Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘Second Coming

The crimes of 1948: Jewish fighters speak out

“The most ferocious Jewish terrorists on Palestinian civilians were those who had escaped the Nazi camps”.

Note: re-edit of 2019 post

#Nakba: Thomas VescoviThursday 28 June 2018 13:08 UTC

More than 60 years after these events, the combatants express little remorse: the territory needed to be liberated to found the Jewish State and there was no room for “Arabs” (Meaning Palestinians)

For the Israelis, 1948 represents the high point of the Zionist project, a major chapter in the Israeli national narrative and succeeded in realising the utopia formulated 50 years earlier by Theodor Herzl – the construction, in Palestine, of a state of refuge for the “Jewish people”.

(This utopia was the concept of the USA “Christian” Evangelists, 50 years prior to Herzl ideology: They believed the Second Coming will take place only when the Jews occupy Jerusalem and Wilson supported this ideology)

For the Palestinians, 1948 symbolises the advent of the colonial process that dispossessed them of their land and their right to sovereignty – known as the “Nakba” (catastrophe, in Arabic).

In theory, Israeli and Palestinian populations disagree over the events of 1948 that drove 805,000 Palestinians into forced exile everywhere in the world with no hope for return to their Homeland.

However, in practice, Jewish fighters testified early on to the crimes of which they perhaps played accomplice, or even perpetrator.

Dissonant voices

Through various channels, a number of Israelis would testify to the events of the day, as early as 1948.

At the time of the conflict, a number of Zionist leaders questioned the movement’s authorities on the treatment of Arab populations in Palestine, which they considered unworthy of the values the Jewish fighters claimed to defend. Others took notes hoping to testify once the violence had stopped.

Yosef Nahmani, a senior officer of the Haganah, the armed force of the Jewish Agency that would become the Army of Defense for Israel, wrote in his diary on 6 November 1948:

“In Safsaf, after the Palestinian inhabitants had hoisted the white flag, [the soldiers] gathered the men and women into separate groups, bound the hands of fifty or sixty villagers, shot them, then buried them all in the same pit. They also raped several women from the village. Where did they learn such behaviour, as cruel as that of the Nazis? […] One officer told me that the most ferocious were those who had escaped the camps.”

The truth is, once the war was over, the narrative of the victors alone was heard, with Israeli civil society facing a number of far more urgent challenges than that of the plight of the Palestinian refugees. People who wanted to recount the events of the day had to turn to fiction and literature.

,In 1949, the Israeli writer and politician, Yizhar Smilansky published the novella Khirbet Khizeh, in which he described the expulsion of an eponymous Arab village.

But according to the author, there was no need to feel remorse about that particular chapter of history. The “dirty work” was as a necessary part of building the Jewish state. His testimony reflects, instead, a kind of atonement for past sins. By acknowledging wrongs and unveiling them, one is able to cast off the burden of guilt.

The novel became a bestseller and was made into a TV film in 1977. Its release provoked heated debate since it called into question the Israeli narrative claiming the Palestinian populations had left their lands voluntarily to avoid living alongside Jews.

Other works were published but few as realistic as Netiva Ben--Yehuda’s trilogy, The Palmach Trilogy, published in 1984, recounting the events of a three-month period in 1948.

A commander in the Palmach, the elite fighting force of the Haganah, she evokes the abuses and acts of violence perpetrated against Arab inhabitants and provides details of the massacre at Ein al Zeitun, which took place around 1 May 1948.

The Deir Yassin massacre

On 4 April 1972, Colonel Meir Pilavski, a former Palmach fighter, was interviewed by Yediot Aharonot, one of Israel’s three largest daily papers, on the Deir Yassin massacre of 9 April 1948, in which nearly 120 civilians lost their lives.

His troops, he claims, were in the vicinity at the time of the attacks, but were advised to withdraw when it became clear the operations were being led by the extremist paramilitary forces, Irgun and Stern, which had broken away from the Haganah.

From then on, the debate would focus on the events at Deir Yassin, to the point of forgetting the nearly 70 other massacres of Arab civilians that took place. The stakes were high for the Zionist left: responsibility for the massacres would be placed on groups of ultras.

The debate would focus on the events of Deir Yassin, to the point of forgetting the nearly 70 other massacres of Arab civilians that took place

In 1987, when the first works of a group of historians known as the Israeli “new historians” appeared, including those of Ilan Pappé, a considerable part of the Jewish battalions of 1948 were called into question. For those who had remained silent in recent decades, the time had come to speak out.

Part of Israeli society seemed ready to listen as well. Within the context of the First Palestinian Intifada and the pre-Oslo negotiations, pacifist circles were ready to question Israeli society on its national narrative and its relationship to non-Jewish communities.

These attempts at dialogue ended suddenly with the outbreak of the Second Intifada, which was more militarised and took place in the aftermath of the failed Camp David talks and the breakdown of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. The Katz controversy would perfectly embody the new dynamic.

