Thursday, March 19, 2009

Israel to probe reported abuse by soldiers in Gaza

Hudah Shaer, the wife of former Palestinian Authority Deputy Prime Minister AP – Hudah Shaer, the wife of former Palestinian Authority Deputy Prime Minister Nasser Shaer from Hamas, …

JERUSALEM – Israel's defense minister promised Thursday to investigate reports that soldiers recounted how some troops opened fire too hastily and killed Palestinian civilians during the recent Gaza war, believing they would not be held to account under relaxed rules of engagement.

The soldiers gave their accounts at a get-together with students at a military preparatory institute. The transcript of the session appeared this week in a newsletter the institute publishes, newspapers reported.

According to one of the published accounts reported by the Haaretz and Maariv dailies, an Israeli sniper killed a Palestinian woman and her two children after they misunderstood another soldier's order and turned the wrong way. The sniper was not told the civilians had been released from the house where they had been confined and he opened fire when they approached him, according to his standing orders.

"The climate in general, from what I understood from most of my men whom I talked to, was ... the lives of Palestinians, let's say, are far less important than the lives of our soldiers. So as far as they're concerned, they can justify it that way," an infantry squad leader was quoted as saying.

Heavy civilian casualties and widespread devastation of property during the three-week war provoked an international outcry against Israel, which halted its fire on Jan. 18. Palestinians say over half of the more than 1,300 Gazans killed were civilians, but Israel disputes the civilian toll.

The soldiers' accounts echo Palestinian allegations and could help human rights groups trying to build a case that Israel violated the laws of war.

Rights groups say Israel used disproportionate force and failed to protect civilians. In one case, Israeli artillery fire hit near a U.N. school where hundreds of Gazans had sought refuge, killing 42. Israeli said it responded to militant fire originating nearby.

Israel also has been criticized for using white phosphorus weapons. The weapons can be legitimately used in war, but critics say its use over populated areas can indiscriminately burn civilians and constitutes a war crime.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak defended the military's wartime conduct overall but said the newspaper reports published Thursday would be investigated.

Israel "has the most ethical army in the world," Barak told Israel Radio. "That doesn't mean there are no exceptions," he added. "I have no doubt that it will be checked carefully."

In another account given at the military institute, an elderly Palestinian woman was shot dead while she was walking on a road, even though she was close enough for the soldiers to see whether she posed a threat, Maariv said. Haaretz, too, reported that the woman was shot at a range of 100 yards.

Soldiers also reported large-scale destruction of Palestinian property.

"We would throw everything out of the windows to make room and order," Maariv quoted a soldier as saying. "Everything in the house was tossed out the windows: Refrigerators, plates, furniture. The order was to throw all of the house's contents outside."

The military said it was not aware of the incidents the soldiers reported but that its top lawyer has ordered the criminal investigation division of the military police to probe the claims.

Israel has acknowledged loosening its rules of engagement in Gaza to reduce military casualties. As a result, ground troops moved under heavy covering fire from tanks and artillery that flattened entire neighborhoods.

At the same time, Israel has blamed the high civilian death toll on Hamas militiamen fighting from civilian areas such as homes, schools and mosques.

Yaakov Amidror, a former chief of Israel's military academies, told Army Radio that in war, not all situations are clear-cut, and if it comes down to a choice between soldiers being killed and killing people on the other side, "you must make a very cold choice and kill the other side."

But "if you see a woman and two children in the crosshairs, it's pretty clear - there is almost no case in the world that would justify pulling the trigger," Amidror said.

The head of the military institute, Danny Zamir, told Haaretz he was shocked by the soldiers' accounts and contacted military chief Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi afterward because he feared a serious ethical lapse in the military. Zamir did not immediately return calls to The Associated Press on Thursday.

Israel and Gaza's Hamas rulers have not cemented their informal, Jan. 18 cease-fire with a long-term truce.

Related Searches:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090319/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians

Monday, March 16, 2009

Mondo Exclusive: Google map of Israeli settlements from leaked database

This is a Mondoweiss exclusive detailing land-grabbing and settlement-building by Israel in the West Bank. It confirms what we already know but the detailing process through maps enhances our understanding further. And the forum beneath the postings is eye-opening.

Statement from the Family of Rachel Corrie, March 16, 2009

This is the sixth anniversary of the murder of US activist Rachel Corrie and the Corries have issued a statement.
_______________________________________________________

Rachel Corrie Foundation for Peace and Justice
www.rachelcorriefoundation.org
(360) 754-3998
info@rachelcorriefoundation.org

Statement from the Family of Rachel Corrie, March 16, 2009

We thank all who continue to remember Rachel and who, on this sixth anniversary of her stand in Gaza, renew their own commitments to human rights, justice and peace in the Middle East. The tributes and actions in her memory are a source of inspiration to us and to others.

