Gush Shalom: Assassinations in Bethlehem and Tulkarm – grave provocation

Press Release, March 13, 2008

Gush Shalom: Assassinations in Bethlehem and Tulkarm – grave provocation

The government does not want a ceasefire, but a new flareup

Those who sent the assassins to carry out “liquidations” today, in Tulkarm and Bethlehem, knew what they were doing – a grave act of provocation which might blow up the serious chance which had opened up, to reach ceasefire and calm. This is a wanton, completely irresponsible act, which might return the inhabitants of Sderot, Ashkelon and Gaza back into the hell from which they momentarily escaped.

The lethal propaganda perpetrated today is the latest in a whole week of provocations:

- the Prime Minister approving settlement construction, spitting in the face of the entire world;

- the incitement in the Knesset, even by the Speaker, to the vengeful destruction of a family house for a crime of which none of the people living there is guilty;

- the rabbis who openly and insolently encourage their disciples to commit indiscriminate killings;

- and also the small-minded boycott declared against the Al-Jazeera TV, whose only sin was to expose to the world’s gaze horrors which the Government of Israel wanted to hide.

הודעה לעיתונות 13.3.2008

גוש שלום: ההתנקשות בבית לחם ובטולכרם – מעשה פרובוקציה חמור

הממשלה אינה רוצה הפסקת אש, אלא התלקחות חדשה וחמורה

מי ששיגרו את 'המחסלים' אל בית לחם וטולכרם ידעו בדיוק מה הם עושים – מעשה פרובוקציה חמורה שעלולה לפוצץ את הסיכוי הרציני שנפתח לנו, להגיע להפסקת אש ורגיעה. זהו מעשה מופקר וחסר אחריות שעלול להחזיר את תושבי שדרות, אשקלון ועזה היישר אל תוך הגיהנום שממנו נמלטו לרגע.

הפרובוקציה הקטלנית שבוצעה היום במצוותם של שר הביטחון וראשי הצבא מצטרפת לשבוע שלם של פרובוקציות קטנות וגדולות:

- פתיחת ברזי הבניה ההתנחלותית ברחבי הגדה המערבית על ידי ראש הממשלה, תוך יריקה בפרצופו של העולם כולו;

- הצטרפות של פוליטיקאים דמגוגים כמו יושבת ראש הכנסת למסע ההסתה הנקמנית הדורש להרוס את בית משפחתו של מי שכבר נענש בעונש מוות;

- הרבנים המעודדים בגלוי ובמצח נחושה את תלמידיהם לבצע מעשי הרג ללא אבחנה;

- החרם הקטנוני על רשת אל-ג'זירה, שכל חטאה היה לחשוף לעיני העולם מעשי זוועה שממשלת ישראל הייתה מעדיפה להסתיר ולמחוק.

From Stalingrad to Winograd

by Uri Avnery

FOR SOME days, the country looked like the Place de la Concorde in 1793. The entire public sat expectantly facing the guillotine, waiting for the tumbril to bring the marquis, for the marquis to lie down, for the blade to fall on his neck and for a soldier to hold up the bloody, severed head for the amusement of the spectators.

All eyes were fixed on the raised blade of the Winograd commission. The judge sat down before the cameras and read out the report. But the blade did not come down. No reserve soldier raised the bloody, severed head. The head remained in its place. Ehud Olmert is no marquis, and his head remains firmly on his shoulders.

From one end of the country to the other, a deep sigh of disappointment. The reporters and commentators sprang from their seats, like the knitting hags of the Paris square whose marquis has escaped.

The Winograd commission has failed, the commentators exclaimed in outrage. To the many failures of the war, the failure of the commission must now be added.


EVERY EXPERIENCED politician knows the axiom: He who chooses the members of a commission determines its conclusions in advance.

That is almost self-evident. After all, the members of the commission are only human. Human beings have attitudes and opinions. These are known in advance to the person who appoints them. He can appoint the members at will. If he appoints tycoons, he can reasonably expect that they will not decide to raise the taxes on the rich. If he appoints leftists instead, the recommendations will be quite different.

Therefore, when the proposed Law of Commissions of Inquiry was debated, we decided that the members of an "official" commission of inquiry should not be appointed by the government, but by the President of the Supreme Court. I was a member of the Knesset at the time and took an active part in the debate. I proposed that not only would the Chief Justice appoint the commission members, but that he - and not the government - would decide on the setting up of an inquiry in the first place. (This was rejected.)

That happened seven years before the young Ehud Olmert was first elected to the Knesset. But he understands the law perfectly. When, after Lebanon War II, the appointment of an "official" commission of inquiry was proposed, he objected strenuously. He insisted on a government-appointed inquiry commission. While the members of an official commission are appointed by the Chief Justice, the members of a government commission are appointed by the government itself.

Vive la petite difference.

The appointment of the Winograd commission was greeted by many doubts. But these evaporated completely when the interim report was released last April. It was harsh and uncompromising. It contained very negative remarks about Olmert.

