurred with Ayalon.
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent
Israeli security forces killed 810 Palestinians in the Gaza Strip in 2006 and 2007, Shin Bet security service chief Yuval Diskin reported Sunday at the weekly cabinet briefing in Jerusalem. He estimated that some 200 of those killed were not clearly linked to terrorist organizations. However, an examination by Haaretz reveals that the number of Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces stands at 816 during those two years, and that of them, 360 were civilians who were not affiliated with any armed organizations. Data from B'Tselem, the Israeli human rights organization, show that 152 of the casualties were under age 18, and 48 were under the age of 14. According to Diskin, 356 Palestinian Gazans were killed in 2006, and an additional 454 in 2007.
Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter, also present at the briefing, said that "about five percent of the militants in the Gaza Strip have been killed," adding that their number today is estimated at some 20,000. He said he was pleased with the results of the fighting against militants in the Strip, noting that Israel's security forces target terrorists while the Palestinians target civilians. "This asymmetry is part of a war of attrition: Sderot's residents are still leaving the city." Dichter went on to say that the war that is being waged against the Israel Defense Forces and Israel "is not being checked, but is actually intensifying." He added that the IDF's modus operandi in Gaza must be changed with the aim of ending the war against the terror organizations there. Minister and former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon disagreed with Dichter. "We should [continue to] pursue the same policy in Gaza, which is so far proved effective in combating Hamas." Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak concurred with Ayalon.
Taking the extortion out of divorce, if the rabbi permits it
Haaretz 11:10 14/01/2008
By Shahar Ilan
A true revolution is afoot in the Knesset. If approved, religious men will have less of an upper hand in divorce proceedings. Under the proposal, the civil and rabbinical courts will be able to divide property between the couple before they divorce. As a result, the economic situation of women who are requesting a divorce and their children will improve considerably. Approved by the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee on Tuesday for its second and third readings, the law will end a significant part of extortion by men who refuse to give their wives a divorce.
The procedure for approving the proposed law is in a very advanced stage and only one more deliberation in the Knesset (for the second and third readings) is needed in order to pass it. However, because the ultra-Orthodox parties see this proposed law as damaging to the status of the rabbinical courts, it is quite possible it will never see that debate. MK Otniel Schneller of Kadima, for example, believes the attempt to pass the law as currently formulated will bring about a coalition crisis with Shas. As everyone knows, Kadima cannot afford this.
The subject of the proposed laws is a procedure called "balancing of assets" - the division of property that has been accumulated during a couple's marriage. Currently, the law stipulates that the balancing of assets will occur only after a divorce is granted. The result is that the man, whose sole consent is required under Jewish law, can force his wife to give him most of the property in order to get the divorce she wants. Under the formulation approved by the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, the family court or rabbinical court can balance assets prior to divorce in several cases: one year after the suit for divorce or the request for the division of property is filed; when the man and the woman have been living apart for at least nine months; in a situation where there is proven violence. A particularly innovative stipulation in the amendment is that the court, when it comes to apportion the property, will be able to take into consideration "career assets" such as professional degrees acquired during the marriage, reputation, pension funds and more.
Dozens of Knesset members are behind the law, but it has been led (in various versions) by a number of religious Knesset members: Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee chairman Menachem Ben-Sasson (Kadima), National Religious Party chairman Zevulun Orlev, Schneller and Meimad chairman Rabbi Michael Melchior. While the secular community tends to arrive at financial agreements outside the rabbinical courts, the national religious legislators know their constituency needs the rabbinical courts.
Ben-Sasson says the amendment's aim is "to disassociate entirely the money issue from divorce," thereby denying the man the ability to extort his wife. Schneller has supported the committee's proposal, but said he believes "there is no chance it will pass during this term. If it passes, there will be a coalition crisis with Shas. I have no reason to suppose that anyone in the coalition wants a crisis on the basis of this law."
The Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee has also deliberated on a proposal sent to the committee on behalf of Chief Rabbi and President of the High Rabbinical Court of Appeals Shlomo Amar. Under this proposal, only the rabbinical courts would be able to balance assets. The court would be obligated to do so within 14 months of the request's filing. If the court doesn't follow through, parties could appeal to the president of the High Rabbinical Court, who could transfer the case to a special rabbinical court. The committee rejected this proposal, which would have meant huge delays and procrastination.
Schneller has been conducting prolonged negotiations with Amar in aims of getting an agreed-upon law passed. He is proposing a compromise which would transfer authority to the rabbinical court. The court would be obligated to balance assets within a year of the request. If it failed, the case would be sent automatically to a special bench of the High Rabbinical Court. Schneller is convinced the bill will ensure property divisions within a year for 99 percent of cases, as no bench will want to disgrace itself by losing control of the case. He says Amar has agreed to this proposal in the past and Schneller is convinced he will be able to obtain the rabbi's approval again. According to him, the compromise will be very beneficial to religious women who are obligated to litigate in rabbinical courts.
Only if Sheetrit permits it
"The cat is out of the bag," said Knesset Interior and Environment Committee Chairman MK Ophir Pines-Paz (Labor) in response to an announcement made on behalf of Interior Minister Meir Sheetrit. Attorney Daniel Solomon, legal advisor to the Population Administration, announced that Sheetrit (Kadima) is opposed to one of the most important reforms the committee has been advancing - transferring the authority to revoke citizenship obtained fraudulently from the auspices of the interior minister to the administrative courts.
Revoking citizenship is a more severe punishment than several years in prison. It removes nearly all of a person's rights: to remain in the country, to work here, to health insurance, to drive and more. Sometimes, citizenship revocation cases are brought before the committee many years after the person has built a life in Israel. When an individual's citizenship is revoked, sometimes the citizenship of his children, who were born in Israel, is also revoked. In recent years, several dozen such cases have been recorded annually. The current procedure stipulates that if the Interior Ministry suspects an individual has obtained citizenship fraudulently, the case will be brought before the committee. The committee makes recommendations to the interior minister, who makes the final decision
The law as originally proposed by MK Gilad Erdan (Likud) did not deal at all with revoking citizenship obtained fraudulently. Erdan wanted to transfer the authority to revoke citizenship because of disloyalty to the state, a condition that applies mainly to Arab Israelis, from the interior minister to the court. His proposal was made because the attorney general does not allow the interior minister to implement the procedure; Erdan wanted to create a procedure that would work.
The Arab Knesset members believe the proposed law is aimed, above all, at revoking the citizenship of Balad leader Azmi Bishara. Pines-Paz, a former interior minister, added to the procedure for revoking citizenship obtained by registering false details. Pines-Paz, who has revoked the citizenship of several individuals, said he believes it is appropriate to transfer such authority to the courts. Sheetrit thinks otherwise. "The Interior Minister has asked me to inform you," said attorney Solomon to the committee two weeks ago, "that if the proposal is passed in this version, he will not support it." When asked what the minister would approve, Solomon replied that Sheetrit is interested in one that relates only to disloyalty to the state. Solomon argues that the detailed procedure in the proposed law for revoking citizenship obtained fraudulently - a committee, a ministerial decision, an application to a court, the possibility to appeal - would take two years. He proposes anchoring in law the current procedure, which is handled by an advisory committee. "There is no justification for taking it to court," he said.
By Shahar Ilan
A true revolution is afoot in the Knesset. If approved, religious men will have less of an upper hand in divorce proceedings. Under the proposal, the civil and rabbinical courts will be able to divide property between the couple before they divorce. As a result, the economic situation of women who are requesting a divorce and their children will improve considerably. Approved by the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee on Tuesday for its second and third readings, the law will end a significant part of extortion by men who refuse to give their wives a divorce.
The procedure for approving the proposed law is in a very advanced stage and only one more deliberation in the Knesset (for the second and third readings) is needed in order to pass it. However, because the ultra-Orthodox parties see this proposed law as damaging to the status of the rabbinical courts, it is quite possible it will never see that debate. MK Otniel Schneller of Kadima, for example, believes the attempt to pass the law as currently formulated will bring about a coalition crisis with Shas. As everyone knows, Kadima cannot afford this.
