Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem Chair of West Midland PSC
Dear Friends,
Tonight’s message is quite long. But some days there are more items that are important then other days. I am omitting Robert Fisk’s piece in today’s Independent ‘First it was Saddam. Then Gaddafi. Now there’s a vacancy for the West’s favourite crackpot tyrant.’ Here’s the link, just in case you want to read it.
Am also omitting reports about today’s missile volley from Gaza, which were apparently aimed at Israeli military bases near the border (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/world/middleeast/20mideast.html?_r=1&ref=middleeast), but which ended up in Israeli communities. They caused some damage and injured 2 people. Over 50 were shot presumably in retaliation for Israel’s killing of 2 militants. Interestingly, I found no mention of the incidents in the Guardian, the Independent, and the LA Times. Of course there is other important news today that drew much attention—namely Libya, the no-fly zone, and of course Japan..
Some reactions to the no-fly zone in letters to the editor of the Guardian were interesting, and I include them. The first one reflects my own feelings—it compares the Western powers reaction to the Libyan affair to their reaction to Israel’s attack on Gaza. I clearly recall how the major powers on that sad day loudly proclaimed ‘Israel has a right to defend itself.’ Sickening. It ‘defends’ with American made weapons and American funding. Perhaps that’s the reason for the almost comic (were it not so grossly inappropriate) remark. Great for a satire, but not for reality.
The final item (8) is Jen Marlowe’s book reading schedule for readers in the US to publicize her and Sami Al Jundi’s new book, The Hour of Sunlight: One Palestinian’s Journey from Prisoner to Peacemaker.’
—
Item 1 contains 2 brief reports from the OPT—the first about Bil’in, the 2nd about settler violence. These are incidents that you will not read about in your local press or even the Israeli press. Ynet and Haaretz used to comment briefly on the Friday demonstrations in Bil’in, and sometimes on ones elsewhere, but nowadays hardly do so.
Items 2, 3, and 4 are about bds. Item 2 reports that Edinburgh students voted overwhelmingly for boycott. Item 3 relates that a Danish company halts equipment supply to the WB. Actually, whether or not the halt is real or in words only, is not absolutely clear, because the co-partner of the Danish company is an Israeli one, and the ways of pretending to carry out an order are many. Still, even if only in principle, the ‘halt’ is encouraging. BDS is gaining ground. Item 4 discusses ‘who benefits from EU-Israeli academic cooperation, and shows that Israel is the beneficiary.
Item 5 is the letters to the editor that I mentioned above.
In item 6 MJ Rosenberg writes about the “Eroding Consensus” with respect to Israel. Rosenberg takes as example David Resnick, whose ‘A Man, A Plan’ was in yesterday’s message. As with so many, Resnick began pro-Israel, but over time has changed his view.
Item 7 reports that the U.S. is promoting an arms trade mission organized by a settlement firm. Yep! Apparently US policy has a double standard—say one thing, do another.
All the best,
Dorothy
============================================
1.Palestine News and Info Agency WAFA Saturday, March 19, 2011 Released Non-Violence Activist Participates in Weekly Bilin Protest Date : 18/3/2011 Time : 21:20
BILIN, WEST BANK, March 18, 2011 (WAFA) – Palestinian non-violence activist Abdullah Abu Rahmeh participated Friday in the weekly anti-fence protest in the village of Bilin, west of Ramallah, for the first time since his release last week.
Abu Rahmeh spent more than a year in Israeli prisons for his anti-fence activities. The international community denounced his imprisonment describing it as an infringement on his right to freedom of expression through non-violent means.
As the case in every week, the Israeli army responded by firing heavy rounds of tear gas at the protestors, who included Israeli and international activists, causing harm to several protestors.
Similar protests took place in nearby Nilin and further out in Nabi Saleh, where the Israeli army showered the protestors with tear gas and at times firing rubber bullets at them.
Protests also took place in the village of al-Masara, in the Bethlehem area.
A number of people were hurt in the Israeli crackdown on the protests, which demand Israel stop taking villages’ land to build a fence to protect illegal settlements built on their land.
M.A.
———–
Settlers Attack Village Near Salfeet Date : 18/3/2011 Time : 21:07
A motion to boycott Israel was overwhelmingly passed at the Edinburgh University Students Association (EUSA) General Meeting on Monday 14th March. In what was described as a ‘landslide’, the motion, ‘Boycott Israeli Goods in EUSA shops and supply chains’ received around 270 votes in favour, with only 20 students voting against.