So the public relaxed. The difference between the two kinds of commission was forgotten. The Winograd commission behaved exactly like an "official" commission, took decisions like one and spoke like one. It raised the guillotine blade, and everybody waited for it to fall on Olmert's neck.

And then it became clear that le petite difference was a very substantial difference indeed. The commission appointed by Olmert has now issued a final report that is favorable to Olmert all along the line, especially about the accusation that Olmert had decided on the last-minute "ground operation" and sent soldiers to their deaths to save his personal prestige.

The commission did not lay any personal blame on any politician or general. Here it could base itself on a decision of the Supreme Court, which had expressly forbidden the commission to condemn anyone personally.

How come? When the Knesset adopted the Commission of Inquiry Law, we paid much attention to Article 15. It prohibits condemning anyone without giving them a fair opportunity to defend themself. Such a person must be warned in advance and invited to appoint a lawyer, to cross-examine witnesses and to summon witnesses of their own.

That is a long process, and a commission of inquiry is generally in a hurry to finish its report before the subject of its investigation is forgotten. For example, the commission of inquiry that was set up after the Yom Kippur war, under Judge Agranat, just disregarded the article altogether and decided to dismiss the Chief of Staff, the Commander of the Southern Front and other generals, without giving them any advance warning at all.

The Winograd commission took another path: when the army authorities petitioned the Supreme Court and demanded that the commission respect Article 15, the commission just promised that they would not blame anybody personally.

The commission could, of course, have described Olmert's part in the war in such scathing terms as to force him to resign. It did not do so. On the contrary, it concluded that his decisions were reasonable.

The blade did not fall, Olmert was bruised, but still standing.


AFTER THE 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacre, the "official" commission of inquiry chaired by Judge Kahan published an exemplary report which exposed all the facts. But these could have led it to much harsher conclusions than it did actually reach. Instead of finding that Ariel Sharon and his minions were guilty of "indirect responsibility" for the massacre, it could have decided that they bore direct responsibility. The facts supported such a conclusion. Why did they not do so, and only dismissed Sharon and some officers? I assume that they shrunk back for fear of causing severe damage to the State of Israel.

Now I could write much the same about the Winograd commission. The facts exposed by it justify more extreme conclusions. What held them back? One can guess: the five commission members, all pillars of the establishment - 2 generals, 2 leading academics, 1 judge - did not want to topple Olmert, the No. 1 establishment person. Perhaps they feared that his place would be taken by somebody much worse - a worry shared by many others in the country.

As prominent establishment figures, the commission members also shrunk back from touching on two basic questions concerning Lebanon War II: (a) Why it was started at all, and (b) What had caused the shocking deterioration of the army.


IN ITS two reports, the commission asserted that the decision to start the war was taken in a hasty and irresponsible manner. The stated war aims were quite unattainable. But the commission did not say what had caused Olmert & Co. - the government of Israel - to make such a decision.

We now know for sure that plans for the war had been prepared a long time before. These were rehearsed only a month before the war and changes were made according to the results. In the end, these plans were not implemented at all. But it is clear that the government and the army had long been thinking about attacking Hizbullah.

For six years, the Northern border had been completely quiet. Hizbullah did deploy rockets (as it is doing now) but showed then (as now) no inclination to attack Israel.

The cross-border incursion in which two Israeli soldiers were captured was an exception. The action was intended to provide negotiating chips for the release of Hizbullah prisoners held in Israel (and perhaps to demonstrate solidarity with Hamas, which had just captured another Israeli soldier in a similar incursion.) Hassan Nasrallah later admitted that this was a grave mistake and would not have been done if he had imagined that it would cause a war. (Olmert, on his part, has not admitted to any mistake.)

As I said right at the beginning, this incident was a pretext for the war, not the reason for it. If so, what was the real reason? The desire of the civilian Olmert for military glory? The dream of the Chief of Staff, Dan Halutz, to prove that the Air Force could win a war alone, by a massive bombardment of the civilian population? The illusion that Hizbullah could be eliminated by one big strike?

When Judge Winograd tried to explain why a part of the report must be kept secret, the words he used attracted no attention: "The security of the state and its foreign relations". Foreign relations? What foreign relations? Relations with whom? There is only one reasonable answer: relations with the United States.

That could be the crux of the matter: Olmert fulfilled an American wish. President Bush wanted to install his protégé, Fouad Siniora, as ruler in Beirut. For that end, Hizbullah, the main Lebanese opposition force, had to be eliminated. Also, Bush wanted to effect a regime change in Syria, one of the main obstacles to American ambitions in the region.

I believe that this is the missing link in Winograd's chain. Olmert could have argued: "I was only obeying orders". But that, of course, is unspeakable.


THE OTHER black hole in the report concerns the Israeli army. The report criticizes it murderously. Never before has the army leadership been described in such a way - as a bunch of people without character, talent or competence; generals who are ready to send soldiers to their death in an operation they believe to be condemned to failure, just because they do not dare to stand up to their superiors; generals who do not demand a clear definition of the objectives before going into battle; Generals who do not recognize the fateful faults of their army, and who are themselves responsible - they and their predecessors - for these very faults.