The subject of the proposed laws is a procedure called "balancing of assets" - the division of property that has been accumulated during a couple's marriage. Currently, the law stipulates that the balancing of assets will occur only after a divorce is granted. The result is that the man, whose sole consent is required under Jewish law, can force his wife to give him most of the property in order to get the divorce she wants. Under the formulation approved by the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, the family court or rabbinical court can balance assets prior to divorce in several cases: one year after the suit for divorce or the request for the division of property is filed; when the man and the woman have been living apart for at least nine months; in a situation where there is proven violence. A particularly innovative stipulation in the amendment is that the court, when it comes to apportion the property, will be able to take into consideration "career assets" such as professional degrees acquired during the marriage, reputation, pension funds and more.
Dozens of Knesset members are behind the law, but it has been led (in various versions) by a number of religious Knesset members: Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee chairman Menachem Ben-Sasson (Kadima), National Religious Party chairman Zevulun Orlev, Schneller and Meimad chairman Rabbi Michael Melchior. While the secular community tends to arrive at financial agreements outside the rabbinical courts, the national religious legislators know their constituency needs the rabbinical courts.
Ben-Sasson says the amendment's aim is "to disassociate entirely the money issue from divorce," thereby denying the man the ability to extort his wife. Schneller has supported the committee's proposal, but said he believes "there is no chance it will pass during this term. If it passes, there will be a coalition crisis with Shas. I have no reason to suppose that anyone in the coalition wants a crisis on the basis of this law."
The Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee has also deliberated on a proposal sent to the committee on behalf of Chief Rabbi and President of the High Rabbinical Court of Appeals Shlomo Amar. Under this proposal, only the rabbinical courts would be able to balance assets. The court would be obligated to do so within 14 months of the request's filing. If the court doesn't follow through, parties could appeal to the president of the High Rabbinical Court, who could transfer the case to a special rabbinical court. The committee rejected this proposal, which would have meant huge delays and procrastination.
Schneller has been conducting prolonged negotiations with Amar in aims of getting an agreed-upon law passed. He is proposing a compromise which would transfer authority to the rabbinical court. The court would be obligated to balance assets within a year of the request. If it failed, the case would be sent automatically to a special bench of the High Rabbinical Court. Schneller is convinced the bill will ensure property divisions within a year for 99 percent of cases, as no bench will want to disgrace itself by losing control of the case. He says Amar has agreed to this proposal in the past and Schneller is convinced he will be able to obtain the rabbi's approval again. According to him, the compromise will be very beneficial to religious women who are obligated to litigate in rabbinical courts.
Only if Sheetrit permits it
"The cat is out of the bag," said Knesset Interior and Environment Committee Chairman MK Ophir Pines-Paz (Labor) in response to an announcement made on behalf of Interior Minister Meir Sheetrit. Attorney Daniel Solomon, legal advisor to the Population Administration, announced that Sheetrit (Kadima) is opposed to one of the most important reforms the committee has been advancing - transferring the authority to revoke citizenship obtained fraudulently from the auspices of the interior minister to the administrative courts.
Revoking citizenship is a more severe punishment than several years in prison. It removes nearly all of a person's rights: to remain in the country, to work here, to health insurance, to drive and more. Sometimes, citizenship revocation cases are brought before the committee many years after the person has built a life in Israel. When an individual's citizenship is revoked, sometimes the citizenship of his children, who were born in Israel, is also revoked. In recent years, several dozen such cases have been recorded annually. The current procedure stipulates that if the Interior Ministry suspects an individual has obtained citizenship fraudulently, the case will be brought before the committee. The committee makes recommendations to the interior minister, who makes the final decision
The law as originally proposed by MK Gilad Erdan (Likud) did not deal at all with revoking citizenship obtained fraudulently. Erdan wanted to transfer the authority to revoke citizenship because of disloyalty to the state, a condition that applies mainly to Arab Israelis, from the interior minister to the court. His proposal was made because the attorney general does not allow the interior minister to implement the procedure; Erdan wanted to create a procedure that would work.