Despite the meeting requiring over 300 students to attend for it to be quorate and for decisions taken to be binding, the huge level of student support for the motion means that EUSA will be under severe student pressure to adopt it as official policy.
Proposed by students from Edinburgh University Students for Justice in Palestine, the motion noted that Israel is an apartheid state and resolved to affiliate EUSA to the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, to boycott Israeli goods in EUSA supply chains and shops, and to mandate the EUSA executive to lobby the University to do the same.
After the motion was discussed for around 15 minutes, it was put to a vote and the result was so comprehensive that no count was required. The passing of the motion led to rapturous applause in the George Square Lecture Theatre, where the General Meeting was held, and was by far the most welcomed result of the night.
Similar motions have been passed at SOAS, Manchester, and Sussex Universities in recent years. This latest result seems a clear indication that students in the UK are continuing to play a prominent role in the campaign for a just peace in Palestine.
The motion came in the wake of recent protests against Israeli officials speaking at the University. In February, student activists shut down a talk by Ishmael Khaldi, advisor to Israeli foreign minister Avidgor Lieberman, and, two weeks ago, over 100 students protested against the invitation of Israeli ambassador Ron Prosor to the University.
The proposer of the motion, second year Maths and Music student Daniel Beesley said “I am overwhelmed with the outcome of the General Meeting. It is great to see students of Edinburgh University once again standing up against injustice, just as they did during Apartheid South Africa. EUSA represents that views of students and we are sure they they will take on board what was clearly the opinion of the vast majority who attended the GM, and endorse the boycott.”
The motion’s seconder, Liam O’Hare, a student of International Relations, said: “Israel has occupied, ethnically cleansed and practised apartheid against the Palestinians for 63 years. The BDS movement seeks to force Israel to abide by international law and is gathering huge momentum year on year. I think the General Meeting proved that the student population at Edinburgh University do not want goods from an Apartheid state on campus and, despite the meeting narrowly not being quorate, I fully expect EUSA to act upon this motion.”
======================================
3. Haaretz,
March 15, 2011
Danish company halts equipment supply to West Bank in wake of public protest
Israeli security firm owned by Danish G4S, said it will stop providing security gear over Green Line; move comes in wake of public pressure following report from group monitoring companies operating in territories.
The Israeli security firm Hashmira, which is owned by the Danish concern G4S, announced last weekend it will stop providing equipment to security installations over the Green Line.
The move comes in the wake of public pressure in Denmark following a report from the Coalition of Women for Peace, which runs the “Who Profits?” project monitoring Israeli companies operating in the territories.
The report, released in November, says that Hashmira provides baggage scanning equipment and body scanners for the Qalandiya, Bethlehem, Sha’ar Efraim and Eyal checkpoints.
It also provided the Ofer base near Ramallah a peripheral security system installed on the security prison walls, and the central control room for the entire compound, which includes a jail for Palestinian prisoners, a lockup and a military court.
Hashmira also installed a security system for the Judea & Samaria district police headquarters in the E1 area near Ma’aleh Adumim.
The report aroused public criticism in Denmark among several elected officials, including the Danish minister of foreign affairs.
In addition, the city of Copenhagen decided to consider its continued investment in the company.
Public uncharmed by purchase of Hashmira
In 2002, G4S faced public pressure over its acquisition of the Israeli company Hashmira, which then provided security services to settlements, including armed guards.
Following that criticism the company, then known as Group 4 Falck, decided to stop guarding settlements in the territories.
Since then the company employs just a few guards in settlements, mainly at the entrances to supermarkets and banks. G4S noted its 2002 decision in its current announcement, adding that since then it hasn’t signed any security contracts of this type in the settlements.
Hashmira is the second largest security company in Israel, operating since 1937, and employs thousands of people. The company has thousands of government, factory, office building and shopping center clients.
G4S employs about 600,000 people worldwide, specializing in providing security services involving guards, electronic equipment, transporting cash and operating private prisons.
In its announcement G4S said it intends to terminate contracts with security facilities in the territories as soon as possible. The company stated, however, that it recognizes its contractual obligations toward its customers and will take these into account.
“The company’s global management is currently considering a small part of security services in the Judean and Samarian areas as many international companies do from time to time, and taking into account its contractual obligations,” G4S responded.