All this is being said now. What has not been said is: how did we get such a leadership? What has caused these faults?

The answers can be summed up in two words: the occupation.

In the last few years I have written dozens of articles about the disastrous effects of the occupation on the army. One cannot employ a whole army for decades as a colonial police force for crushing the resistance of an occupied population, without changing its character. Soldiers who run after stone-throwing children in the alleys of the Qasbah, who hammer at night on the doors of civilians, who use bulldozers to destroy people's homes, and all this for year after year - such soldiers are not competent to fight a modern war.

Worse: such a colonial army does not attract the best and the brightest. These now go into high-tech and science. The brutal work of the army against civilians and guerrilla fighters disgusts people of conscience and sensitivity, the very ones who are the backbone of a good officers' corps. It blunts the senses of those who remain, or sends them home from the occupied territories traumatized.

In the 40 years of occupation, the Israeli army has lost the kind of officers that led it in the 1948 and 1967 wars, people like Yitzhak Sadeh, Yigal Allon, Yitzhak Rabin, Ezer Weitzman, Matti Peled, Haim Bar-Lev and David Elazar, to mention just a few. Their place has been taken by a mediocre, faceless group, gray but arrogant technicians, people of shallow thinking, colonialist and extreme right-wing attitudes, with an ever increasing percentage of knitted kippa-wearers.

That is the group the report speaks of - but without saying so. It is an occupation army in which a negative natural selection process operates - everyone who does not feel comfortable in this milieu just leaves. As in any army, the atmosphere prevailing at the top - good or bad - trickles down the ranks to the meanest soldier.

This is not an army of Stalingrad fighters defending their country - this is an army of Winograd fighters. An army which no genius can to "repair", as demanded by the commission. Because all the faults stem from the original sin: the occupation.

(source: http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1201998041/)

"GAZA: LIFT THE BLOCKADE" - The Relief Convoy on its way

(Source: Gush Shalom mailing list and website)
-------

Click here to watch video from the convoy (sorry, Hebrew only)

The initiative for the large action that took place today (26.1.08) started when the well-know psychiatrist, Dr. Eyad al-Sarraj, the human-rights activist from Gaza, met in the Gush Shalom office with a small group of Israeli peace activists, in order to tell them about the desperate situation in the strip. It was decided on the spot to organize in Israel a relief convoy for the Gaza Strip people, and to fight by all political and juridical means for the right to get it in. It was agreed that two parallel protest rallies would be held simultaneously on the two sides of the wall.

26 Israeli peace groups joined the initiative, under the single slogan: "Gaza: Lift the siege!" Many activists from different organizations worked day and night. Gush Shalom prepared a special poster and started a fund-raising campaign among its sympathizers. Hundreds of checks came pouring in from Israel and a dozen other countries, enabling the Gush to carry alone the full costs of the supplies. Many added words of thanks for the opportunity given them to express their opinion this way and join the struggle.

Warm thanks to all of them!

In consultation with Dr. al-Sarraj it was decided to buy not only five tons of essential foodstuffs - flour, sugar, rice, oil, salt, beans and lentils - but also water distillers. "The water in the Gaza Strip is undrinkable," al-Sarraj reported, "therefore there is an urgent need for distillers."

The weather forecasts promised rain and thunderstorms all over the country. In spite of this, old and young peace activists came to the starting points in six towns. As requested by the organizers, hundreds of families came in their private cars. Together with the people who came by bus, their number reached about two thousand.

"In the night we were woken up by strong thunderbolts. It started to rain cats and dogs, and we were very worried: who is going to get up early on Shabbat morning in such stormy weather in order to participate in an open-air protest rally and carry sacks of food?" recounted one of the organizers.

Ya'akov Manor had the idea to ask the demonstrators to bring private relief parcels and to add personal letters "from family to family". The response was beyond all expectations. Families brought not only food and mineral water, but also blankets, warm clothing and many other useful articles, even electrical stoves. The parcels were fastened to the tops of the cars or put in the baggage holds of the buses. They added up to two tons.

When the demonstrators assembled in the towns - Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Haifa, Nazareth and others - a slight rain was falling. But all who hoped for a brightening up were soon disappointed: during the drive to the Erez border crossing, a very heavy rain started to pour down, making it almost impossible to see the road, and slowed down the huge convoy towards the Gaza strip extremely difficult.

About half of the protesters were Jewish, the other half Arab. The rally was conducted the same way: Side by side with the Jewish speakers - Uri Avnery, Nurit Peled-Elhanan, Professor Jeff Halper and former minister Shulamit Aloni (who was ill and sent a written speech, read by Teddy Katz), speeches were made by advocate Fatmeh al-Ijou, and MKs Izzam Mahul and Jamal Zahalke.

At the height of the rally, the moderator, Huloud al-Badawi, called Dr. Sarraj by cellular phone. He was participating at the parallel rally in Gaza and his words were conveyed by loudspeaker. They amounted to a stirring call to the Israeli peace camp to support the Palestinians in their struggle against the blockade.