The Katz controversy

In 1985, a 60-year-old kibbutznik, Teddy Katz, decided to resume his studies and enrolled in a historical research programme under the direction of Ilan Pappé at the University of Haifa. He wanted to shed light on the events that took place in five Palestinian villages, deserted in 1948.

He conducted 135 interviews with Jewish fighters, 64 of which focused on the atrocity that allegedly took place in the village of Tantura, cleared of 1,200 inhabitants on 23 May 1948 by Palmach forces.

After two years of research, Katz states in his work that between 85 and 110 men were ruthlessly shot dead on Tantura beach, after digging their own graves. The massacre would then continue in the village, one house at a time, and a man-hunt was played out in the streets.

The killing only stopped when Jewish inhabitants from the neighbouring village of Zikhron Yaakov intervened. More than 230 people were murdered.

Ilan Pappé: “The Nakba, the observation of a crime, ignored but not forgotten

(Article to be continued)

Israel is ‘becoming a full-blown police state,’ Reza Aslan says after interrogation at border

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” src=”data:;base64,” />

Yesterday Peter Beinart, the liberal Zionist writer, disclosed that he had been detained at Ben Gurion airport on August 12 for an hour of questioning of his political opinions/activities.

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu promptly released an unprecedented statement saying the detention had been a mistake, and Beinart said he would accept Netanyahu’s apology only if he apologized to Palestinians who are subjected to far worse.

Many Zionists have responded angrily to the news by saying that the country is damaging itself in the eyes of the world by harassing left leaning Jews who want to visit.

And the Israeli attorney general says she is looking into the detention incidents.  

Today Reza Aslan, the bestselling writer on religion who was born in Iran and lives in LA, was moved by Beinart’s experience to tell his own story on twitter:

Peter’s experience has spurred me to share mine.

2 weeks ago, as I was crossing back into Israel from Jordan, I was separated from my family and detained by Shin Bet. “We can make it so you don’t see your kids for a long time” I was warned. This is what happened next.

The Shin Bet lady, who already knew everything about me and my family’s journey around the world, began with “You think because you’re a public person I can’t do whatever I want with you?” I was floored.

This is how interrogations begin in police states.

“Why do you hate Israel?” She asked. “I don’t hate Israel,” I replied. (And why don’t you Reza? Israel is behind prompting USA to carry out a pre-emptive war on Iran)

“But you hate our Prime Minister.” “I’m sorry that he is your Prime Minister?”

“He was democratically elected!” (No he wasn’t but let’s just drop that)

“So was Trump and I hate him and still love America.”

“Oh I know all about you and Trump,” she spat. I forgot the Israeli Right Wing’s affection for our racist Neo-Nazi loving president.

“You don’t think Israel should exist, yes?” That’s absurd. I’m against the occupation not Israel. (And how do you end the occupation Reza? By supporting the existence of colonial Israel?)

Then the police state part began in earnest.

Write down names of Palestinians you know

Write down names of journalists you associate with

Write down names of Palestinian organizations you support

And constantly, repeatedly, this threat: “if you don’t cooperate it will be a long time before you see your kids again.”

I tried to cooperate the best I could. It was 104 degrees.

My wife, my two 6yr olds, my 3yr old, and I my two elderly in-laws had been waiting for me in the sun for hours. But (again the police state tactic): every answer I gave she told me was lie. “Stop lying!” She’d yell.

The questions got dumber and more surreal:

“Who did your father work for in Iran?” I don’t know. I was 7 when we left

“Oh Mr Scholar! You can tell me everything about the Ottoman Empire but you don’t know your own father’s history?” For the record I am not an Ottoman scholar.

In the end, after hours of this, she warned “I may let you into Israel but, who knows, I may not let you out. I will keep you here and kick out your family. It depends on you. You would miss your kids, yes?”

That my friends is the classic police state trick. Iran has perfected it. (Iran of the Shah?)

Her final warning was Not to visit the Palestinian Territories.

Not to meet with or speak to any Palestinians or any Israeli trouble makers. “We are watching you.”

2 days later I went to Bethlehem, to the wall, and took this picture:

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” src=”data:;base64,” />

Painting of Ahed Tamimi on Bethlehem wall, photo by Reza Aslan

Two days later, the Italian artist who painted this portrait of Ahed Tamimi was arrested and deported.

This was my 4th trip to Israel in ten years and every time it’s gotten worse. It’s becoming unrecognizable as a democracy. It is becoming a full-blown police state.

When I was released my evangelical in-laws were in shock. (The “Christian” evangelical movement in US is the staunchest supporter of Israel, no matter what: They want to believe the Second Coming won’t happens unless Jerusalem is totally Jewish)

“I had no idea it was like this,” they said. Now they do.

So do more Americans each day.