Two months ago Hashmira, along with Shikun & Binui (formerly Housing and Construction Holding Co. ), won a NIS 1.5 billion tender for a police academy in Beit Shemesh. The training center will be built over the next three years, and will be operated over a 22 year period in exchange for regular payments to Hashmira from the government.
============================
4. [forwarded by Ofer]
From: Eleanor
What a great and important piece
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: pscwestlondon <pscwestlondon@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 22:25:55 +0000
Subject: [pscwestlondon] (Article) Who benefits from EU-Israeli
academic co-operation?
To: pscwestlondon@googlegroups.com http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11851.shtml<wlmailhtml:{C280E345-C053-4AB6-9C1B-7C9341AD9CEB}mid://00000182/!x-usc:http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11851.shtml>
David Cronin, *The Electronic Intifada,* 10 March 2011
One of the most enjoyable things that has happened since I wrote a book on
Israel’s relations with Europe is that I have been asked to speak at various
universities. So when an invitation appeared in my email inbox to visit
King’s College London (KCL), I immediately accepted. Big mistake.
The request came from the International Center for the Study of
Radicalization (ICSR), a partnership between King’s College and the
Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) in Herzliya, Israel. I only became aware of
the partnership one day before I was scheduled to address an ICSR seminar in
January. Following a hasty consultation with some friends in the Palestine
solidarity movement, I withdrew from the event, informing the organizers
that I fully supported the campaign to boycott Israeli goods and
institutions.
In hindsight, I am relieved to have taken that decision. Set up in 2008, the
ICSR boasts on its website that it is the first initiative of this kind in
which Arab and Israeli academic institutions can work together. This appears
to be a reference to how the Jordan Institute of Diplomacy is also involved
in its research on political violence. However, the participation of an
academic body from an Arab state does not exonerate the ICSR for embracing
the Herzliya center, which has long tried to cloak Israeli apartheid with
intellectual gravitas.
Each year the IDC hosts the Herzliya security conference, attracting
Israel’s political, military and business elite, as well as illustrious
foreign guests. Speakers at this conference can spout racist invective
without fear of being challenged; in 2003, Yitzhak Ravid, a senior
researcher with Israel’s weapons development authority Rafael, called for
coercive measures to curb the birthrate among Palestinians. The delivery
rooms in Soroka Hospital in Beersheba have turned into “a factory for the
production of a backward population,” he said, alluding to an area with a
considerable number of Bedouin inhabitants.
Furthermore, the IDC expresses pride in its links with the Israeli army,
despite the army’s role in enforcing the occupation, which includes the
brutal siege on the Gaza Strip. Representatives of Israel’s most profitable
arms manufacturers frequently sit on the IDC’s management committee, while
10 percent of its student places are reserved for veterans of elite combat
units in the Israeli army.
John Bew, director of the ICSR, told me there is no “financial relationship
between ourselves and Herzilya.” He added “You will see that we also have
contacts with universities across the world, including Jordan. This is not
an expression of support for any political position on any state — Israel,
Pakistan, India, wherever. It is part of our belief that academic
institutions should be a source of dialogue and discussion and the first
port of call for discussion between divided peoples. Having grown up in
Belfast, I am personally committed to that sort of dialogue. I don’t think
demonizing or boycotting one side or another has any constructive impact.”
Bew’s comments are disingenuous. Although he is opposed to a boycott of
Israel, he is happy to put his name to pamphlets defending the boycott of
Hamas by western governments. In a 2008 paper he wrote with fellow scholar
Martyn Frampton, Bew urged the West to be wary of negotiating with Hamas,
lest that doing so would strengthen its position against more moderate
alternatives (“Talking to
Terrorists<wlmailhtml:{C280E345-C053-4AB6-9C1B-7C9341AD9CEB}mid://00000182/!x-usc:http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=443&PID=0&IID=2336>,”
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs). In his writing, he habitually labels
Hamas as terrorist, without applying that term to the State of Israel, a far
more prolific killer of civilians than Hamas. Moreover, he appears reluctant
to learn from the situation in his native Belfast, where a peace settlement
could only be achieved after the British government agreed to hold talks
with Irish Republicans.
Bew’s flawed analysis chimes with the stance from chief administrators in
King’s College. In November 2008, KCL awarded an honorary doctorate to then
Israeli president Shimon Peres, an inveterate warmonger (his status as a
Nobel Peace laureate notwithstanding). The award sparked protests from
student activists sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.