Friday, March 13th, we learned of the tragic injury to American activist Tristan Anderson. Tristan was shot in the head with a tear-gas canister in Ni’lin Village in the West Bank when Israeli forces attacked a demonstration opposing the construction of the annexation wall through the village's land. On the same day, a Ni’lin resident was, also, shot in the leg with live ammunition. Four residents of Ni’lin have been killed in the past eight months as villagers and their supporters have courageously demonstrated against the Apartheid Wall deemed illegal by the International Court of Justice—a wall that will ultimately absorb one-quarter of the village's remaining land. Those who have died are a ten-year-old child Ahmed Mousa, shot in the forehead with live ammunition on July 29, 2008; Yousef Amira (17) shot with rubber-coated steel bullets on July 30, 2008; Arafat Rateb Khawaje (22) and Mohammed Khawaje (20), both shot and killed with live ammunition on December 8, 2008. On this anniversary, Rachel would want us all to hold Tristan Anderson and his family and these Palestinians and their families in our thoughts and prayers, and we ask everyone to do so.

We are writing this message from Cairo where we returned after a visit to Gaza with the Code Pink Delegation from the United States. Fifty-eight women and men successfully passed through Rafah Crossing on Saturday, March 7th to challenge the border closures and siege and to celebrate International Women's Day with the strong and courageous women of Gaza. Rachel would be very happy that our spirited delegation made this journey. North to south throughout the Strip, we witnessed the sweeping destruction of neighborhoods, municipal buildings, police stations, mosques, and schools –casualties of the Israeli military assaults in December and January. When we asked about the personal impact of the attacks on those we met, we heard repeatedly of the loss of mothers, fathers, children, cousins, and friends. The Palestinian Center for Human Rights reports 1434 Palestinian dead and over 5000 injured, among them 288 children and 121 women.

We walked through the farming village of Khoza in the South where fifty homes were destroyed during the land invasion. A young boy scrambled through a hole in the rubble to show us the basement he and his family crouched in as a bulldozer crushed their house upon them. We heard of Rafiya who lead the frightened women and children of this neighborhood away from threatening Israeli military bulldozers, only to be struck down and killed by an Israeli soldier's sniper fire as she walked in the street carrying her white flag.

Repeatedly, we were told by Palestinians, and by the internationals on the ground supporting them, that there is no ceasefire. Indeed, bomb blasts from the border area punctuated our conversations as we arrived and departed Gaza. On our last night, we sat by a fire in the moonlight in the remains of a friend's farmyard and listened to him tell of how the Israeli military destroyed his home in 2004, and of how this second home was shattered on February 6th. This time, it was Israeli rockets from Apache helicopters that struck the house, A stand of wheat remained and rustled soothingly in the breeze as we talked, but our attention shifted quickly when F-16s streaked high across the night sky. and our friend explained that if the planes tipped to the side, they would strike. Everywhere, the psychological costs of the recent and ongoing attacks for all Gazans, but especially for the children, were sadly apparent. It is not only those who suffer the greatest losses that carry the scars of all that has happened. It is those, too, who witnessed from their school bodies flying in the air when police cadets were bombed across the street and those who felt and heard the terrifying blasts of missiles falling near their own homes. It is the children who each day must walk past the unexplainable and inhumane destruction that has occurred.

In Rachel's case, though a thorough, credible and transparent investigation was promised by the Israeli Government, after six years, the position of the U.S. Government remains that such an investigation has not taken place. In March 2008, Michele Bernier-Toff, Managing Director of the Office of Overseas Citizen Services at the Department of State wrote, “We have consistently requested that the Government of Israel conduct a full and transparent investigation into Rachel's death. Our requests have gone unanswered or ignored.” Now, the attacks on all the people of Gaza and the recent one on Tristan Anderson in Ni'lin cry out for investigation and accountability. We call on President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, and members of Congress to act with fortitude and courage to ensure that the atrocities that have occurred are addressed by the Israeli Government and through relevant international and U.S. law. We ask them to act immediately and persistently to stop the impunity enjoyed by the Israeli military, not to encourage it.

Despite the pain, we have once again felt privileged to enter briefly into the lives of Rachel's Palestinian friends in Gaza. We are moved by their resilience and heartened by their song, dance, and laughter amidst the tears. Rachel wrote in 2003, “I am nevertheless amazed at their strength in being able to defend such a large degree of their humanity--laughter, generosity, family time—against the incredible horror occurring in their lives.....I am also discovering a degree of strength and of the basic ability for humans to remain human in the direst of circumstances...I think the word is dignity.” On this sixth anniversary of Rachel's killing, we echo her sentiments.



Sincerely,

Cindy and Craig Corrie

On behalf of our family


Telephone: 33-643363046

source: http://mepeace.ning.com/forum/topics

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Palestine!! You are not alone..