The Arab Knesset members believe the proposed law is aimed, above all, at revoking the citizenship of Balad leader Azmi Bishara. Pines-Paz, a former interior minister, added to the procedure for revoking citizenship obtained by registering false details. Pines-Paz, who has revoked the citizenship of several individuals, said he believes it is appropriate to transfer such authority to the courts. Sheetrit thinks otherwise. "The Interior Minister has asked me to inform you," said attorney Solomon to the committee two weeks ago, "that if the proposal is passed in this version, he will not support it." When asked what the minister would approve, Solomon replied that Sheetrit is interested in one that relates only to disloyalty to the state. Solomon argues that the detailed procedure in the proposed law for revoking citizenship obtained fraudulently - a committee, a ministerial decision, an application to a court, the possibility to appeal - would take two years. He proposes anchoring in law the current procedure, which is handled by an advisory committee. "There is no justification for taking it to court," he said.
lundi 7 janvier 2008
Citing security, state refuses to release data on settlements
Haaretz 12:56 07/01/2008
By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent
The government is refusing to publish a database containing full details about the settlement enterprise in the territories, including outposts and neighborhoods built across the Green Line. In response to a High Court of Justice petition on the matter, the Defense Ministry is arguing that publication would harm state security and Israel's foreign relations.
In October 2006, Haaretz revealed the existence of the Spiegel Report - the largest database ever compiled by the state on the settlements, by then special adviser to the defense minister Brigadier General Baruch Spiegel. The report, whose preparation was kept secret, revealed that extensive building was carried out without permits on dozens of veteran settlements - not just outposts - often on privately owned Palestinian land. Spiegel's data came from the Civil Administration and other government agencies, as well as from photographic sorties carried out by civilian aircraft leased by the military establishment.
The data collection began after Spiegel and other Defense Ministry officials realized that the state's figures on the settlements were incomplete. It became clear that often the state's own information was incomplete in comparison with the data presented by the U.S. administration or gathered by Peace Now's monitoring staff. The lacunae stemmed from the government's policy of looking the other way. In some cases, information was deliberately kept hidden in order to help the settlers expand their control over land without having to contend with judicial oversight of their activities.
Advertisement
At the time, military sources described the information as "explosive" from a security and foreign-policy point of view, and claimed that part of the reason for the secrecy about the database was to avoid embarrassing Israel's relations with the U.S. In the wake of reports about the database, the Movement for Freedom of Information in Israel and Peace Now petitioned the district administrative court in Tel Aviv, demanding that the database be released for publication in accordance with the Freedom of Information Law.
Last week the Tel Aviv district prosecutor's office submitted a pre-petition response including a statement from Brigadier General Mike Herzog, Defense Minister Ehud Barak's chief of staff. Herzog and the prosecution asked the court to bar publication of the material. They claim that while they have no quarrel with the principle of freedom of information they seek to invoke Chapter 9A of the law to prevent publication "for fear of harming state security and foreign relations."
In his statement, Herzog argued that, "At the present time, public disclosure of the material could cause injury," about which "we are unable to expand upon." The attorney's office even asked the court for an in camera session, without the presence of the petitioners, during which the state would explain the basis of its claim. Judge Michal Rubinstein has not yet issued a decision on the matter.
By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent
The government is refusing to publish a database containing full details about the settlement enterprise in the territories, including outposts and neighborhoods built across the Green Line. In response to a High Court of Justice petition on the matter, the Defense Ministry is arguing that publication would harm state security and Israel's foreign relations.
In October 2006, Haaretz revealed the existence of the Spiegel Report - the largest database ever compiled by the state on the settlements, by then special adviser to the defense minister Brigadier General Baruch Spiegel. The report, whose preparation was kept secret, revealed that extensive building was carried out without permits on dozens of veteran settlements - not just outposts - often on privately owned Palestinian land. Spiegel's data came from the Civil Administration and other government agencies, as well as from photographic sorties carried out by civilian aircraft leased by the military establishment.