Along with his post with the ICSR, Bew is listed as a vice president of the
Henry Jackson Society, a think tank that defends America’s imperial
machinations. The society’s founding principles commit it to advocating that
the US and Britain maintain a strong military with global expeditionary
outreach.
A Palestine solidarity campaigner studying in KCL, who asked not to be
named, said “The idea that the International Center for the Study of
Radicalization is there to combat radicalization is quite absurd. If it
wanted to follow the Northern Ireland model [to conflict resolution], it
wouldn’t be covertly pressing to exclude Hamas from the so-called peace
process.”
The case for an academic boycott of Israel was bolstered by a 2009 paper
from the Alternative Information Center
(AIC)<wlmailhtml:{C280E345-C053-4AB6-9C1B-7C9341AD9CEB}mid://00000182/!x-usc:http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10945.shtml>,
a group combining Israeli and Palestinian researchers and activists. All
major Israeli academic institutions, certainly the ones with the strongest
international connections, were found to provide unquestionable support to
Israel’s occupation, the paper stated. Such support ranged from how the
Technion in Haifa developed a remote-controlled bulldozer for the demolition
of Palestinian homes to how Tel Aviv University has welcomed arms
manufacturers to symposia on robotics and electro-optics.
Uri Yacobi Keller, an author of the AIC paper, said the Palestine solidarity
movement is not seeking that European academics cease talking to their
Israeli counterparts. Rather, the movement is urging a boycott of Israeli
universities as institutions and that the flow of finance to them be cut off
until they sever their links with the occupation. “This would make Israeli
universities understand that these [international] contacts are in danger if
they continue to cooperate with the Israeli security establishment and the
settlement project [in the occupied territories],” he said.
Academic cooperation between Europe and Israel has been encouraged by
governments on both sides. In July 2008, the Britain-Israel Research and
Academic Exchange Partnership (BIRAX) was launched by the two prime
ministers then in office, Gordon Brown and Ehud Olmert. This $1.6 million
scheme, which involves the allocation of grants to science researchers, is
mainly funded by the Pears Foundation, which presents itself as a
philanthropic body. All of the Israeli universities taking part have links
to the Israeli military, according to the aforementioned AIC paper.
Mike Cushman from the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine
(BRICUP), which has called for an academic boycott of Israel, noted that
some of the activities sponsored by BIRAX exclude Palestinian institutes.
“BIRAX funds research on the Dead Sea ecology without the involvement of
Palestinian universities but the Dead Sea is a vital resource for
Palestinians,” he said.
“Israeli universities develop the arms and control technologies that
directly support the occupation of the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza,” Cushman added. “Their alumni magazines proudly boast of their links with the Israeli military and security services. Israelis who have done military service get privileged entry into universities — one of a number of ways the universities directly and indirectly discriminate against Palestinian citizens of Israel.”
The European Commission, meanwhile, is a major provider of grants to Israeli universities and to private Israeli firms, including weapons manufacturers. Israel is the main foreign participant in the European Union’s multi-annual framework program for scientific research, which has an overall budget of 53 billion euros (US $73.5 billion) between 2007 and 2013. Israel is taking part in 800 EU-financed research projects, worth a total of 4.3 billion euros. Israeli officials have told me that they hope they will have directly drawn down more than 500 million euros worth of science grants by the time the EU’s program concludes in 2013.
Cordis, a searchable database on the EU program
(www.cordis.lu<wlmailhtml:{C280E345-C053-4AB6-9C1B-7C9341AD9CEB}mid://00000182/!x-usc:http://www.cordis.lu/>),
is a useful resource for activists wishing to find concrete cases of
European universities linked to Israeli institutions and the private sector.
When I gave a talk in Ireland’s University of Limerick towards the end of
last year, a member of staff told me she was shocked to discover the extent
of its cooperation with Israel. By checking Cordis, I found five examples
linking Limerick to Israel; several of the beneficiaries are profiting
directly from the Israeli occupation. Among these projects was one with the
unwieldy title Innovative and Novel First Responders Applications (INFRA), which aims to develop communications services in tunnels and other locations where mobile phones prove unreliable. Athena GS3, a company founded by Shabtai Shavit, a former head of the Israeli secret service Mossad, is involved in this project; the firm belongs to the Mer Group, which provides surveillance equipment to illegal settlements in East Jerusalem and to military bases and checkpoints in the wider West Bank. Another Israeli beneficiary of this project is Opgal, a maker of infrared cameras. Opgal is partly owned by Elbit, a leading supplier of warplanes to the Israeli air force.