Tristan is not the only one who lost his life in Palestine. There are others who put their lives on the line to stand up for what is right. View the video of the episode here.
_______________________________________________

SOLIDARITY: TRISTAN & PALESTINE!
by Friends of Tristan and Palestine
Saturday Mar 14th, 2009 11:37 AM
DEMONSTRATION
MON MARCH 16, 4pm
ISRAEL CONSULATE,
456 Montgomery St, SF
(@ Calif. St./Montgomery BART. 4 blocks
North of Market St. on Montgomery)


Tristan Anderson was critically injured Friday March 13 in village of Ni’lin, near the central West Bank city of Ramallah, after Israeli forces shot him in the head with a tear-gas canister. US-funded Israeli military forces attacked a demonstration against the construction of the annexation wall through the village of Ni’lin’s, encroaching on the land, livelihood and dignity of the local residents. Another resident from Ni’lin was shot in the leg with live ammunition. Israeli military continued to fire teargas directly at clearly marked paramedics as the wounded. The ambulance was detained outside the village by the IDF, but finally allowed to pass and tend to Tristan.

In 2004, the International Court of Justice found all parts of the wall being built on Palestinian land illegal and that these portions should be removed. Last month Israeli bulldozers uprooted the villages olive trees and militarily invaded the village. Four Ni’lin residents have been killed during demonstrations against the confiscation of their land, including ten year-old Ahmed Mousa.

Monday is also the 6th anniversary of the death of Rachel Corrie. Tristan is a well-loved Bay Area community member, independent journalist and longtime frontline human rights, global justice/anti-capitalist, antiwar and environmental activist.

Friends of Tristan and Palestine
More Info and Updates: Indybay.org

source: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/03/14/18577174.php

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

The Scam and the Reality of Israel/Palestine

March 9, 2009 at 21:49:29

The Scam and the Reality of Israel/Palestine

by W. Christopher Epler (Bill)
www.opednews.com

The scam of extremist Israeli’s (who do not represent the whole of Israel) is that they don’t want to be “pushed into the sea”. One wonders why they would fear this since they have they have incredibly more atomic weaponry than the entire Arab world combined!

The Reality is that the extremists want THE ENTIRE COUNTRY OF PALESTINE, as the quotes below make tragically clear . . .

"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
-- David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.

In 1948, David Ben-Gurion stated: "We have taken their country....We must do everything to insure they never return....We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."

In 1988, former prime minister Yitzhak Shamir told Jewish settlers that Palestinians "would be crushed like grasshoppers (with their) heads smashed against the boulders and
walls.”

In 1967, Israeli defense minister, Moshe Dayan, said: Palestinians "shall continue to live like dogs" so they'll leave.

"Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial."

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, 25 March, 2001 quoted in BBC News Online,

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
-- Golda Meir, statement to The Sunday Times, 15 June, 1969.

"This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy."
-- Golda Meir, Le Monde, 15 October 1971

"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!"
-- Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979.

"The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized .... Jerusalem was and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever."
-- Menachem Begin, the day after the U.N. vote to partition Palestine.

"The settlement of the Land of Israel is the essence of Zionism. Without settlement, we will not fulfill Zionism. It's that simple."
-- Yitzhak Shamir, Maariv, 02/21/1997.

"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."

Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998.

by W. Christopher Epler (Bill)

source: www.opednews.com

Sunday, March 8, 2009

Is Change Possible?

US Affairs: Losing the lobby on the Hill?



Last month, three members of Congress made an usual trip, visiting Gaza for the first time since both the 2003 killing of three American security personnel by Palestinian militants, and the 2007 takeover of the coastal strip by Hamas, that prompted Israel and the United States to stay away.

US Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn...

US Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., left and US Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash., right, take photos of the rubble of the American International school in Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip, Thursday.
Photo: AP

That the visit by Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) and, separately, Congressmen Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) and Brian Baird (D-Washington) took place at all might have been its most newsworthy aspect. But it was not its only atypical one. Ellison and Baird both made comments conspicuously critical of Israel, and then organized a briefing for members of Congress to share what they saw, in an effort to push for change in American policies. They would like to see the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip opened, and well as a rethinking of the ways America supports Israel.

Briefings of these sorts, particularly by members of Congress themselves, are rare. Though some observers downplay the significance of a few congressmen making such statements, and note they aren't unprecedented, others think these views could be spreading and receiving more traction as the Left gains power in America, and the administration puts itself firmly on the side of pushing for peace. While both groups agree it's too early in the session to jump to any broad conclusions, some already maintain that there is more space now for different perspectives on Israel, and more initiatives that aren't originating from the mainstream pro-Israel lobbies.

Already resolutions and letters to the administration have emphasized support for its peace and mediation efforts, most recently in a letter by Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, calling on US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to demonstrate her commitment to the peace process during her current trip to the region as events there "underscore the importance of tenacious American leadership and engagement, now and in the future."

More boldly, Democratic Congressman Gary Ackerman, who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Middle East subcommittee, and represents heavily Jewish areas of New York's Long Island, issued a scathing critique of Israel at his first hearing of the session.