And if Israel loses them, who will continue to shield it from pressure to change course? The clock is ticking.

Addendum: Beinart managed to get out of detention quickly by calling on human rights attorney Gaby Lasky.

Lasky represents Ahed Tamimi, the 17-year-old Palestinian woman in the painting, who lives in the occupied village of Nabi Saleh and spent 8 months in prison recently for slapping an Israeli soldier.

It appears that Beinart’s case has already gotten as much attention as hers, and far more outrage; though of course Tamimi’s case is not that unusual.

Today Samidoun (Steadfast) released a report stating, “In July 2018, Israeli occupation forces arrested (administratively?) 520 Palestinians from the occupied Palestinian territories, including 69 children, nine women and five journalists.”

5 Reasons We So Blindly Support Israel in Spite of the Truth or Biblical Ethics

Two-State Solution and the Differentiation Strategy

Note: I wrote many articles on this existential issue. As long as the extremist Evangelical Zionists in the USA believe firmly that the Second Coming will happens when Jerusalem is totally Jewish, reason and rational policies are irrelevant for any feasible strategy, except military re-conquest of Palestine.

Apparently, there are about 50 million of those deplorable Evangelical Zionists in the USA who don’t believe a Palestinian exist. At best temporary residents. And many European States have these kinds of extremist dogmatic religious affiliations. Evangelical Zionist foundation preceded Herzl by 50 years, and it the US supreme judge in 1915 who pressured Wilson to obtain from Britain and Balfour a declaration on a Jewish homeland before joining England in WW!

In an attempt to maintain their legitimacy through International Law compliance, the European Union has continued to support the parameters of the Oslo Agreement and a Two-State Solution.

(Oslo Agreement is the peace deal that Clinton signed with Arafat and Rabin in 1992. After Rabin assassination, the US reneged on its signature and every clause in the deal. Congress went even further and pronounced that Jerusalem is Capital of Israel in 1996)

However, by doing so, it has failed to adjust to the changing realities on the ground and half-measures designed to ensure the geopolitical readiness of the East Side of the Green Line have ultimately failed to move the Middle East Peace Process any closer to a final agreement. (East Side of the Green Line? Explain)

The reasons behind this cautious EU approach to the conflict are complex and, at its crux, revolves around a lack of unity among EU member states; a reluctance to instigate any major confrontation with Israel and their limited power if acting unilaterally without US backing.

With the purpose of understanding the role and limits of the European Union in the Israel/Palestine conflict resolution, this paper places emphasis on the EU Differentiation Strategy and its symbiotic relationship with the Two State for Two Peoples paradigm.

(Paradigm? But the Palestinians lived in Palestine for thousands of years. It is accepting the Zionist Jews, who came from everywhere, as a people that is the new paradigm)

On the basis that the EU’s Strategy aims to build the foundations of a future Palestinian State, it will be argued that the Differentiation Strategy is insufficient to achieve a Two-State Solution as it fails to understand the roots of the settlement policies and the lack of sovereignty in the Occupied Territories as the main obstacle to peace. (Wrong. the institutions knew these facts ever since Israel was recognized as a State, and the European people too)

The European Union has played an important role in the Middle East Peace Process (MEPP) being both a supporter of a Two-State solution and a legitimising agent of the Palestinian State –meaning Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem[1].  I

ts role in legitimising a more pro-Arab framework of negotiations has been key to normalising issues such as the Palestinian rights back in the 70’s when only Arab states had hitherto mentioned the word Palestinians or a Palestinian Homeland.

Cognisant of the fact that a unified voice was essential to gain credibility and weight in the world’s International Affairs[2], the European Community further formalised its pro-Arab approach through the Venice Declaration in 1980 by calling for the PLO involvement in the Peace negotiations and the Palestinian right to self-determination[3].

Further to this, the already established European Union committed to the recognition of a Palestinian State in the 1999 Berlin Declaration “when appropriate”[4] and recognised Jerusalem as the capital for both states later in 2009[5].

In this spirit, it has been largely argued that the European Community had set the grounds for the signing of the Declaration of Principles in 1993[6] which defined the Oslo parameters making the EU the “middle ground” party in the negotiations[7].

Since 1980 it has consistently advocated for a Two-State solution, and the Green Line as the border between Israel and Palestine[8] serving as a normative example internationally[9]. Hence, being this ‘definer’ of normality confers on the EU a certain political weight in international affairs- a fact that should not be overlooked[10].

The European Union, as the largest donor to the Palestinians, has strongly committed economically to the Palestinian state-building enterprise in a belief that occupation will perish under strong institution building[11].

With the final aim of achieving Palestinian statehood, the EU has been supporting the Palestinian Authority institution and infrastructure building[12]. Again, the EU has also taken an economic lead in the Palestinian right to self-determination and demonstrated its commitment to the Two-State Solution by strengthening future Palestinian state infrastructure.