A sensation was caused by a young woman from Sderot, Shir Shusdig, who called out: "For seven years I am suffering from the Qassams in Kibbutz Zikim and Sderot. I know that the people on the other side are also suffering very much. That's why I am here!"

Jeff Halper mentioned that demonstrations of solidarity with the people of Gaza were taking place in dozens of cities around the world. Advocate al-Ijou pointed out that the Attorney General had asserted in a Supreme Court hearing that the blockade on Gaza was similar to the boycott against the former apartheid regime in South Africa. "This is absurd when it comes from a government which is building apartheid roads all over the West Bank!"

Miraculously, the rain stopped just before the rally, and started again a few minutes after it was finished.

Since the Israeli army has not allowed the relief supplies into the Gaza strip, they were stored in a neighboring kibbutz. If the military will not permit their transfer to Gaza in the next two days, we shall apply to the High Court of Justice and start a legal fight until we succeed.

-------

Uri Avnery's speech at the rally:

Three days ago, a wall fell here – Just as the Berlin Wall fell, Just as the apartheid wall will fall, And just as all walls and fences in this country Will come down.

But the inhuman blockade That has been imposed on A million and a half human beings in Gaza By our government By our army, In our name – This siege is continuing in its full cruelty. We, Israelis from various political camps, Have come to bring basic supplies And to say to the Israeli public And to the whole world: We will not participate in crime! We are ashamed of the blockade!”

Our hearts are with our Palestinian brothers Who are at this moment demonstrating with us On the other side of the fence – Don’t lose faith that one day We will meet together in this place Without fences, without walls, Without violence, Without fighting, The sons of two peoples living next to each other In peace, in friendship, in partnership.

Our hearts are with our brothers, the residents of Sderot – The threat of Qassams must stop! It won’t stop by a policy of “an eye for an eye”, Or a hundred eyes for one eye, Or a thousand eyes for one eye, Because that only leaves us all blind. It will end when we speak to the other side – Yes, yes, even with Hamas! And we'll together create a total and mutual ceasefire – Without Qassams, without murderous incursions, Without mortars, without extrajudicial assassinations, Without blockade, without starvation.

This is our call, this is our demand: Set up an immediate ceasefire! Open the crossings immediately! Make peace with all parts of the Palestinian people! MAKE PEACE!”

-------

Uri Avnery

26.01.08

Worse than a Crime

IT LOOKED like the fall of the Berlin wall. And not only did it look like it. For a moment, the Rafah crossing was the Brandenburg Gate.

It is impossible not to feel exhilaration when masses of oppressed and hungry people break down the wall that is shutting them in, their eyes radiant, embracing everybody they meet - to feel so even when it is your own government that erected the wall in the first place.

The Gaza Strip is the largest prison on earth. The breaking of the Rafah wall was an act of liberation. It proves that an inhuman policy is always a stupid policy: no power can stand up against a mass of people that has crossed the border of despair.

That is the lesson of Gaza, January, 2008.

ONE MIGHT repeat the famous saying of the French statesman Boulay de la Meurthe, slightly amended: It is worse than a war crime, it is a blunder!

Months ago, the two Ehuds - Barak and Olmert - imposed a blockade on the Gaza Strip, and boasted about it. Lately they have tightened the deadly noose even more, so that hardly anything at all could be brought into the Strip. Last week they made the blockade absolute - no food, no medicines. Things reached a climax when they stopped the fuel, too. Large areas of Gaza remained without electricity - incubators for premature babies, dialysis machines, pumps for water and sewage. Hundreds of thousands remained without heating in the severe cold, unable to cook, running out of food.

Again and again, Aljazeera broadcast the pictures into millions of homes in the Arab world. TV stations all over the world showed them, too. From Casablanca to Amman angry mass protest broke out and frightened the authoritarian Arab regimes. Hosny Mubarak called Ehud Barak in panic. That evening Barak was compelled to cancel, at least temporarily, the fuel-blockade he had imposed in the morning. Apart from that, the blockade remained total.

It is hard to imagine a more stupid act.

THE REASON given for the starving and freezing of one and a half million human beings, crowded into a territory of 365 square kilometers, is the continued shooting at the town of Sderot and the adjoining villages.

That is a well-chosen reason. It unites the primitive and poor parts of the Israeli public. It blunts the criticism of the UN and the governments throughout the world, who might otherwise have spoken out against a collective punishment that is, undoubtedly, a war crime under international law.

A clear picture is presented to the world: the Hamas terror regime in Gaza launches missiles at innocent Israeli civilians. No government in the world can tolerate the bombardment of its citizens from across the border. The Israeli military has not found a military answer to the Qassam missiles. Therefore there is no other way than to exert such strong pressure on the Gaza population as to make them rise up against Hamas and compel them to stop the missiles.

The day the Gaza electricity works stopped operating, our military correspondents were overjoyed: only two Qassams were launched from the Strip. So it works! Ehud Barak is a genius!