He declared that the situation in the region was "spiraling downward," and blamed both Israelis and Palestinians.

"The downward pressure comes from terrorism and the march of settlements and outposts, from the firing of rockets and the perpetration of settler pogroms … It comes from tunnels in Gaza and from digging in Jerusalem, as well. There is no moral equivalence between these acts, but they are part of the same destructive dynamic."

And he also alluded to seeming inconsistencies in Israel's own policies, particularly in Gaza. "Start with Hamas, a terrorist organization, an entity beyond the pale. They are the enemy, and no one can talk to them until they accept the Quartet's conditions of recognizing Israel, repudiating violence, and accepting the PLO's agreements with Israel," he said. "Except that for years, Israel has been talking to Hamas through Egypt, and directly to the Hamas prisoners in Israeli jails."

"I thought it was quite surprising that he went that far," one Jewish organizational official said of Ackerman's remarks. "That was very significant, because of who Ackerman is, and where his district is, and where he comes from. For someone like him, it requires real balls."

The official, who works for a left-wing organization and was therefore pleased by these developments, noted that it's too early to make any determination about where the new Congress is headed.

"But there are some indications so far that show there's a different atmosphere, that Congress is more willing to entertain perspectives that are more dovish," he said. "There's definitely a sense that there's an air of independence, and that people are more emboldened in their approach to this issue in general."

He explained that difference as stemming partly from groups like the self-described "pro-Israel, pro-peace" J Street, which started last year, making it clear that "AIPAC is not the only voice that's out there, that there are strong voices with different views."

But more important, he maintained, was that US President Barack Obama was squarely behind a peace deal. His early moves appointing George Mitchell as a Middle East envoy and reaching out to the Arab world "reverberated in the region, but it also reverberated on Capitol Hill," where members of Congress "feel more emboldened" to speak out on the issue.

ONE CAPITOL Hill staffer said having a new president with a new Middle East agenda made a difference in how members felt about engaging on the issue. But he added that a greater factor was Israel's own leadership - or lack thereof.

"It's not clear what Israel's policy is," he said, noting the unsettled state of its elections, but also its attitudes toward the Palestinians. He pointed to Israel's decision not to overthrow Hamas, yet also not willing to engage with it, as well as talking about a peace process at the same time that it says no deal is possible.

"There's a bit of a vacuum, which invites people to step into the vacuum," he said.

Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi of The Israel Project, though, fingered the American political system. She pointed to gerrymandering which has increasingly made seats "safe" for Republicans or Democrats, meaning that the real fight for them takes place in the primaries, where party views are more extreme.

"You see that we have more of these very liberal members of Congress," she said. "You have people who are now in Congress who don't feel accountable to voters of a wider political spectrum, and that's bad for Israel, because support for Israel is much stronger among centrists and conservatives than among liberals."

At the same time, she said the latter were more likely to be swayed toward the Jewish state by the supportive messages for Israel coming from Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, with whom they would identify politically.

She also said the current activity on Capitol Hill didn't represent a serious blow.

US Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., left and US Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash., right, take photos of the rubble of the American International school in Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip, Thursday.

"As much as we might be upset about what two Congressmen say about the situation in Gaza," she said, "Israel will weather the storm."

And Morrie Amitay, a former executive director of AIPAC, who now heads his own pro-Israel political action committee, dismissed the activity altogether, saying there have always been members of Congress with different views.

"I don't see it as a new thing that there are some people in the Congress who are critical of Israel. And there have always been some in the American Jewish community who are part of what I call 'the blame Israel first crowd,'" he said. "It's a small minority, thankfully."

His bottom line: "I don't see any reason why support of Israel would diminish."

Doug Bloomfield, who once served as a legislative director of AIPAC, also thought that not much had happened - yet.

"Right now you're having a few people talking, but I don't see this as a big sea change," he said.

He added, though, that waves could be on the way, particularly as the US sees Israel moving to the Right at the same time that it itself is moving to the Left.

"There is a foundation there for a shift to a more activist peace policy," he said of Congress. "The foundation has already been laid by the administration."

Iranian Military Capability

It's amazing what adversity can do to a nation. One has to learn and be self-reliant. Same thing applies to Palestine.
___________________________________________

Iran test fires new long-range missile

TEHRAN, March 8 (Xinhua) -- Iran has "successfully" test fired a new long-range missile, Iran's English-language television station Press TV reported on Sunday.

"Iran's Defense Ministry said it has successfully installed long-range (air-to-sea) missiles on some of its jet fighters," the report said, which did not say when the test was conducted.

"The ministry said Iranian experts have managed to build and test-launched the new missile to hit its naval targets within a range of more than 110 kilometers."

"These are also equipped with radar system for automatic navigation and target recognition," the report said, adding the 500-kg missile is Iran's latest military development.

Iran's latest test of its long-range missiles comes amid the global efforts to soothe the tension between Iran and the West over its nuclear program. Tehran has said that its military agenda is defensive and its technology is aimed at the possible aggressions.