As the Secretary-General, António Guterres affirmed earlier this year[13]-“A two-State solution is the only way to achieve the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and secure a sustainable solution to the conflict”.

The most recent example of the European Union’s legitimising role in framing the conflict’s terminology and drawing red-lines has been the 2013 Differentiation Strategy. This Strategy has further underlined the European understanding of Israeli boundaries disregarding the “Greater Israel” conceptualisation and set the grounds for Palestinian self-determination[14]. (Actually, even now, Israel refuses to have in its constitution any definite borders for the State)

Although there are precedents of EU´s differentiation between the State of Israel and the West Bank, the Differentiation Strategy has been understood as the crystallisation of these efforts in a more unified policy and a consequence of the European Parliament (EP) and activists groups’ pressure together with the European Commission frustration after the many failed attempts to end the conflict[15].

The Differentiation Strategy needs to be taken in the context of the post-Lisbon era and the increasing power of the European Parliament which has criticised the EU’s hesitant attitude to condemning Israeli unlawful action[16].

Given its less institutional character, the EP has held a more critical view and proof of this is its acknowledgement of the necessity to recognise Palestinian statehood concurrently with the Peace Talks and not as the consequence of these.[17]

The European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) defines the EU Differentiation Strategy as a “variety of measures taken by the EU and its member states to exclude settlement-linked entities and activities from bilateral relations with Israel” as a means to deter settlement construction[18] and a reminder of Oslo parameters.

When signing the Free Trade Agreement, Israel had to agree to exclude any products originated in settlements, thus, becoming unable to export them to Europe, as well as excluding settlement entities from the EU’s Horizon 2020 programme -which provides research grants.

These guidelines prevent settlement entities from accessing EU funds and, presently, 18 EU member states have issued advisories which aim to warn EU businesses of the legal and economic consequences of dealing with such entities[19].

As the EU’s Ambassador to Israel, Lars Faaborg-Andersen, put it: “The EU said it will accept mutually agreed changes to the pre-67 lines, or whatever the parties can agree on. However, until such an agreement is reached, it will continue to differentiate between Israel within internationally recognized borders and the settlements outside those borders”[20].

The problem emerges when the EU Differentiation Strategy is not consistently applied – as many states have preferred to comply with the guidelines through EU institutions but not bilaterally[21].

The discord among EU member states became even more apparent when in 2015 the European Commission issued an interpretative notice[22] on labeling settlement products to prevent them from having the same preferential treatment Israeli products have in the EU[23] -which provoked strong opposition from countries such as Greece, Hungary and the Czech Republic[24].

Israel responded fiercely to this policy and accused the labels of being anti-Semitic since, contrary to the 2013 strategy, the labeling involved action from the Israeli exporters and not only from Europe[25]: Netanyahu declared, “we remember history and we remember what happened when the products of Jews were labelled in Europe. The labelling of products of the Jewish state by the European Union brings back dark memories”[26].

Eventually, the product labeling was not equally applied among member states[27] and sparked strong criticism.

Whilst EU Law aimed to unify EU’s foreign policy on trading and funding issues, it has also evidenced the difficulty of getting a consensus among the 28 member states, given the disparity of their interests and their historical backgrounds –e.g. the tendency of a more pro-Israeli predilection of Eastern European countries[28].

Acting effectively given the divisions among EU member states and their own national and regional priorities as well as interests has been a daunting task thus far. The ascent of Euro-Scepticism after the economic crisis has contributed to the rise of populists and right wing leaning governments which tend to be more pro-Israeli[29].

As a result, any agreement will be based on the “lowest common denominator” [30] explaining the EU’s moderate approach and preventing any drastic measures such as the labelling to be equally implemented or realised.

This lack of unity among member states is also exemplified in the recognition of the State of Palestine. (Actually, far more States recognized Palestine than Israel was recognized in 1948)

When the Palestinian Authority presented its candidature in the United Nations in 2011 and despite a UN report which endorsed Palestinian readiness for statehood,[31] European members could not reach a consensus.

Contrary to what was expected, Sweden’s recognition of the Palestinian State in 2014 was not mirrored by others; the remaining states who today recognise Palestinian statehood did so whilst part of the Soviet Union, and some of these same states, such as the Czech Republic, are now close allies of Israel[32].

The Berlin Declaration which established that the recognition should be realised “when appropriate” is again another illustration of the EU’s overly-cautious behaviour, reluctant to take stronger measures and ´rush into´ Palestinian sovereignty.

As the Swedish Foreign Affairs Minister, Margot Wallström, upheld: “Some will state this decision comes too soon. I am afraid, rather, that it is too late.” (Nothing is too late, as long as the Palestinians are marching every Friday to Return home)

There is no unanimity among European member states on whether the EU should recognise Palestine collectively or bilaterally[33]. Yet, the problem is rather whether it will ever be appropriate: sovereignty should be a priority in the State-Building enterprise but it is undermined by the facts on the ground which are not properly condemned or addressed creating in a vicious circle.