But the day after, 17 Qassams landed, and the joy evaporated. Politicians and generals were (literally) out of their minds: one politician proposed to "act crazier than them", another proposed to "shell Gaza's urban area indiscriminately for every Qassam launched", a famous professor (who is a little bit deranged) proposed the exercise of "ultimate evil".

The government scenario was a repeat of Lebanon War II (the report about which is due to be published in a few days). Then: Hizbullah captured two soldiers on the Israeli side of the border, now: Hamas fired on towns and villages on the Israeli side of the border. Then: the government decide in haste to start a war, now: the government decided in haste to impose a total blockade. Then: the government ordered the massive bombing of the civilian population in order to get them to pressure Hizbullah, now: the government decided to cause massive suffering of the civilian population in order to get them to pressure Hamas.

The results were the same in both cases: the Lebanese population did not rise up against Hizbullah, but on the contrary, people of all religious communities united behind the Shiite organization. Hassan Nasrallah became the hero of the entire Arab world. And now: the population unites behind Hamas and accuses Mahmoud Abbas of cooperation with the enemy. A mother who has no food for her children does not curse Ismail Haniyeh, she curses Olmert, Abbas and Mubarak.

SO WHAT to do? After all, it is impossible to tolerate the suffering of the inhabitants of Sderot, who are under constant fire.

What is being hidden from the embittered public is that the launching of the Qassams could be stopped tomorrow morning.

Several months ago Hamas proposed a cease-fire. It repeated the offer this week.

A cease-fire means, in the view of Hamas: the Palestinians will stop shooting Qassams and mortar shells, the Israelis will stop the incursions into Gaza, the "targeted" assassinations and the blockade.

Why doesn't our government jump at this proposal?

Simple: in order to make such a deal, we must speak with Hamas, directly or indirectly. And this is precisely what the government refuses to do.

Why? Simple again: Sderot is only a pretext - much like the two captured soldiers were a pretext for something else altogether. The real purpose of the whole exercise is to overthrow the Hamas regime in Gaza and to prevent a Hamas takeover in the West Bank.

In simple and blunt words: the government sacrifices the fate of the Sderot population on the altar of a hopeless principle. It is more important for the government to boycott Hamas - because it is now the spearhead of Palestinian resistance - than to put an end to the suffering of Sderot. All the media cooperate with this pretence.

IT HAS been said before that it is dangerous to write satire in our country - too often the satire becomes reality. Some readers may recall a satirical article I wrote months ago. In it I described the situation in Gaza as a scientific experiment designed to find out how far one can go, in starving a civilian population and turning their lives into hell, before they raise their hands in surrender.

This week, the satire has become official policy. Respected commentators declared explicitly that Ehud Barak and the army chiefs are working on the principle of "trial and error" and change their methods daily according to results. They stop the fuel to Gaza, observe how this works and backtrack when the international reaction is too negative. They stop the delivery of medicines, see how it works, etc. The scientific aim justifies the means.

The man in charge of the experiment is Defense Minister Ehud Barak, a man of many ideas and few scruples, a man whose whole turn of mind is basically inhuman. He is now, perhaps, the most dangerous person in Israel, more dangerous than Ehud Olmert and Binyamin Netanyahu, dangerous to the very existence of Israel in the long run.

The man in charge of execution is the Chief of Staff. This week we had the chance of hearing speeches by two of his predecessors, generals Moshe Ya'alon and Shaul Mofaz, in a forum with inflated intellectual pretensions. Both were discovered to have views that place them somewhere between the extreme Right and the ultra-Right. Both have a frighteningly primitive mind. There is no need to waste a word about the moral and intellectual qualities of their immediate successor, Dan Halutz. If these are the voices of the three last Chiefs of Staff, what about the incumbent, who cannot speak out as openly as they? Has this apple fallen further from the tree?

Until three days ago, the generals could entertain the opinion that the experiment was succeeding. The misery in the Gaza Strip had reached its climax. Hundreds of thousands were threatened by actual hunger. The chief of UNRWA warned of an impending human catastrophe. Only the rich could still drive a car, heat their homes and eat their fill. The world stood by and wagged its collective tongue. The leaders of the Arab states voiced empty phrases of sympathy without raising a finger.

Barak, who has mathematical abilities, could calculate when the population would finally collapse.

AND THEN something happened that none of them foresaw, in spite of the fact that it was the most foreseeable event on earth.

When one puts a million and a half people in a pressure cooker and keeps turning up the heat, it will explode. That is what happened at the Gaza-Egypt border.

At first there was a small explosion. A crowd stormed the gate, Egyptian policemen opened live fire, dozens were wounded. That was a warning.

The next day came the big attack. Palestinian fighters blew up the wall in many places. Hundreds of thousands broke out into Egyptian territory and took a deep breath. The blockade was broken.

Even before that, Mubarak was in an impossible situation. Hundreds of millions of Arabs, a billion Muslims, saw how the Israeli army had closed the Gaza strip off on three sides: the North, the East and the sea. The fourth side of the blockade was provided by the Egyptian army.