On Wednesday, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) commander Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari said that Israel's nuclear sites are within the reach of its missiles.

"All the nuclear sites in every part of the occupied lands by the Zionist regime (Israel) are within the reach of Iran's missiles," Jafari was quoted as saying.

The United States and Israel have consistently refused to rule out the possibility of military strikes against Iran over its refusal to halt its nuclear program.

The United States and its allies have accused Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program. Iran has denied the U.S. charges and insisted that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.

............................................................................................................................

Iran builds long-range anti-aircraft system: minister

TEHRAN, Feb. 11 (Xinhua) -- Iran's Defense Minister Brigadier General Mostafa Mohammad Najjar said Wednesday that Iran has built a long-range anti-aircraft system, the semi-official Fars news agency reported.

Iran "has built a long-range anti-aircraft system capable of spotting, tracing, intercepting and destroying multiple targets simultaneously," Fars quoted him as saying on the sidelines of "Inventions and Innovations Exhibition" held in Tehran.

He pointed out that "all the materials and parts employed in the country's missile industries are Iranian."

Earlier this month, Iran's Secretary of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaie said that his country was the first power in the region from the viewpoint of defense and security matters.

Iran "has achieved its independence through its capabilities and it is among the 10 world major countries regarding security and defense issues," Rezaie, the former chief commander of Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency.

Iran's successive pretensions for defensive gains, war shows and missile-development claims come amid the tensions over its defiance concerning the halt of its nuclear program.

The United States and Israel have consistently refused to rule out the possibility of military strikes against Iran over its refusal to halt its nuclear program.

The United States and its allies have accused Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program.

Iran has denied the U.S. charges and insisted that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.

....................................................................................................................................

Commander: Iran to develop independent missile headquarters

TEHRAN, Aug. 27 (Xinhua) -- Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Commander Brigadier General Mohammad-Ali Jafari said here on Wednesday that it is possible for Iran to establish an independent headquarters of missiles, the semi-official Mehr news agency reported.

Forming of an independent commandership of missiles aims at strengthening the structure of the missile section, the report quoted Jafari as saying.

"We should not allow the basic spirit of success and victory to be diminished in Revolution Guards", Jafari said.

In order to face recent or potential threats, the revolution guards needs to be equipped and strengthened with the required technique, he added.

The announcement came amid reports that an armada of U.S. and European warships will be deployed in the Gulf in an unprecedented build-up.

The IRGC completed military maneuvers in the Gulf called Payambar-e Azam 3 (Great Prophet 3) in mid July to improve combat readiness and capability. Iran successfully test fired new long- and medium-range missiles in the drills.

Jafari said early this month that Iran has tested a new advanced naval weapon, which is "unique in the world" and can target the enemy at the range of 300 km.

The United States and its allies have accused Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program. Iran has denied the U.S. charges and insists that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.

The Bush administration said it focused on diplomacy to try to resolve Iran's nuclear issue, but insisted it will take "no option off the table."

Some observers believe that it is possible that the United States and Israel would attack Iranian targets for Tehran's suspicious nuclear program.

source: www.chinaview.cn 2008-08-27 21:55:54



Solidarity in South Africa

We still have a long way to go. This grassroots support, undertaken independently, is a sign of a high sense of awareness.
__________________________________________________________

Intervention from below


BY MIKE MARQUSEE

In a show of solidarity with Palestinians, dockworkers in Durban refused to unload a ship carrying Israeli cargo.

Learning from the past: South Africans protesting Israel’s blockade of Gaza.

Something special took place in Durban last month when dockworkers, members of the South African Transport and Allied Workers Union (SATAWU), refused to unload a ship carrying Israeli cargo. It was an intervention from below in global politics, driven not by national, ethnic or religious affinity but by principle, experience and common humanity.

The dockworkers were responding to the call for a boycott of Israeli goods issued by a broad coalition of Palestinian (and some Israeli) civil society organisations, including human rights groups and trade unions. That call had already been endorsed by the Congress of South African Trade Unions, of which SATAWU is an affiliate, and the dockworkers knew that they had the backing of the wider movement.

Immediately and concretely, the dockworkers were responding to Israel’s three-week attack on Gaza, which left more than 1,300 Palestinians dead, including 431 children, as well as 5,300 injured, including 1,870 children and 1,600 permanently disabled. Israel’s losses were of a different order: three civilians and 10 soldiers killed, 113 soldiers and 84 civilians injured. Gaza’s infrastructure was battered. 120,000 houses were damaged and 4,000 demolished. In the course of the operation, the Israelis are said to have dropped 1.5 million tons of explosives on Gaza — one ton for each inhabitant.

The dockworkers were also responding to — and respecting — the call and lesson of their own history. They remembered the importance of international support in the battle against apartheid. Initially, the international campaign had been little more than a small-scale irritant, reliant on the patient, sometimes lonely labours of grass-roots activists. An early success came when dock workers in various countries refused to unload South African goods. In time, the boycott grew and took a material toll on the apartheid regime.