Contrary to Israel’s claims that it is the only democracy in the Middle
East, its university authorities are actively seeking to quell dissent.
After Israel attacked the Gaza Freedom Flotilla, killing nine activists, in
May 2010, Haifa University banned its students from protesting. Ben Gurion University of the Negev has also begun disciplinary proceedings against students who demonstrated against the flotilla massacre and for improved conditions for workers hired to clean the campus.
With deep cuts imposed on education spending in many countries, it is
understandable that student unions and academics are preoccupied with
domestic economic issues at the moment. But those cuts are being taken as
part of a greater ideological effort to make universities more subservient
to the private sector and restrict third-level education to people from
wealthy families. Cooperation with Israeli universities needs to be viewed
in that context.
Indeed, Israel’s experience should be a wake-up call for everyone concerned about social justice. Whereas most industrialized countries spend around $8,000 on each student attending school or university per year, Israel spends $6,000. By contrast, Israel devotes eight percent of its gross domestic product to military expenditure, almost six times the average for industrialized countries (see “Reforming education and raising unemployment key … wlmailhtml:{C280E345-C053-4AB6-9C1B-7C9341AD9CEB}mid://00000182/!x-sc :http://www.oecd.org/document/37/0,3746,en_21571361_44315115_44411365_1_1_1_1,00.html>,”
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 20 January 2010).
Israel’s political elite is clearly more concerned with prime-pumping its
arms industry and tightening its grip on Palestinian land than in ensuring
that education helps people realize their potential. That is one of many
reasons why an academic boycott of Israel is so vital.
*David Cronin’s book *Europes Alliance With Israel: Aiding the
Occupation*is published by Pluto Press ( www.plutobooks.com wlmailhtml:{C280E345-C053-4AB6-9C1B- C9341AD9CEB}mid://00000182/!x-usc:http://www.plutobooks.com/>
).*
======================
When Israel bombed Gaza at the end of 2008 in a brutal action which killed 1,300 people and destroyed 20,000 buildings, there was no question of the US allowing the UN to impose a no-fly zone over Gaza to protect its people, 50% of which are children. Those who support the UN security council’s authorisation of a no-fly zone over Libya (Britain, France and US line up for air strikes against Gaddafi, 18 March) need to reflect on the selective nature of UN intervention throughout the world and in the Middle East in particular.
The UN will not be intervening in the Libyan revolution to protect civilians from Gaddafi’s brutality. It will go in to further the interests of the world’s major powers in the region. It will be an imperialist action, not a humanitarian one. After the bloodshed it produced in Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan, the doctrine of “humanitarian military intervention” should be discredited beyond rehabilitation. The west is a major source of the problems of the Middle East and north Africa. It’s not part of the solution, even when its troops wear blue helmets.
Sasha Simic
London
• Over many years the UK and other western states have sold billions of dollars’ worth of weapons, including highly sophisticated fighter aircraft to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states. So if these states now have all these expensive and powerful weapons, why cannot they operate the no-fly zone without the help of the west? If they can’t, what was the point of spending all these billions on weapon systems that they can’t use?
Colin Day
Shoreham-by-Sea, West Sussex
• Although it will no doubt attract criticisms, the government’s decision to protect innocent civilians in Libya is to be welcomed. This, however, is only the start of an extended process. Without even moving from the Middle East, civilians also need to be protected in the Israeli-occupied territories, Yemen and Bahrain. I do hope we have enough planes and pilots to go round.
Nick Blackstock
Wilsden, West Yorkshire
• We have no business intervening in the Libyan uprising. Imagine how we would feel if there was an armed uprising in part of the UK, for example Northern Ireland, and the Libyan government intervened to arm the rebels!
Shane Lynch
St Albans, Hertfordshire
• Why, when the coalition government is launching a comprehensive attack on public services and the most vulnerable in our society, can money still be found for war?
Irene Short
===============================
6. Al Jazeera,
18 Mar 2011 17:00
Israel: The eroding consensus
Most influential Jewish American journalist says it is time for US to stop telling Israelis what they want to hear.
If America is to be a useful friend, it owes clarity to Israel, no less than Israel and the world owe justice – and a nation – to the Palestinian people [REUTERS]
David Remnick, editor of The New Yorker, is arguably the most influential Jewish American journalist.
Now 50, Remnick became editor at 37 after an impressive career covering the collapse of the Soviet Union for the Washington Post. His book about that incredible period, Lenin’s Tomb: The Last Days of the Soviet Empire, won a Pulitzer in 1994.