The Egyptian president, who claims the leadership of the entire Arab world, was seen as a collaborator with an inhuman operation conducted by a cruel enemy in order to gain the favor (and the money) of the Americans. His internal enemies, the Muslim Brothers, exploited the situation to debase him in the eyes of his own people.

It is doubtful if Mubarak could have persisted in this position. But the Palestinian masses relieved him of the need to make a decision. They decided for him. They broke out like a tsunami wave. Now he has to decide whether to succumb to the Israeli demand to re-impose the blockade on his Arab brothers.

And what about Barak's experiment? What's the next step? The options are few:

(a) To re-occupy Gaza. The army does not like the idea. It understands that this would expose thousands of soldiers to a cruel guerilla war, which would be unlike any intifada before.

(b) To tighten the blockade again and exert extreme pressure on Mubarak, including the use of Israeli influence on the US Congess to deprive him of the billions he gets every year for his services.

(c) To turn the curse into a blessing, by handing the Strip over to Mubarak, pretending that this was Barak's hidden aim all along. Egypt would have to safeguard Israel's security, prevent the launching of Qassams and expose its own soldiers to a Palestinian guerilla war - when it thought it was rid of the burden of this poor and barren area, and after the infrastructure there has been destroyed by the Israeli occupation. Probably Mubarak will say: Very kind of you, but no thanks.

The brutal blockade was a war crime. And worse: it was a stupid blunder.

permlink http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1201278309/

Thousands of Palestinians stuck under appalling conditions at Rafah - 31-year old mother of five died yesterday under the blazing sun

Thousands of Palestinians stuck under appalling conditions at Rafah - 31-year old mother of five died yesterday under the blazing sun - Gush Shalom demands immediate opening of the Rafah Crossing for which the government of Israel and the European Union share responsibility

After the translated press release follows a call for action


Press Release, July 2, 2007 - Hebrew attached / עברית מצורף

Gush Shalom, the Israeli Peace Bloc, today sent a strong protest to Prime Minster Olmert and Defence Minister Barak, and also a letter to representatives of the European Union - warning about the extreme suffering of about 6000 Palestinians stuck on the Egyptian side of the closed Rafah Border crossing and unable to return to their homes: "This shameful and unacceptable situation must be ended forthwith".

The Rafah Border crossing has been closed ever since the eruption of confrontations between the Palestinian militias in the Gaza strip, which culminated with the Hamas takeover. Some six thousands of residents who found themselves at the time on the Egyptian side - among them a considerable number returning from medical treatment at Egyptian hospitals - have been stranded ever since: waiting, sleeping, and living in the streets under the hot sun, unable to wash, and with no idea how long they would still have to wait. The money most of them had on them already ran out. And since last week the services of Western Union and DHL in the Gaza Strip were discontinued under Israeli and American pressure, making it impossible for families to send money to their trapped relatives.

Yesterday, July 1, Taghreed Abeaed, a 31 years old Palestinian woman, mother of five children - died while waiting in the very bad conditions at Rafah Crossing. Even her body is not allowed to be brought back into the Gaza Strip.

"These stranded Gaza Strip residents have no part in the internecine conflict between Fatah and Hamas; it is not at their expense that the complicated problems of the Gaza Strip's legal and political status should be solved. They are innocent civilians caught cruelly in an unpredictable trap, and it is your duty to provide them the elementary right of going home" wrote Gush Shalom to the Israeli PM and Defence Minister.

Also the EU representatives were approached. "We place part of the responsibility and blame on the European. Since 2005, the armed forces of Israel are not in direct control of the Rafah Border Crossing. However, its opening was made conditional upon the presence of European monitors. The EU however has given the Government of Israel a complete power of veto. It is in practice the Defence Minster of Israel who decides whether or not there will be European monitors at Rafah, and thus whether the crossing will be open or closed . Now, the absence of European monitors at Rafah serves the encirclement and siege of Gaza, shortsightedly and cruelly decreed by the Government of Israel. In this way, the EU has abdicated its own often proclaimed responsibility to promote the welfare and peaceful future of all peoples in the Middle East.

Gush Shalom calls upon the Europeans to emancipate themselves, form an independent policy and exert their influence to the reopening of the Rafah Crossing.

Further details: Adam Keller adam@gush-shalom.org

=====================

What can and should be done:

Send a Rafah protest mail - a short one or a longer one*- to:

lTo the P

1) To the Prime Minister through the PM's Press office:

E-Mail: gpo@pmo.gov.il Fax: +972-2-6233388

(You can personalize your letter making use of these data: The Director of the GPO is Daniel Seaman. The Director's direct telephone number is 02-5007502, and his direct fax is 02- 6257886. The Director's secretary is Noa Arazi )

2) To the Israeli government via the embassy in your country - for the Israeli embassy in your country look in:

http://www.learn4good.com/travel/israel_embassies.htm

http://www.travelguru.net/html/consulates/israel.html

http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/mfa/about%20the%20ministry/diplomatic%20missions/

3) To the Delegation of the European Commission, delegation head Ramiro Cibrian - delegation-israel@ec.europa.eu

4) To the highest-ranking politician in your country whose address you can get.

cc to: MEP Luisa Morgantini luisa.morgantini@europarl.europa.eu

and also cc to: info@gush-shalom.org

*You may use the press release and add as subject line "The closed Rafah border is a shame to all the world"

www.gush-shalom.org

פעילויות, מטרות, מאמרים, הודעות לעתונות, ועוד
actions, aims, articles, press releases, and more

info@gush-shalom.org

Wherever you are, you can take part in protests by writing protest letters

With donations you can help us make our actions more visible

Please, send checks in your own currency – for confirmation of receipt include email address.