South African trade unionists know this history well. That was seen last year when they turned away a Chinese ship carrying arms to the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe.

They also know that throughout the course of their struggle against apartheid, Israel was engaged in intensive military, economic and technological (not least nuclear) collaboration with the white minority regime, whom it saw as an ally in a global conflict.

Similar experience

Significantly, in explaining their action in Durban, union leaders and members have stressed the similarity between Palestinians’ experience of Israeli rule and their own experiences under apartheid. Supporters of Israel object fiercely to this analogy; for suggesting it, even as prestigious a figure as former President Jimmy Carter was anathematised: speaking engagements cancelled and funds removed from his charitable foundations. But how will they resist the analogy now, when it is being drawn by those with most authority and right to draw it?

There are many who think of international labour solidarity as something belonging to a distant past. True, far too often it has amounted to little more than empty rhetoric. But what we saw in Durban was international labour solidarity not as a slogan or admirable ideal or bit of wishful thinking but as a living practice, a pointer to the future. In a world of over-hyped spectacle, this was the real thing. Most importantly, it is not an isolated event. The Western Australian section of the Maritime Union of Australia endorsed the boycott and has urged its members not to handle Israeli goods. In January, the Norwegian Locomotive Drivers Union stopped all trains in the country for a two minute protest against the Israeli onslaught.

In fact, Durban was really a crest in a wave of protest that has followed Israel’s all-out military assault on a captive, besieged, largely defenceless population. In Britain, students at more than 21 universities have mounted occupations demanding an end to their institution’s ties with Israel and support for Palestinian education. Victories have been secured: scholarships for students from Gaza, reviews of investment policies, and in some cases cancellation of contracts with Israeli-based corporations.

For the students as for so many others, Gaza epitomised basic divisions, basic choices. Between the powerful and the powerless, between the “war on terror” and respect for human rights and human life. Between Western interests and the interests of the world majority. Between passively standing by and actively engaging — whatever the odds — in the pursuit of justice.

Gathering momentum

The wave of protest has washed well beyond academia and the trade unions. A convoy of more than 100 vehicles carrying £1 million of aid assembled in the north of England and is now making its way across North Africa to Gaza. A crude attempt by British police to smear the convoy by arresting some of its participants (all later released uncharged) under anti-terrorism laws deterred no one.

The pro-Palestinian activists, obviously small in number in the greater scheme of things, draw strength from the fact that they represent an increasing proportion of public opinion, in Britain and elsewhere. On this issue, there is a growing fissure between governments and peoples. International support, whether from dockworkers of Durban or students in Britain, is critical for the Palestinians: a vital counterweight to the powerful forces arrayed against them, which include the U.S. government and the European Union, due to sign a new preferential trade agreement with Israel.

India is also one of the major culprits. In recent years, commercial, military and intelligence links with Israel have burgeoned, under both BJP and Congress-dominated governments — links justified by a drastically misconceived paradigm in which Israel and India share a common enemy in the “war on terror”. In this context, the issue is not as peripheral as it may seem to many in India.

The international boycott and divestment campaign has, of course, a long way to go. As yet, the pressure on Israel is symbolic, not material. The bulk of the public there regards the Gaza assault as a success. The big vote for the Right-wing parties in the recent election suggests they have turned their backs, for the moment, on any compromise with the Palestinians. It is sobering to note that the U.S. Congress voted to support Israel’s actions in Gaza by a majority of 390 to 5. Meanwhile, Gaza remains under Israeli blockade, even minimal humanitarian aid is often blocked, and it has been impossible to start reconstruction. On the West Bank and in east Jerusalem, Israel gobbles up more territory and makes wider claims.

In these desperate circumstances, economically strangled and violently assaulted, the Palestinians at least know that they are not alone, that there are people out there aware of and angry about their plight.

Common assumptions about the limits of human solidarity have become routinely and excessively pessimistic. It is taken for granted that our loyalties — our willingness to sacrifice — are confined to family and close friends, and beyond that, to ethnic, communal or national groups, somehow also assumed, like the family, to be “natural” categories. Anything wider is weighed as too abstract, too remote, too theoretical to motivate human activity. In their uncompromising, far-reaching and at the same time concrete universalism, the Durban dockworkers and their global allies have shown that this is not the case.

source: The Hindu - Online edition of India's National NewspaperOnline Sunday, Mar 08, 2009

Why is Iran safe?

Know why Iran is relatively save from American and Israeli pressure? It's because Iran has Russia's help. And China too. And before that, from the French. Alignment is the name of the game; or just plain getting outside help. It's a win-win situation some would say.
_______________________________________________

Siemens divorcing Russia over Iran?
Sun, 08 Mar 2009 10:38:52 GMT
Siemens limits business with Russia's atomic energy agency Rosatom because of its joint nuclear venture with Iran.