As Lovatt argues[34], the statehood readiness that the EU considers necessary to recognise Palestine can hardly be achieved amid the limitations that the stem from territorial fragmentation in the West Bank. (Settlements in occupied lands are contrary to UN resolutions and should never be a handicap)

The European Union is a heterogeneous actor: to many member states national interests are still more powerful motivators than achieving a common EU foreign policy, making major decision-making on international relations both convoluted and treacherous.

Attempts to promote a more coherent foreign policy by, e.g. the Lisbon Treaty and the creation of the European External Action Service (EEAS), have proven to have limited scope for action or effectiveness[35].

On the top of that, instability in the European community -Brexit, the Ukraine crises and the rise of populism, among others- has increased the EU’s challenges[36] deprioritising the MEPP[37].

This heterogeneity hampers the diffusion of its normative discourse and the creation of a single identity. Normative power if not internalised within local institutions loses its full capacity to cause an impact[38].

(And why a few extremist Right wing Eastern European governments, like Hungary, Check republic, Poland..have to officially celebrate in Jerusalem with Ivanka? Is it the trend that every chauvinistic government in East Europe is supposed to lick USA ass in order to bypass EU frustrations with their racist policies?)

In this vein, major condemnation of the settlement policy would entail recognising Israel’s direct responsibility, thus, the EU’s differentiation strategy tends to understand settlements as a separate entity.(This statement is Not clear)

Even when the EU´s infrastructure has been demolished or seized by Israel due to their settlement policies in the West Bank, European foreign policy has always avoided imposing sanctions to Israel [39]which could be partially explained by the cooperative relation between the two actors.

In addition to the individual state alliances, the EU maintains strong economic and research links with Israel, being its main trading partner[40] -cooperation materialised through the “Association Agreement” in 2000[41]and further integrated Israel within the EU market via the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) in 2005[42].

Not only does Israel’s trade with Europe amount to a third of its total trade but also, Israel is one of the most significant trading partners to the EU in the Mediterranean Area and has been ranked as its 24th partner globally in 2016 [43]. Institutional and economic links between Europe and Israel could have reached an “everything without membership” status in 2013 through a partnership offered by the EU if Peace Talks had not failed a year later[44].

In sum and as Freedland well puts it “if one reason for Israel to end the occupation and make peace with the Palestinians was to improve its international standing, that motive has lost its urgency[45]. (Only sanctioning and boycotting Israel is the main pressure effort to rehabilitate the racist and apartheid policies of Israel)

It seems that maintaining trade relations with Israel is still more profitable than promoting its identity with consistency[46]by being more critical of the settlement activity. Still, the EU has continued to place emphasis on its compliance of International Law and in its “middle ground” normative role.

The Differentiation Strategy, or the “New Approach” as coined by Harpaz[47] is based on “‘[T]he respect of EU positions and commitments in conformity with international law on the non-recognition by the EU of Israel’s sovereignty over the territories occupied by Israel since June 1967’”[48] reinforcing its understanding of the conflict.

As stated previously, coherence and continuity confer actors’ legitimacy and, thus, leverage in International Affairs. “EU’s self-identity”[49] is grounded on its “consistency, effectiveness and continuity of its policies and actions”[50] as well as “strict observance and the development of international law, including respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter”[51] as established in the Lisbon Treaty.

European normative power may provide external legitimacy by being consistent with International Law[52], but it does not lead to major changes on the ground. In other words, not rewarding the State of Israel for its settlement policy –referring to the Differentiation Strategy[53] does not halt the settlement policy itself.

Furthermore, if more drastic measures to condemn Israel policies vis-á-vis the occupied territories were to be taken, they would require prior US backing. The High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini, could not be clearer in that respect: “Nothing without the United States, nothing with the United States alone”[54].

The US is the only capable actor of exercising effective pressure on Israel and even if the EU were to make use of all its leverage on both parties, this would not necessarily result in a compromise between the PA and the Israeli government[55]. US approval, as well as support, is required to lead the MEPP[56].

The EU Differentiation Strategy has been insufficient to pressure Israel and failed to force any recognition of Israeli state responsibility as the perpetrator and driving-force of increased settlement activity, by only tackling non-governmental actors based in the settlements[57].

Yet the EU is still cognisant of the dangers this activity presents to achieving a Two-State solution and the danger of reaching a one-state reality. As recently acknowledged by António Guterres: “Negative trends on the ground have the potential to create an irreversible one-state reality that is incompatible with realizing the legitimate national, historic and democratic aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians” (This statement is a tacit encouragement for Israel to continue its settlement policies).[58]

The EU has been managing rather than resolving the conflict which proves once again the urgent need for a new “new approach”.[59]A non-confrontational attitude[60]towards Israel is certainly not a strong enough tool to force Israel to reconsider its policy vis-á-vis the occupied territories.