Remnick believes that fear is misplaced and that Obama should think big despite the pressure from the donors and White House aides mired in the status quo.
Over the years he has written about Israel and the Palestinians with some regularity. Although he claims no special expertise in the area (other than being a strongly identifying Jew), his editor’s “comments” indicate that he knows the issue well.
In fact, his pieces are usually far more sophisticated than the news and opinion pieces that the supposed experts regularly produce for the prestige newspapers and journals.
Over Remnick’s past 13 years as editor of The New Yorker, his attitudes toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have evolved. In the early years, Remnick’s views were decidedly mainstream.
Though no Likudnik, he did give Israel the benefit of the doubt in most situations. Back then, he clearly believed that although Israel often blundered, even badly, it still was sincerely seeking peace. Of course, holding those views was significantly easier a decade or two ago than it is today.
Today those views seem only to be held by either true believers (the “Israel can do no wrong” crowd) or politicians determined to ingratiate themselves with donors whose politics can be summed up as “Israel First”.
There aren’t a whole lot of those donors but it doesn’t take very many to intimidate politicians. And intimidated they are.
But established journalists like Remnick don’t have to be intimidated (although ingratiating oneself with rich and powerful people is not an unknown phenomenon among writers).
Trailblazers
Today Remnick is treading the path blazed last year by Peter Beinart, another influential Jewish American writer who had been editor of The New Republic at 24.
A year ago, Beinart broke with the AIPAC crowd with a blockbuster piece in The New York Review of Books explaining how the combination of right-wing Israeli policies and the mindless chauvinism of AIPAC and its allies had succeeded in alienating young Jews from Israel.
Beinart’s piece enraged the pro-Israel establishment, although it knew, from its own surveys, that identification with Israel is strongest among those in their 80s and then drops precipitously among the now-ageing “baby boomers” and their kids. (One Ivy Leaguer recently told me that even J Street is a hard sell among Jewish kids. As for AIPAC, forget about it. In fact, any passion for Israel at all makes you pretty much an outlier.)
A year later, David Remnick has crossed Beinart’s Rubicon. In a “Talk of the Town” essay in his magazine, Remnick definitively asserts that it is time for the United States to put a comprehensive peace plan (exchanging the territories for peace) on the table and to push it to fruition.
He writes that the Obama administration obviously knows this, but is simply afraid of the implications for “domestic politics”. Remnick believes that fear is misplaced and that Obama should think big despite the pressure from the donors and White House aides mired in the status quo.
For decades, AIPAC, the Anti-Defamation League, and other such right-leaning groups have played an outsized role in American politics, pressuring members of congress and presidents with their capacity to raise money and swing elections.
But democratic presidents in particular should recognize that these groups are hardly representative and should be met head on.
Obama won seventy-eight per cent of the Jewish vote; he is more likely to lose some of that vote if he reverses his position on, say, abortion than if he tries to organise international opinion on the Israeli-Arab conflict.
However, some senior members of the administration have internalised the political restraints that they believe they are under, and cannot think beyond them. Some, like Dennis Ross, who has served five presidents, can think only in incremental terms.
This is strong stuff, especially when it comes from David Remnick. But it isn’t all.
Netanyahu’s ‘chilling’ influence
A sizeable chunk of the piece is devoted to Remnick’s explanation of why it is silly to expect prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu to abandon his decades-long commitment to the occupation of the Palestinian territories. The thinking goes that:
Just as Nixon set aside decades of Cold War ideology and red-baiting in the interests of practical global politics, Netanyahu would transcend his own history, and his party’s, to end the suffering of a dispossessed people and regain Israel’s moral standing.
Not going to happen, writes Remnick. He believes that the reason is the influence of Netanyahu’s 101-year-old father, Benzion Netanyahu. Remnick tells of a meeting he had with the prime minister’s father, writing that the elder Netanyahu “invited me to his house for lunch, and I am not sure that I have ever heard more outrageously reactionary table talk. The disdain for Arabs, for Israeli liberals, for any Americans to the left of the neoconservatives was chilling.”
Add to that a “coalition government that includes anti-democratic, even proto-fascistic ministers, such as Avigdor Lieberman,” and it is clear that Obama’s sweet talk has not a chance of accomplishing anything.
And that is why Obama has to act decisively and without waiting for permission from AIPAC, Dennis Ross, or the Democratic party’s fundraisers.