German engineering giant Siemens, bridled at Moscow's nuclear cooperation with Tehran, moves to limit joint ventures with Russia.

The Spiegel reported Saturday that Siemens is pressuring Russian atomic energy agency Rosatom over its involvement in building Iran's first power plant in the southern port of Bushehr.

The Munich-based Siemens launched a joint venture Rosatom on Tuesday, forecasting the construction of some 400 new nuclear power plants worldwide by 2030.

Siemens CEO Peter Loescher initially hailed the joint venture as a great opportunity "to enlarge our footprint in nuclear business with a very strong and experienced partner."

He later became critical of Russia's political and financial contributions to the Bushehr reactor and demanded that the Kremlin address international concerns over Tehran's uranium enrichment activities.

The ongoing Russian cooperation with Iran has prompted Siemens -- widely believed to be the largest engineering firm in Europe -- to reduce business with Russia only a week after its deal was sealed, Spiegel revealed.

Washington, Tel Aviv and their European allies accuse Tehran of inching toward nuclear weapons development. Iran, however, dismisses the allegation, saying its uranium enrichment is aimed at peaceful energy production.

Moscow has supplied nuclear fuel for the Bushehr power plant since 2007 under arrangements with the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Western countries have criticized Moscow's involvement in building the Bushehr plant. Russia, however, insists that the Bushehr plant -- which was completed under a USD 1 billion contract -- is purely civilian and cannot be used for weapons production.

The 1000-megawatt reactor is expected to become operational later this year.

Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=87902&sectionid=351020104
..........................................................................................................

''China and Iran Strengthen their Bilateral Relationship''

hina's decision to send 1,000 soldiers to south Lebanon with the U.N.I.F.I.L. mission is the latest example of Beijing's increased involvement in the Middle East. The overall importance of the broader Middle East for China's geostrategy is growing. China is searching for new regional allies because it wants to pursue strategic aims such as gaining privileged access to crude oil reserves, finding new markets for its products and technology, and competing with the United States for supremacy in an area that is a fundamental part of the international system. Iran seems to be the best ally for such an approach; thus, the strategic relationship between the two countries has increased strongly during the past few years.

Why China is Eyeing Iran

China has much interest in enlarging its presence in the Middle East. The Middle East is a region with significant geostrategic importance for the entire global political balance. China will play an increasing role on the global scene, and therefore it needs to reinforce its presence in regions that are fundamental for the overall fate of the global political balance. [See: "China Becomes Increasingly Involved in the Middle East"]

On this chessboard, China could have an important role in terms of economic, strategic and ideological influence. Beijing, therefore, is trying to strengthen its ties with those regional powers that represent an opportunity for entering strongly into the regional political balance. Iran is the main target of such a strategy. Iran is a major supplier of oil and gas and it could represent a fundamental source of energy for the development and modernization of China, which is increasingly reliant upon oil imports.

Moreover, China wants to reinforce its relations with Iran and to deepen its presence in Central Asia with the goal of reaching Caspian energy; tapping Caspian energy would help China lessen its dependence on maritime oil imports coming from the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf, thus better securing the uninterrupted flow of oil.

China has also been exploiting opportunities in countries where the presence of major powers is weak. Clear examples of this are the moves China has made in Sudan, Angola and Syria. As part of this strategy, Tehran is an ideal partner for Beijing, both for its natural resources and for its geopolitical influence. Iranian crude oil and gas reserves are largely untapped because the country has suffered the ostracism of Western countries, leaving a large part of its petroleum fields unexplored since Tehran does not have adequate technology to increase its refined oil-production. China proposes itself as the country that can help Iran in the way of modernizing its petroleum industry and the wider Iranian economy with industrial technology, capital, engineering services and nuclear technology.

The Sino-Iranian economic relationship extends beyond the oil and gas spheres. Beijing is not only interested in the exploitation of Iran's oil reserves. China, for example, wants to deepen the presence of its firms in the Iranian market, which could be a good outlet for Chinese exports. The development of a strong economy is fundamental for China's external projection of power. Economic concerns, however, are only part of China's strategy toward Iran.

Iran as a Geopolitical Instrument to Combat U.S. Influence

Beijing perceives Tehran as a geopolitical instrument to combat U.S. influence in the Middle East, even though this rivalry is not emerging as an overt competition. Beijing's calls to avoid U.N. sanctions against Tehran's nuclear program and the selling of Chinese weapons and military technology to Iran are two clear examples of the deeper relationship between the two countries.

Moreover, Iran joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization as an observer; the organization is largely a Sino-Russian instrument for containing the U.S. presence in Central Asia. Additionally, Central Asia represents an important concern for Iran in its security calculations; thus, Tehran prefers the stronger role of China and Russia in the region rather than the United States.