In several countries, tax-exemption can be obtained by donating through local charities - email us for details

GUSH SHALOM p.o.b. 3322 Tel Aviv 61033

The Saker interviews Uri Avnery from the Israeli Gush Shalom

Today I begin what I hope will be a continuous series of interviews with various participants in the conflicts in the Middle-East. The first person I "spoke" to (by email, actually) is Uri Avnery whose amazing life spans the entire history of Israel. From his political beginning as a 15 year old member of the terrorist group Irgun to becoming the founder of the most consistent Israeli peace group Gush Shalom (Peace Block) Uri Avnery's life of militancy has earned him plenty of enemies and even more supporters. He has been called a "Nazi" and a "self-hating Jew" by Neocon Zionists (amusingly enough, most of which manifest their Zionist patriotism by living outside Israel or never personally participating in any conflict with real bullets).

The Neocon's boundless arrogance and their imperial messianism has resulted into two very different consequences. One one hand, an increasing number of Americans are finally daring to question and challenge the total control exercised by the Neocons over US foreign policy, Congress or even the political discourse. That is,of course, a highly positive development. On the other hand, however, this realization has also lead many to conflate the Neocons with "the Jews" as if the latter was a monolithic block with a unifying objective. This fallacy wholly overlooks the fact that not all Neocons are Jews and, even more importantly, that most Jews are not Neocons. This is not the first time in history that this happens.

For example, it can hardly be denied that a vast majority of Bolsheviks, in particular in the horrible Leninist ancestor of the KGB, the "ChK" (or Cheka), were Jews. This does not at all mean that most Jews in Russia were Bolsheviks as many Russians still think nowadays. The same fallacy leads all too many people today blaming "the Jews" for what are the actions of a small but highly powerful group.

While many people understand that this kind of logic is deeply flawed, most only oppose it on the grounds that it blames innocent people, which it most certainly does. But no less important is the fact that conflating Neocons with "the Jews" or, for that matter, American messianic imperialists with "the Americans", gets the real culprits of the hook: the thugs who are pulling the strings of the centers of Imperial power love nothing more than to hide behind the backs of the innocents which inadvertently provide them with a fantastic cover. Does anybody seriously believe that the ADL or AIPAC leadership really cares about any Jews or Israelis?! Of course not - they just need them as cover for their Neocon bosses. Olmert cares as much about his fellow Israelis as Bush the Lesser cares about his fellow Americans or the Imperial war pimps care about the troops they claim to "support" but use as cannon-fodder in Imperial wars of aggression.

Every time an innocent is blamed the guilty one gets away.

I decided to ask Uri the hard questions which most Gentiles still rarely directly submit to Jews. I wanted to hear the answer of a person who still considers himself highly patriotic, who loves his country and his people, but who also fully opposes the policies of the Neocon/Zionist Empire. Kindly enough, Uri took some time of his very busy schedule to give me some short, but direct, answers.

I am deeply grateful to him for that.

-------

NEOCONS AND JEWS: The policies of the Bush administration have resulted in a strong backlash against the so-called "Neocons" (most of which are Jews). The political debate on the Internet (the so-called "blogosphere") is now becoming saturated with accusations of anti-Semitism on one hand and of a "Jewish conspiracy" on the other. Jews who are critical of Neocon or Israeli policies are being called "self-hating Jews" by Neocons. What do you make of this Neocon-Jews connection? In your opinion, are Neocons truly worried about the welfare of Israel or are they pursing other goals? Are there Neocons in Israel?

The Neocons are closely connected with right-wing Israelis, especially Benjamin Netanyahu of the Likud party. They completely identify Israeli and American interests.

WHO IS USING WHOM? Noam Chomsky denies the existence of a "Jewish Lobby" and claims that it is the USA who are, in fact, using Israel for their own imperial designs. In your opinion, who is using whom? Is Israel a tool in the hands of the USA, or are the USA a tool in the hands of the Israeli government? Or is this a symbiotic relationship. In the latter case, do you believe that it is in Israel's advantage to be so closely identified with the USA and do you believe that it is in the USA's interest to be so closely identified with the policies of Israel?

Both theories are right. The dog wags its tail and the tail wags its dog. It is a very complex - indeed unique - relationship.

A "HOLOCAUST INDUSTRY"? What do you make of the accusation of some American Jews (such as Norman Finkelstein or Michael Neumann) that the memory of the millions of Jews killed by the Nazis is being cynically used for political purposes by a "Holocaust Industry" lead by such organizations as the ADL, B'nai Brith, AJC, AIPAC and others? To what degree do these organizations speak for Jews in general and, in particular, for Israeli Jews?

The Holocaust is a living reality in the life of many Israelis. Its impact is real and immense. It is also manipulated for political ends by the Israeli government and Jewish institutions abroad.

IS ISRAEL A MORALLY LEGITIMATE STATE? What do you make of the accusation that Israel is a creation of European colonial powers and that it has therefore no moral right to exist on the land belonging to the Palestinians (under whatever state or government)? Some even argue that Israel, being a self-described "Jewish state", is an ethno-religious entity comparable to the South African Apartheid regime and that Iranian President Ahmadinejad is in his right when he says that this regime should be totally eliminated and, presumably, be replaced by a "one man one vote" system which would give Arab Muslims the majority in Palestine. Do you think Israeli Jews should give up their dream for a "Jewish state" in which they would be the majority and, if not, how could Israel ever be a truly democratic country?

Israel is morally as legitimate as the US, which isbased on genocide and slavery. The question of "morally legitimate" can be asked about dozens of states around the world, the differences only concern time. The fact is that in our country there exist now two nations with deep roots in it, and peace must be made between the two.

IS ZIONISM RACIST OR NOT? You spend many years of your life fighting for Israel. During most of these years, the United Nations condemned Zionism as a form of racism (the UN has since changed its stance). What is your view of Zionism? Is it a race-based religion and ideology or not? Do those who seek out, and often find, offensive anti-Gentile quotes in the Talmud have a point or not?

The UN is a political organization, driven by the political interests of its members - once the Soviet-third- world coalition, now the USA.Zionism is a many-faceted movement, like socialism etc. The word has no real meaning until it is clearly defined what it means in the context of a particular question. I consider myself a post-Zionism (indeed, I was the first to use the term), which means that I believe Zionism is obsolete. We are now talking about the State of Israel, its interests and actions. The Talmud (actually there are two Talmuds) is an immense work which has been collected throughout several centuries. You can find there everything, from the best to the worst - much as in other religions, including Christianity and Islam.

WHAT DRIVES ISRAELI LEADERS? What worldview, what ideology or religion inspires leaders like Sharon, Natanyahu or Olmert? Is it Judaism? Zionism? Neoconservatism? What are the ideological roots of their beliefs and policies? What role does Judaism play in modern Israel? Is it the root of the hostility of some Jews towards Gentiles and to what degree is Zionism influenced by the values and ideas of Judaism?

The interests of Israel are the determining factor in Israeli public discourse - with many contradictory views and tendencies. Zionist history play a role in forming the ideas of political leaders, public attitudes and propaganda.

WAHABIS AND SALAFIS. Groups such as Al-Qaeda or Hamas appear determined to truly destroy Israel and most likely all of its Jewish inhabitants (at least those not willing to abandon their identity). What should Israel do in regards to these groups and the threat they represent? Do you think negotiations are possible with Wahabi/Salafi organizations?

There are many forms of Salafism, and many interpretations. History disproves any claim that it isanti-Jewish. No pogroms and no Holocaust in the Islamic world. Undeniably, the hostility between Jews and Muslims started with the Zionist-Arab conflict.

ISRAELI ELECTIONS. Why do Israelis still elect people like Olmert or Netanyahu? After all the years of suffering and war, why are most Israelis not willing to negotiate with their enemies (such as Hamas or Hezbollah) rather than insist on pretending to negotiate with people such as Abbas or Siniora who simply do not represent the majority of the people of their country?

Why was Bush elected? To outsiders, the election of such an inferior politician seems incredible. Politics create facts that are often bizarre.

WHAT IS THE CONDITION OF THE ISRAELI PEACE MOVEMENT? To my knowledge, during the summer of 2006, Gush Shalom was the only political force opposed the war. Is this correct? What is the status of the Israeli peace movement today? Who, in the Arab and Muslim world, do you see as your primary interlocutors and potential allies? Who in the Middle-East share your hopes and values?

The peace movement is in a bad situation on the ground, but our ideas are slowly gaining ground beneath the surface. We want to talk with all elements of the Palestinian public, including Hamas, and with all parts of the Arab world, including Hizbullah and Syria. Also with Iran, if possible.

BLAMING "THE JEWS". What do you have to say to those who blame "the Jews" for US support for past Israeli aggressions and atrocities in the past? For the seemingly unconditional support and "cover" the USA gives to Israel in the UN Security Council? For the 3 Trillion dollars in US support received since its creation? What should those who blame "the Jews" (as if there was such one, monolithic entity) read to correctly understand these issues?

The American political structure has made the pro-Israeli lobby (Jewish and Christian) very strong. That's really an American problem, not ours.

WHAT FUTURE ISRAEL WOULD YOU WANT TO SEE? Please outline your idea of a future Israel. What would be the first priorities of a Gush Shalom government and Knesset? What is your best hope for the future of the Middle-East?

I want peace between Israel and Palestine, two states with their capitals in Jerusalem. Details in the "Truth against Truth" on the Gush Shalom website. Shalom!