The EU’s relation with Israel is based on a policy of incentives which places the country in a privileged position in trade relations and turns any effort to differentiate Israel from Greater Israel almost purely normative. There is a misconception in understanding settlements as a separate entity from the State of Israel as the Differentiation Strategy does. Notwithstanding that the EU has taken the lead in establishing the red lines of the conflict, these appear to be far too unambitious to properly threaten the settlement expansion.

The European Differentiation Strategy can, thus, be taken as an example of the limits of the European role in achieving a Two-State Solution. Due to the lack of unity among member states, the strong economic and institutional ties with Israel and the difficulty of pursuing a stronger policy unilaterally at odds with the US, the European Union has chosen to take a cautious approach.

Maintaining the current bilateral and multilateral relations with Israel bears more fruit than any benefits reaped from an overt confrontation. Avoiding confrontation still allows the EU to maintain its coherency and, thus, to some extent its external legitimacy.

On the one hand, the Differentiation Strategy can be seen as an EU attempt to preserve its legitimacy internationally since the time for abandoning the Two-State Solution is not ripe after all efforts invested in it and given the unpopularity of the alternatives. On the other hand, it also proves the urgent need for a real shift in the EU’s thinking.

By tackling the consequences of settlement activity instead and disregarding its roots, the conflict has reached a stalemate which has not actively contributed to reaching the sovereignty required for Palestinian statehood and, thus, the achievement of a Two-State Solution.

Despite the fact that a halt or decrease in the settlement activity has not come to reality, the Differentiation Strategy can still be understood as an active approach towards the conflict resolution strengthening the role of the EU as the middle ground party.  Moreover, after the US confirmed its budget cuts to UNRWA, the European Union has pledged additional funds directed to the UN agency and the Palestinian institution-building enterprise[61] which, together with the Union’s rejection of the US latest decision on Jerusalem, can serve as confidence builders for the Palestinians towards the EU.

(The same process with Iran nuclear deal: EU will have to shoulder the compensation for US reneging on the deal)

Amid the difficulties and limitations previously described, the EU has recently taken a more active role in the conflict with the purpose of reactivating the Peace Talks. Its engagement on the ground is now under the scrutiny of the EU foreign ministers who are committed to reviewing the modalities applied thus far. Mogherini clarified in her declaration: “The purpose of this review, that will be conducted mainly by our colleagues in the European Commission, will be exactly to make sure that all the modalities of our engagement will be as efficient and as effective as they can be to reach the goal of the two-state solution.”[62]

At an Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) extraordinary session hosted by the EU earlier this year, the Union has committed to engage in further multilateral talks with the Quartet, Norway and the Arab partners[63].  Further to this, Abbas’s decision to hold an International Conference by mid-2018 which aims to re-address the conflict multilaterally –meaning the Middle East Quartet and the Arab League- was particularly well-received by France and Russia[64].

This new impulse to reactivate and re-address the talks could provide the EU with the space to translate its normative and financial power into significant changes on-the-ground. It remains to be seen what 2018 will bring for the MEPP but the one thing is clear: the EU continues to have a legitimising role in the negotiations despite the limitations.

Israel snipers and soldiers ordered to fulfill “Quotas”: How many to assassinate, to injure, every hour of the Palestinians marches to Return Home

Those injured had their legs targeted in order Not to march any time soon

In 1948, amid the massacres and military forced mass expulsions of the Palestinians called al “Nakba” (Arabic for catastrophe) as the State of “Israel” was recognized by the UN by a majority of a single vote, (The independent States in Africa in the 60’s and dozen other new States were Not in the UN), all of the Jews who had been calling themselves Palestinians became “Israelis”.

USA embassy in Jerusalem: Another extremist Evangelical Zionists settlement in Palestine?

Since the pronouncement of Donald Trump in April of Jerusalem Capital of the State of Israel, the Palestinians have been marching every Friday, called “March to return Home”, I have been following the thousands of casualties inflicted by Israeli snipers and soldiers on these peaceful demonstrations. I covered them in my posts “tidbits and notes”.

Mind you that US Congress declared Jerusalem Capital of Israel in 1996.  And under Clinton administration. This president that signed a “peace deal” with Rabin and Arafat, only to renege on it, every clause in it , after rabin assassination.

Clinton officially blamed the Palestinians when Arafat met Ehud Barack, (Israel PM) though unofficially put the entire blame on the intransigence of the Israeli.

Since Trump pronouncement on Jerusalem, Palestinians have been marching every Friday. So far, casualties surpassed the 10,000 injured and over 500 killed by live bullets. Just May 14 and 15, 114 Palestinians were killed by snipers and 2,100 injured. 410 of them in critical conditions.