Iran is emerging as a new, rising, regional power and it is playing a lead role in the Middle East's diplomatic balance. The recent crisis in Lebanon demonstrated that Iranian capabilities in influencing the regional dynamics are stronger than before. Moreover, in a period in which world energy markets highlight the increasing dependence of industrial powers on petroleum prices, Tehran has an important instrument of geopolitical pressure through its status as a major oil producer and for its control of the Strait of Hormuz.

In spite of the harsh internal struggle for power and the country's inner social and political heterogeneity, which displays the fragmentation of the Iranian leadership and the country as a whole, "nuclear nationalism" is an element that rallies the nation together, minimizing the political and social cleavages and reinforcing the Iranian projection of power overseas.

Conclusion

China needs new allies and privileged access to the oil reserves in the Middle East. Iran appears to be the best target for such an approach. The importance of energy reserves for China rests on the country's desire to develop its economy, which is the foundation of its attempts to play a stronger role in the international system. Also, Tehran's position in the Middle East is stronger than before; thus, it can help Beijing in the fight against unrivaled U.S. influence.

For Iran, it needs a powerful ally to help it develop its economy, especially its oil industry. Moreover, it wants to improve its diplomatic and military status in the Middle East. Its nuclear program is a clear example of this. Iran needs civil and military technology and Beijing could be a good partner in these fields.

Finally, both countries are struggling against the supremacy of the United States in the world system even though, publicly, Tehran is more aggressive toward this end than is Beijing. The improving relationship between Iran and China does not mean that their long term interests are the same, but it does mean that, in the medium term, the two states share common aims in the economic and geopolitical spheres.

Report Drafted By:
Dario Cristiani

The Power and Interest News Report (PINR) is an analysis-based publication that seeks to, as objectively as possible, provide insight into various conflicts, regions and points of interest around the globe. PINR approaches a subject based upon the powers and interests involved, leaving the moral judgments to the reader. This report may not be reproduced, reprinted or broadcast without the written permission of inquiries@pinr.com. All comments should be directed to content@pinr.com.

Source: http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=566&language_id=1

Saturday, March 7, 2009

Palestinians `need decisions'

Despite U.S. support for two-state solution, an independent state seems no closer than in 1991
Mar 05, 2009 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (22)
Oakland Ross
MIDDLE EAST BUREAU

JERUSALEM–U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton travelled to the West Bank yesterday with a message of renewed American support for a two-state solution to the long-running conflict between Palestinians and Israelis.

But Palestinians have heard those words before, and the prospect of an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza seems no closer now than it did nearly two decades ago, when an international conference in Madrid lay the groundwork for the establishment of a country called Palestine that would dwell in peace alongside Israel.

That was in November 1991.

Since then, hundreds of negotiators have bargained their way through dozens of round-the-clock peace talks – and many thousands of innocent people have perished in political violence – but still there is no Palestinian state.

Perhaps understandably, a sense of hopelessness has taken hold, at least in some quarters.

"Many Palestinians have despaired of the two-state solution," said George Giacaman, director of the Program on Democracy and Human Rights at Birzeit University in the West Bank.

That bleak mood is just one of many impediments blocking the way to peace in the Middle East. Others include the political fallout from Israel's deadly military offensive in Hamas-ruled Gaza earlier this year and the continued firing of Palestinian rockets at Israel.

There is also the bitter split that now separates the militant Islamists of Hamas from their former comrades in the ranks of Fatah, the more moderate Palestinian faction that holds uncertain sway in the West Bank.

It does not exactly simplify matters that Clinton's one-day visit to the West Bank came on the heels of a decision by Israeli authorities to demolish more than 80 Palestinian dwellings in East Jerusalem, a decision Clinton criticized yesterday

"Clearly, this kind of activity is unhelpful," she said.

Clinton vowed to take the issue up with Israel's prime-minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu once he manages to piece together a ruling coalition, a task he is expected to do within the next few weeks.

Not exactly a proponent of political dialogue with Palestinians, Netanyahu may find himself at the helm of a hard-line right-wing government that would be even more adverse to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state than he is himself.

Meanwhile, some Palestinians look back at the past two decades of failed peace talks with Israel and ask themselves whether there has ever really been genuine Israeli support for a two-state solution to the region's troubles.

"I really think Israel is not serious at all on the issue of peace negotiations," Nader Said-Foqahaa, a prominent Palestinian pollster, said yesterday.

"There has been a lot of talk about `final settlements,' and there have been so many creative solutions, but I don't think there is a real desire on Israel's part to implement them,'' he said. ``I don't think Israelis really care."

Nearly a year ago, Saeb Erekat, a senior adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, told a gathering of journalists in East Jerusalem that, in his view, there was no longer anything that needed to be talked about between the two sides.

After decades of exhaustive negotiations, he said, every major issue in the conflict – the fate of Palestinian refugees, the location of borders, the future of Jerusalem, the provision of Israeli security – had all been examined in microscopic detail.

"We need decisions," he said. "We don't need negotiations."

But, once again, the decisions were left unmade.

Source: http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/596866