The importance of an Obama plan is not that Netanyahu accept it right away; the Palestinian leadership, which is weak and suffers from its own issues of legitimacy, might not embrace it immediately, either.
Rather, it is important as a way for the United States to assert that it stands not with the supporters of Greater Israel but with what the writer Bernard Avishai calls “Global Israel”, the constituencies that accept the moral necessity of a Palestinian state and understand the dire cost of Israeli isolation.
Remnick concludes that it is time for the United States to stop telling the Israelis what they want to hear, and start telling them what almost all policy-makers actually believe.
A friend in need…
If America is to be a useful friend, it owes clarity to Israel, no less than Israel and the world owe justice – and a nation – to the Palestinian people.
A few years ago, there is no chance that either David Remnick or Peter Beinart would be saying these things. And a few years before that they wouldn’t even be advocating a Palestinian state at all. And before that it wasn’t even safe to talk about a discrete Palestinian people.
But it’s all changing for two reasons. First, at long last, it is common and uncontroversial knowledge that the Palestinian people have suffered mightily at the hands of Israel, with the support of the United States.
Second, it has become abundantly clear that Israel’s isolation is increasing at such a rapid rate (Turkey and Egypt distancing themselves from Israel in a single year) that the continuation of the occupation (and the conflict that emanates from it) threatens the existence of Israel itself.
That is why there will be more Remnicks and more Beinarts. Not because influential Americans like them are indifferent to Israel’s survival. But because they aren’t.
MJ Rosenberg is a Senior Foreign Policy Fellow at Media Matters Action Network.
The above article first appeared in Foreign Policy Matters, a part of the Media Matters Action Network.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.
Source: Al Jazeera
====================================
7, Electronic Intifada,
March 18, 2011
US promoting arms trade mission organized by settlement firm
The United States Department of Commerce and the US embassy in Tel Aviv are co-promoting the Israel Unmanned Systems 2011 trade mission from 27 March to 1 April. Their partner — and the primary organizer — is Airlift, inc., an aerospace and consulting firm based in the settlement of Talpiot Mizrach (East Talpiot) in occupied East Jerusalem. This raises troubling questions about why Washington is promoting the Israeli arms trade and why it is doing so with a firm based in an illegal colony which explicitly contradicts official US policy as well as international law.
Airlift was founded in 2007 by Marc-Philippe Rudel, a French-Israeli electrical engineer and businessman, to “promote economic cooperation and the establishment of global partnerships.” The company brings foreign arms industry and military officials to Israel for arranged business-to-business meetings, specially tailored seminars, industry workshops and visits to major Israeli armament firms and research institutes. Airlift’s website states that its “offices are located in the heart of Jerusalem” but the address given puts them in occupied East Jerusalem. Airlift’s Spanish subsidiary, Airlift Iberia, was established in September 2010.
Though considered a mainstream Jerusalem neighborhood by most Israelis — including Rudel, judging by his activism in the secular liberal/centrist “Awakening in Jerusalem” movement — East Talpiot is unanimously considered an illegal settlement by the international community including the United Nations, the International Court of Justice and the US government whose pronouncements consistently oppose Israeli settlements. However, Washington regularly takes actions — such as the recent veto of a UN Security Council resolution condemning settlements — to shield Israel from international condemnation and formerly contributed economic aid that was used directly for settlement infrastructure and construction. Promoting a trade mission with a firm based in a settlement points to the latter as being more representative of US policy, in spite of official pronouncements to the contrary. American sponsorship comes at a time when governments like Norway, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom are actively distancing themselves from settlement-related business
es. Requests for comment from the US State Department and Department of Commerce were not answered.
The trade mission’s program includes visits to the facilities of several Israeli arms manufacturers deeply involved in the occupation. Israel Aerospace Industries, Aeronautics Defense Systems, BlueBird Aero Systems and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems are all on the schedule for the visiting delegation as well as an “upscale” reception at the US embassy in Tel Aviv. There will also be panels on the market for unmanned systems (drones) and an optional tour on the last day through the occupied Old City of Jerusalem.
Israel is a world-leader in the design and export of unmanned systems, especially unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). It also deploys them extensively in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip and over Lebanon. This battlefield experience, the history of deployment in service of military occupation, is a key marketing aspect for the tools. The website for the trade mission notes, for example, that BlueBird Aero Systems is an “official supplier of the Israeli Ministry of Defense and Israeli Air Force.”