The data collection began after Spiegel and other Defense Ministry officials realized that the state's figures on the settlements were incomplete. It became clear that often the state's own information was incomplete in comparison with the data presented by the U.S. administration or gathered by Peace Now's monitoring staff. The lacunae stemmed from the government's policy of looking the other way. In some cases, information was deliberately kept hidden in order to help the settlers expand their control over land without having to contend with judicial oversight of their activities.
Advertisement
At the time, military sources described the information as "explosive" from a security and foreign-policy point of view, and claimed that part of the reason for the secrecy about the database was to avoid embarrassing Israel's relations with the U.S. In the wake of reports about the database, the Movement for Freedom of Information in Israel and Peace Now petitioned the district administrative court in Tel Aviv, demanding that the database be released for publication in accordance with the Freedom of Information Law.
Last week the Tel Aviv district prosecutor's office submitted a pre-petition response including a statement from Brigadier General Mike Herzog, Defense Minister Ehud Barak's chief of staff. Herzog and the prosecution asked the court to bar publication of the material. They claim that while they have no quarrel with the principle of freedom of information they seek to invoke Chapter 9A of the law to prevent publication "for fear of harming state security and foreign relations."
In his statement, Herzog argued that, "At the present time, public disclosure of the material could cause injury," about which "we are unable to expand upon." The attorney's office even asked the court for an in camera session, without the presence of the petitioners, during which the state would explain the basis of its claim. Judge Michal Rubinstein has not yet issued a decision on the matter.
mercredi 2 janvier 2008
Barak: West Bank roadblocks are effective, will remain in place
Haaretz 09:10 02/01/2008
By Yuval Azoulay, Haaretz Correspondent, and The Associated Press
West Bank roadblocks have proven themselves in preventing terror attacks against Israel and will not be removed, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Tuesday during a visit to an Israel Defense Forces post in the northern West Bank. "The method of roadblocks has proven itself," Barak told a group of IDF soldiers from the Golani Brigade. "There is no way to effectively fight terrorism without actual daily control of the area." The defense minister added, however, that Israel was making an attempt to alleviate the Palestinians' plight.
"We are trying to make life easier for the Palestinians by opening roadblocks on the outskirts," he said. "We have recently opened dozens of dirt blockings and removed two of the 16 major roadblocks. We may do a few other things to ease the Palestinians' lives." The defense minister also spoke about recent Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians, including Friday's attack on two soldiers from Kiryat Arba who were spending their leave hiking in the Hebron Hills. "Our main target is Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine," he said. "There are too many terrorists, and too much desire to carry out attacks in the area, and without intelligence and field control, we'll witness more attacks such as the ones were Zuldan, Amihai, and Rubin were killed." Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said Barak's comments were "very unfortunate." "I don't think we can do anything about the economy ot improvement of life or revival of institution-building as long as the roadblocks remain," Erekat said.
By Yuval Azoulay, Haaretz Correspondent, and The Associated Press
West Bank roadblocks have proven themselves in preventing terror attacks against Israel and will not be removed, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Tuesday during a visit to an Israel Defense Forces post in the northern West Bank. "The method of roadblocks has proven itself," Barak told a group of IDF soldiers from the Golani Brigade. "There is no way to effectively fight terrorism without actual daily control of the area." The defense minister added, however, that Israel was making an attempt to alleviate the Palestinians' plight.
"We are trying to make life easier for the Palestinians by opening roadblocks on the outskirts," he said. "We have recently opened dozens of dirt blockings and removed two of the 16 major roadblocks. We may do a few other things to ease the Palestinians' lives." The defense minister also spoke about recent Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians, including Friday's attack on two soldiers from Kiryat Arba who were spending their leave hiking in the Hebron Hills. "Our main target is Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine," he said. "There are too many terrorists, and too much desire to carry out attacks in the area, and without intelligence and field control, we'll witness more attacks such as the ones were Zuldan, Amihai, and Rubin were killed." Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said Barak's comments were "very unfortunate." "I don't think we can do anything about the economy ot improvement of life or revival of institution-building as long as the roadblocks remain," Erekat said.
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)