For example:

On May 14, I followed the progress of the assassination of Palestinians on the borders with Gaza

Monday, May 14, 2018: It is 1:30 pm and the Israeli snipers and soldiers killed 18 Palestinians and already injured 500 with live bullets.  In the mean time, Ivanka and Husband extremist Zionist Kushner are celebrating in Jerusalem.

3:5 pm, May 14Israeli snipers and soldiers killed 28 Palestinians and already injured 1,500 with live bullets and toxic tear gas canisters.

6:15 pm, May 14: Israeli snipers and soldiers killed 52 Palestinians and already injured 2,500 with live bullets and toxic tear gas canisters.

Every single hour of this demonstration generated 6 killed martyrs and 420 injured. In the mean time, Ivanka and husband extremist Zionist Kushner are still celebrating in Jerusalem.

I watched a female reporter fall down as a poisonous “tear” gas fall in her vicinity. Apparently, England and France are experimenting with their chemical weapons on the Palestinians. Israel is bombing emergency Red Cross tents with tear gas too.

Fadi abu Salah (29), was handicapped during Israel pre-emptive war on Gaza. They finished him off Yesterday by an Israeli sniper

Israeli soldiers described why and how they assassinated the 8-month toddler girls.

Jerusalem: Israeli settlers invade the Muslim Al Aqsa and try to prevent the coverage of this aggression

Ivanka and Kushner celebrated in Jerusalem on the blood and suffering of 2,100 Palestinians injured in a single day. 55 already killed by live bullets

Tuesday, May 15, 2018: 2,200 Palestinian families in Gaza are mourning, wailing, tending to the injured member of the families. Among the 2,200 injured by live bullets from Israeli snipers and drones, 410 are in critical conditions. 55 were killed yesterday during the “March to return Home” and denouncing Trump opening the US embassy in Jerusalem and another 60 the day after.

3 days of mourning for the Palestinians? Like what? Lowering the flag half mast? Visiting the mourning 104 families who lost a member of the family? Visiting the 410 critically injured? Personally disbursing financial compensation? Opening the Rafa7 border with Egypt to transfer the critically inured?

There is a qualitative shift in covering the massive massacre in Gaza and West Bank in the western media: from focusing on a French stabbed in Paris for an entire week, and from nonchalantly claiming that just a dozen Palestinian killed to full exact numbers of 114 killed by live bullets and 2,100 injured in a single day.

Coverage is gaining momentum and the USA and Israel are isolated and the world community recalling Israel’s ambassadors. By South Africa, Turkey…

Why Israel uses live bullets on Palestinians in Gaza and indiscriminately kill them, while restricting itself with at most rubber bullets on Palestinians in the West Bank?

Most probably because Israel considers that the “higher standard of living” of Palestinians in the West Bank has tamed them and won’t take the risk of exacerbating tensions with mass murder?

Israel soldiers and snipers at it again for the 6th Friday: killing and shooting with live bullets at Palestinians marching for their rights to return Home: Hundreds of injured and maimed Palestinians on the borders with Gaza.

Note 1: For every dollar the U.S. spent on an African, it spent $250.65 on an Israeli, and for every dollar it spent on someone from the Western Hemisphere outside the United States, it spent $214 on an Israeli.

Just in fiscal 1997 alone, Israel received from a variety of other U.S. federal budgets at least $525.8 million above and beyond its $3 billion from the foreign aid budget, and yet another $2 billion in federal loan guarantees. So the complete total of U.S. grants and loan guarantees to Israel for fiscal 1997 was $5,525,800,000
Although Congress authorizes America’s foreign aid total, the fact that more than a third of it goes to a country smaller in both area and population than Hong Kong probably never has been mentioned on the floor of the Senate or House. Or that Israel standard of living is higher than Spain and Ireland. Yet it’s been going on for more than a generation.

Why USA never demanded Israel to conduct a single referendum  on any one of major issues in the Middle-East? Like retaining the Golan Heights, Jerusalem as Capital or building walls of shames?

The UN general Assembly declared by a crushing majority that Zionism is a form of racism in 1975. It abrogated it in 1991. Why? US congress has declared Jerusalem Capital of Israel in 1996

Moving the US embassy to Jerusalem on May 15 is the nastiest symbolic date for all Palestinians and nationalist “Arabs”: Date of infamy of the Nakba when State of Israel first displaced thousands of the Palestinians in 1948

Begun in 2005 by the largest trade union federations and organizations in Palestinian society, B.D.S. calls for ending Israel’s 1967 occupation, “recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality,” and the right of Palestinian refugees to return to the homes and lands from which they were forcibly displaced and dispossessed in 1948.

Note 2: I wrote many articles on this existential issue. As long as the extremist Evangelical Zionists in the USA believe firmly that the Second Coming will happens when Jerusalem is totally Jewish, reason and rational policies are irrelevant for any feasible strategy, except military re-conquest of Palestine.