There is already a history of partnerships between Israeli UAV manufacturers and American arms and aerospace firms, some of which pre-date Airlift’s founding. Boeing, AAI and General Dynamics have all signed marketing agreements to promote Aeronautics Defense Systems models in the US. General Dynamics also helps promote Elbit Systems models, and Advanced Ceramics Research and Cubic Advanced Tactical Systems formerly helped market Rafael’s now-discontinued Skylite drone. These firms and others are also engaged in research and development for their own production of UAVs. It is only the US arms industry’s UAVs, in fact, which compete with those from Israel.
This is also not Airlift’s first joint mission with the US Department of Commerce. In January 2010, they jointly organized and promoted the Israel Space 2010 Trade Mission which brought participants from Brazil, Belgium and the US to learn about and engage with many of the same arms manufacturers involved in the pending Unmanned Systems mission. Airlift regularly participates in trade and aerospace events promoted by the French, Brazilian, Canadian and other embassies. Rudel too is a consultant in charge of the aerospace industry sector for the Economic Mission of the Embassy of France.
The promoters are well aware that the same battlefield experience that gives Israeli UAVs a marketing edge is also a potential liability. A document from the 2010 Space Trade Mission available on the US Department of Commerce’s BuyUSA.gov website notes that “geo-political concerns” are “potential obstacles” to Israeli firms tapping international markets more successfully. A recent example of this was Brazil’s hesitancy in buying Israeli UAVs, as revealed by Wikileaks. The 2009 US diplomatic cable notes that Brazilian Defense Minister Nelson Jobim prepared arrangements to “prevent Brazil [from] having to buy UAVs from Israel, which had become politically sensitive” (15 January 2009 diplomatic cable, Wikileaks). With the increasing activity and popularity of the boycott, divestment and sanctions efforts aimed at ending the occupation, perhaps “potential obstacles” to future sales will prove more formidable.
Jimmy Johnson lives in Detroit and runs www.NegedNeshek.org, a news, data and analysis project researching Israeli arms exports. He can be reached at jimmy [at] negedneshek [dot] org.
========================
8. On Mon, Mar 14, 2011,
Jen Marlowe <donkeysaddle@hotmail.comwrote:
Dear friends,
Now that Sami Al Jundi’s and my book, *The Hour of Sunlight: One
Robin’s Books & Moonstone Arts Center<http://www.moonstoneartscenter.org/moonstone-arts-center-events/jen-marlowe-and-sami-al-jundi-authors-of-the-hour-of-sunlight/
110A S 13th Street
Phila, PA 19107
Wednesday, April 6, 6:30pm
*Washington, DC*
The Jerusalem Fund<http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/display/EventDetails/i/28032/pid/906
2425 Virgina Ave NW
Washington, DC 20037
Wednesday, April 13, 7pm
*Bellingham, WA*
Village Books <http://villagebooks.com/village-books-jen-marlowe-04/12/11
1200 11th St
Bellingham, WA 98225
Thursday, April 14, 7:30pm
*Bainbridge Island, WA*
Eagle Harbor Book Co<http://www.eagleharborbooks.com/event/hour-sunlight-jen-marlowe
157 Winslow Way East
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
Saturday, April 23, 4:30pm
*Seattle, WA*
Elliott Bay Books
1521 Tenth Avenue
Seattle WA 98122
See you soon—and thanks in advance for spreading the words to friends and
colleagues in the cities listed above!
All the best,
Jen Marlowe
donkeysaddle projects
www.donkeysaddle.org
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Jen Marlowe <donkeysaddle@hotmail.comwrote:
Dear friends,
Now that Sami Al Jundi’s and my book, *The Hour of Sunlight: One
Palestinian’s Journey from Prisoner to Peacemaker*<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1568584482/ref=s9_simh_gw_p14_d0_i1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=0KDCWN7Q97G5C91HQNCQ&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938631&pf_rd_i=507846,
has been out in the world for a month, it’s time to take it “on the road!”
I hope you will join me at one of the book readings/signings below. And,
though visa issues are preventing Sami Al Jundi (who the book is written
with and is about) from joining me on this leg of the book tour, we are
making efforts for him to be “present” at as many events as possible, via
video and/or skype. Hopefully Sami and I will be able to do a “Round Two
Tour” in the fall.
Please do circulate this email to friends, family or colleagues in any of
the cities mentioned below. I depend on your grassroots efforts for “word to get out.”