 

 

 

 

Tidbits and notes posted on FB and Twitter. Part 199

Note: I take notes of books I read and comment on events and edit sentences that fit my style. I pa attention to researched documentaries and serious links I receive. The page is long and growing like crazy, and the sections I post contains a month-old events that are worth refreshing your memory.

White supremacist Richard Spencer finds his model in the state of Israel: “You could say I am a white Zionist, the Jewish state  of Israel is the most important and perhaps most revolutionary ethno-state that I turn to for guidance.”

What ethno-democracy means? Israel prime minister described the Arab citizens of Israel (Palestinians) as a “demographic threat”; the education minister who settled a cabinet debate by saying “I’ve killed lots of Arabs in my life and there’s no problem with that”; or the justice minister who called Palestinian childrenlittle snakes.” It doesn’t matter what the nations of the world say.” And the public security minister said at the beginning of 2018. “The time has come to express our biblical right to the land.”

Before the two-state idea (Palestine/Israel), the early leaders of Israel’s left-of-center Labor Party did things like reward Jewish “heroine mothers” who had more than ten children and drafted “Absentee Property Laws” to make sure expelled Palestinians could never return to their homes.

The sinister solution is the term “peaceful ethnic separation” — an idea that has its roots in population “exchanges,” such as between Greece and Turkey in 1923, Muslims in India into the newly created State of Pakistan in 1948, the one-sided “transfers” like the expulsion of Germans from Central and Eastern Europe after the Second World War, the expulsion of the Muslim Rohingas from Burma and the vast transfer of Palestinians from their villages since 1948 and after each of the many pre-emptive wars. since then

Popular support for the most extreme form of “transfer” — outright expulsion — is widespread in Israel, often polling over 50 % among Jewish Israelis. particularly among settlers.

Is it just a Psychological Barrier between the Palestinians and Colonialist Israelis? The Israeli author and activist Amos Oz had organized the “Peace Now” movement 2 decades ago and the movement is currently not  doing well in Israel.  Amos published “Help us to divorce”; “how to heal a fanatic”; “A story of love and darkness”; and his latest “Scenes of village life”.

Amos Oz resumed his talk: “Israel cannot be but a deception since it is a State built on a dream.” A fictitious mythical dream. Particularly the dream of US Evangelical Zionists who believe firmly that Second Coming will happens when Jerusalem is Jewish

Israel’s Newest Allies: The US and UK White Nationalist Right, famous anti-Semitic movements have come to admire modern Israel’s “ethno-nationalism, ethnic cleansing activities.” Harry Blain

 

Notes and tidbits posted on FB and Twitter. Part 147

Note: I take notes of books I read and comment on events and edit sentences that fit my style. I pay attention to researched documentaries and serious links I receive. The page is long and growing like crazy, and the sections I post contains a month-old events that are worth refreshing your memory.

Trump akhad fesse’ (behind whipped). 128 countries slapped his ass pretty well. 9 of USA “colonies” voted against the UN resolution, Pretty lame alliances

Again, why US administration didn’t challenge Israel to conduct a referendum on Jerusalem before the pronouncement in the face of world community position? Simple: It is the US Evangelical Zionists who wanted it. (Something to do with Second Coming?)

Our existential enemies are the Evangelical Zionists who are spreading Jewish myths, every which way and manners

Most of the days (1971-75) I ended up attending conferences, political party meetings, joining regular demonstrations and marches by university students, sit-ins, hunger strikes on the street in front of the education ministry (I tried once for half a day), fleeing police tanks and water hoses, or just walking all around Beirut circulating where the “movable fairs” crossed my path, gathering of people chanting slogans against the sectarian and mercantile political system, the defeatist government, not responding to the frequent bombardment of Israel in south Lebanon...

The citizens (mostly Moslem Chiaa) in the south (1970-75), after each Israeli incursion in Lebanon, flocked to the suburbs of Beirut, mainly in Dahieh, and labelled the “Red belt of poverty

Let’s be focused: Until the Evangelical Zionists in US Senate and Congress rescind the 1995 law on Jerusalem, there should be No let-off of the various Intifadas in Palestine and everywhere else. Every week, on successive Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays.

38 countries abstained of voting on a UN resolution that didn’t even mention an independent Palestinian State? Shi mouzri. ba3d fi shoghol kteer

La survie de la region (Palestine, Lebanon and Jordan) depend des fleuves et des sources d’eau: mont Hermon (Jabal el Cheikh)

Imagine un corps, mirroir d’une identite’ honnie. Ma grand-mere se souvient de tous les humiliations depuis 1936 en Palestine. Elle a vu ses parents changer de domicile plusieurs fois, avec des bagages bien plus restreint au fil des evenements.

Trop d’intelligence innee’ qui se develop avec chaque boulversement: De la rationalite’ froide et efficace.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

April 2020
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Blog Stats

  • 1,376,344 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 719 other followers

%d bloggers like this: