Mondoweiss Online Newsletter

NOVANEWS

• ‘Day of reckoning’ settlers who attacked IDF base have friends in gov’t

• Hey Quartet, Netanyahu left a note for you on the door

• Lieberman plan to strip Palestinian citizenship mirrors liberal demographic fear mongering

• Israel’s national theater to bring ‘Merchant’ to World Shakespeare Fest in May

• Trying to save two-state consensus, ‘Washington Post’ invokes ‘demographic’ threat

• Gaza students discuss ‘Occupy Wall Street’

• US millionaire Kenneth Abramowitz funds settlers linked to attacks on IDF

• A Year of Foreboding: What next for the Arab Spring?

• Loury says Iran attack talk is ‘anti-Islamic hyper-pro-Israeli genuflection’

• A personal appeal– PennBDS needs your help

‘

Day of reckoning’ settlers who attacked IDF base have friends in gov’t

Jan 09, 2012

Annie Robbins

The five right wing activists (Photo: Gil Yohanan)

What started out as a brazen attack by extreme rightwing Jewish zealots on a military base last month is turning into a full-on extravaganza. Going well beyond the ‘hilltop youth’, it now involves the government. There are reports of the infiltration of Israeli military intelligence, the tracking of Israeli army movements via intelligence contacts, and the possible involvement of at least two Israeli MK’s.

Thus far five Israeli rightwing extremists (above, photo from Ynet) have been indicted for the attack on the base near the northern West Bank city of Qalqilia. The purpose of the attack was to deter the dismantling of an illegal outpost to the settlement Yitzhar, an outpost the GOI intended to evacuate the night of December 12, that is, until the plan was deterred by the attack. Yitzhar is home to Rabbi Yosef Elitzur of the Od Yosef Hai yeshiva (who “explicitly called for operations like the arson at the Yasouf mosque”). Yitzhar itself is a legit colony, in the eyes of the state; it is included in the National Priorities Map and generously funded by the GOI.

  Ynet:

An indictment filed on Sunday against five right wing activists reveals their organized modus operandi that is based on a communications system that streamed information via text messages from the defense forces, politicians and those in the know to the people in the field.

The five defendants – Akiva HaCohen, elad Meir, Epraim Chaykin, Meir Etinger and David Eliyahu – are accused of gathering military intelligence, reports of troop movements in the West Bank, conspiracy to riot, entering a closed military zone and deceiving a public figure.

This is the same gang. So where’s the investigation? Haaretz

The indictment applies to members of a gang who carry out attacks on mosques and Palestinian property, Shin Bet security service officials and police investigators suspect. The indictment’s review of the systematic fashion in which right-wing zealots monitor Israel Defense Forces and police preparations to evacuate illegal settlement outposts is worrisome, as is the description of the scope of the extremist right-wing group’s influence on the West Bank.

Haaretz juxtaposes the treatment afforded to the rightwing extremist to the prosecution of Anat Kam, who leaked classified military documents to Haaretz regarding assassinations of Palestinian militants in the West Bank (note Alex’s references to Uri Blau).

There are startling differences between the seriousness with which the GOI investigates leaking classified information when it involves Palestinians and when it involves settlers. In the settlers’ case, they are all through IDF units– sometimes  referenced as Yesha Council of settlements’ “special forces.”

More from Haaretz:

On Sunday, for the first time, the state exposed problems it faces defending classified information against encroachments perpetrated by the political right. That sensitive IDF information is readily available to West Bank settlers is well known; but when such sensitive data fall into the hands of extremists …. the problem of keeping secret information under wraps seems more urgent.

In order to closely monitor IDF preparation for the evacuation of settlement outposts, right-wing activists maintain close contacts with a large number of sources from IDF units. Revelations in this indictment explain why Brigadier General Nitzan Alon, who is designated to be the IDF’s central region commander, has recommended that soldiers who have clear ideological affiliations be kept at some remove from classified information regarding outpost evacuation. ….

Why the Military Police have not formally launched an investigation into the leaks remains unclear.

MK Uri Ariel Photo by: Tess Scheflan / Jini

Unclear? Well, maybe because doing so would entail investigating two Israeli MK’s who have admitted giving extremists information on IDF movements as well as probing those IDF units affiliated with the settler movement. That shouldn’t be to hard to figure out.

They could start with Likud MK Ze’ev Elkin and then National Union MK Uri Ariel:

“If a person who transfers information about IDF movements is a spy, then I am a spy,” Ariel said during a discussion on law enforcement in the settlements. “If others were arrested, I should be arrested as well.”

This is all part and parcel of what Yossi Gurvitz calls the political arm of Jewish Terrorism. The ‘bring it on’ eagerness of many of these fanatics (we’ve written about them before ) is reflected in their talk of civil war–or what the recently indicted call the ‘day for reckoning‘.

They are upfront about advocating an end to democracy, and these MK’s are aligned with them.  That ‘democracy’ is becoming more and more illusory all the time.

Gurvitz:

Now, Elkin is obviously not a spy, just as the “price tag” people who gathered information on the army’s activities aren’t. The question whether Elkin is a traitor, however – in the moral sense of the word, not, naturally, the legal one – is more complicated. Elkin took an oath to maintain “loyalty to the State of Israel and to faithfully execute [his] calling in the Knesset.” When he gave information to the “price tag” people, which was supposed to derail military activity ordered by the lawful government, did he commit treason, or not? Let’s just say that Elkin is lucky to be a Jew and not an Arab; Otherwise the Knesset would already be discussing the removal of his immunity. As he is a Jew, it’ll be a surprise if even the Ethics Committee bothers itself with his perfidy.

Needless to say, No Palestinian or Palestinian Israeli MK would be afforded such intransigence over their loyalty. They’d be jailed, assassinated or in hiding somewhere in Lebanon forcrossing a red line. The hypocrisy is astounding.

The five right wing activists (Photo: Gil Yohanan)

(Hat tip Paul Mutter)

Hey Quartet, Netanyahu left a note for you on the door

Jan 09, 2012

 Paul Mutter

(Photo Credit: Unknown. First seen here.)

Lieberman plan to strip Palestinian citizenship mirrors liberal demographic fear mongering

Jan 09, 2012

Adam Horowitz

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman is in the press again for suggesting that Palestinian citizens of Israel should be stripped of Israeli citizenship under a two-state agreement. He says in an AP report, “Any other arrangement is simply collective suicide. This has to be clear and I think it is time to say these things out loud.”

The Haaretz coverage of the Lieberman proposal includes Haneen Zoabi’s cutting response. She lays out the choice precisely — it’s either a Jewish state or democracy:

Israeli Arab politicians responded furiously Sunday to Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s suggestion suggesting that “disloyal” members of that sector should take Palestinian citizenship.

The question of Israel’s citizens needs to be one of the central issues on the negotiating table, in light of the Palestinian refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state,” Lieberman said ahead of Sunday’s weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem.

Recognizing Israel as uniquely Jewish is one of the key demands by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the latest peace talks with the Palestinians, which began earlier this month.

“We can’t continue to ignore issues like that of Hanin Zuabi, who identifies completely with the other side,” Lieberman said, , referring to an Israeli Arab member of Knesset was stripped of her parliamentary privileges after sailing aboard a pro-Palestinian aid convoy attacked by Israel en route to the Gaza Strip.

“It’s as if someone sells you a flat and then demands that his mother-in-law continues living there,” he said. “Any Israeli you takes pride in his citizenship should be able to serve in any post, but people like Hanin Zuabi should in my opinion be Palestinian citizens elected under Hamas in Gaza.”

In response to Lieberman’s remarks, Zuabi declared: “We [Israeli Arabs] represent the only possible democratic option, while Lieberman represents apartheid and ethnic cleansing.”

“Lieberman bases his claims on a doctrine of racism, while I base mine on the principle of full equality among citizens – but both of us agree that there needs to be a discussion on the question of Palestinians in Israel and how to classify the state in any negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians,” she added.

While I agree that Lieberman’s proposal is racist and anti-democratic, I am less clear on how this is much different from liberal advocates for the two-state solution who warn of a similar “collective suicide” by invoking the “demographic threat” Palestinians represent. Here’s J Street’s Jeremy Ben Ami from his recent book A New Voice for Israel: Fighting for the Survival of the Jewish Nation (pps 88-89):

The third factor that makes the lack of a two-state solution a more serious threat to Israel over time is demography. . .

In other words, roughly half of the people living in the area under Israel’s political control are not Jewish. Given demographic trends, at some point soon the number of non-Jews in the area will exceed the number of Jews, who as a minority will then be exercising political control over a majority that is denied equal political rights on the basis of their ethnic background.

Given these threats — the improved technology, the deepening extremist ideology and the inexorable march of demography — Israel finds itself at a critical fork in the road, facing a choice of existential proportion: Either end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict now through a two-state solution or cling to an untenable status quo that leads to the decline of its Jewish character, its democratic values and its international standing.

Sounds like “collective suicide” to me. While I imagine Ben Ami would never support Lieberman’s proposal, how would he feel in a two-state future when the Palestinian population of Israel is approaching 51%? It’s also interesting that he seems to openly acknowledge that Palestinian citizens of Israel are currently “denied equal political rights on the basis of their ethnic background,” but he seems okay with it because the numbers are still in the Jewish Israelis favor.

Israel’s national theater to bring ‘Merchant’ to World Shakespeare Fest in May

Jan 09, 2012

Eleanor Kilroy

Habima National Theatre

Unlike many post-Oslo normalization programs that claim to promote peaceful co-existence and respect the ‘Green Line’ – thereby obfuscating the reality of colonial power relations –, the case of the Israeli national theater company Habima presents event organizers and the public with a clear-cut ethical issue.

The Israeli group Boycott from Within sets out the Israeli theatre company’s unapologetic collusion with Israeli state violations of international humanitarian law in a letter to the directors of the World Shakespeare Festival 2012:

Israel’s Habima Theatre is due to present, in [May in] your forthcoming festival, “The Merchant of Venice”. As noted on your website, this play includes the role of “Shylock, the most famous and controversial Jewish character in the theatre canon”… In the past year, two large settlements – Ariel in the northern part of the West Bank and Kiryat Arba in its south – set up “Halls of Culture” and asked theatres to come and present their plays there…. on this issue the management of Habima has taken a position which is remote from any kind of social engagement. Claiming to be “non-political”, the management has reiterated its decision to perform in West Bank settlements, “like everywhere else”… We cannot help seeing the positions taken by Habima Theatre on the two issues – presentation of “The Merchant of Venice” in London and regular performances in West Bank settlements – as inherently incompatible.

Furthermore, Habima’s repertoire is reportedly Hebrew-only, and all plays chosen by the theatre are either Jewish-Israeli, European or North American (none of them Palestinian or Arab). The ensemble is predominantly Jewish-Israeli, and the management is entirely Jewish-Israeli. ‘Habima… feels that this is an honorable accomplishment for the State of Israel in general and for the national theater in particular,’ General Manager Odelia Friedman is quoted in Ynet as saying.

Regardless, Shakespeare’s Globe responded that Habima will not be excluded because,

[T]he festival was intended as, and has become, a celebration of languages and not – with the exception of the group from South Sudan – a celebration of nations or states. Habima are the most well-known and respected Hebrew-language theatre company in the world, and are a natural choice to any programmer wishing to host a dramatic production in Hebrew. They are committed, publicly, to providing an ongoing arena for sensible dialogue between Jews and Arabs, Israelis and Palestinians.

To what kind of dialogue are Israeli cultural producers committed? As Nicholas Rowe writes inRaising Dust: A Cultural History of Dance in Palestine, the 1994 bilingual Ha-khan Theatre/ Al-Kasaba Theatre co-production of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, in which Jews were cast as Montagues and Arabs as Capulets, provoked a more vociferous Palestinian boycott of cultural interaction with Israel within occupied Palestinian territory:

Promoted as a cooperative venture between Israelis and Palestinians, this production subsequently toured Europe, sponsored by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs…The familial Montague-Capulet conflict was particularly disdained [by Palestinian artists] as a metaphor for the dispute between Zionists and the indigenous population of Palestine as it did not reflect the actual imbalance of power inherent to foreign colonization and military occupation, and suggested the conflict was simply based on an ancient ethnic and religious tribal hatred.

An even more succinct rationale for cultural boycott can be found in The Independent today, where Suhail Khoury, director of Gaza’s Edward Said Conservatory, asks of the West-Eastern Divan orchestra: “What is this orchestra telling the world – that Palestinian and Israelis can play together? We know that.”

The Gazan conservatory was severely damaged during Israel’s ‘Cast Lead’ bombardment in 2008-9, and today the only way prizewinning musicians can perform in music competitions is by video link – because students cannot leave the besieged Strip.

A British scholar of sixteenth century literature, whom I asked to comment on Habima’s proposed performance at the festival, wrote the following:

‘If we suppose for a moment that Habima were willing to engage artistically with Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land, how might the company’s politically and morally-conscious production of The Merchant of Venice look? Without damage to the text, Shylock at the end of the trial, the point at which an audience is normally made to sympathise with him, (sometimes by a prolonged scream as in the last performance I saw at Stratford) could be recognisably Palestinian and join a shuffling queue behind iron cage bars (like those at Israeli military checkpoints), which could form the stage backdrop throughout the performance. That would genuinely show that exclusion, appropriation and oppression of other peoples is something that can be practised by Christian against Jew, or Zionist against Palestinian. It would allow the actors to express their frustration at becoming performers within an encircling ring of control. Shylock’s unhappiness is over losing half of the deeds of his house, an issue with profound resonance for many Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem:

You take my house when you do take the prop
That doth sustain my house; you take my life
When you do take the means whereby I live. (IV.1.371-3)

‘Of course, the play is, arguably, not so much about Jews and Christians as two conceptions of justice: an eye for an eye (proportionate Old Testament justice) and the New Testament idea of mercy triumphing over this. That is why the last scene carries echoes of the Easter hymn, the Exsultet, which celebrates the exodus, the escape of the Israelites from Egypt, and all men from the slavery to sin. ‘In such a night’ (in hac nocte in the Latin hymn) is repeated eight times in the last scene of the play (the number of the resurrection). There’s only one way out of an endless cycle of tit-for-tat violence, and that’s mercy: and marriage, here as always, symbolic of unity and love. It’s important to say that the play is about justice, and the attempt to exact justice in the traditional human way of revenge leads nowhere but to loss. In my view the play is not about Christians and Jews ethnically, but about two views of justice, (of course it may well have been performed for lawyers in the Inns of Court, like so many of these plays including Twelfth Night), and a production of the play could stage both the process of exclusion, appropriation of land and housing and means of living, and to take up the symbolically hopeful signpost of the end of the play. Shylock’s daughter steals from his house, breaks out of the cycle of retribution, and marries a Christian. This is a comedy, a play that ends with unity, unlike Romeo and Juliet.

‘To perform this play as if it is only about the shocking past of mistreatment of Jews is to miss the point of a play that carefully balances justice, and shows the scales come down on the side of mercy, because the other way leads only to death. The present scandal of the illegal appropriation of Palestinian land, the reduction of Palestinians to shuffling queues of migrant workers, cowed civilians dodging sniper fire from towers, demands that an acting group confronting the text, interpret it in the light of one of the worst injustices of our time. The pursuit of ‘merely justice’ in the play (exacting Shylock’s bond of a pound of flesh) would lead to bloodshed, which the law does not allow. It is not difficult to apply this to the Israeli treatment of Palestinian land, even if by some bizarre and convoluted argument they could say that it belonged to them.’

Please contact the festival directors at info@shakespearesglobe.com, to register your own opinion of these plans.

Trying to save two-state consensus, ‘Washington Post’ invokes ‘demographic’ threat

Jan 09, 2012

Philip Weiss

Santorum

After Rick Santorum’s surge had the result of publicizing his view that no Palestinians live in the West Bank–that’s Israel, too–Glenn Kessler at the Washington Post did an emphatic “fact-check” of the statement, showing how deluded Santorum is. What I find interesting about the piece is its need to save the two-state consensus in Washington at all costs.

This is one case where Washington is living in an alternate reality, Hunky-Doryland. There is not a word about the occupation– no sense that Palestinians are killed for trying to regain an occupied village’s access to its water supply! No sense that 20 years of peace process have produced further dispossession. The Post invokes Israelis’ sense that things are movin right along on the West Bank:

Moreover, because of a series of agreements between Israelis and Palestinians, Palestinians have now acquired self-government over tracts of West Bank territory. A map on the [Israeli] Foreign Ministry Web site shows the sections of the West Bank that are subject either to full Palestinian military and civilian control or just civilian Palestinian control….

 In other words, Israel makes no claim that the Arabs residing in the West Bank are Israelis and in fact has already given up some governmental control to Palestinian self-rule — with the implication that even more territory will eventually form a Palestinian state…

Then notice how the Post attaches Santorum’s one-state idea to the belief of Palestinians like Ali Abunimah (its link), ignoring the many non-Palestinians who also have called for democracy.

Santorum, by labeling the Palestinians as “Israelis,” appears to be adopting a position similar to that favored by some Palestinians increasingly skeptical of a two-state solution — a one-state solution that would grant equal rights to Jews and Arabs.

What about the late Tony Judt, a Jew. Or Virginia Tilley. Or Peter Beinart, who says that West Bank Palestinians should be able to vote for the government that rules their lives.

And finally, notice (my emphasis) how this idea of “equal rights,” only favored by Palestinians, forces Kessler to put forward a racial argument that he would never offer so neutrally in the context of American liberal democracy. Imagine expressing such concerns about the black majority in Washington, D.C.!

Under such a [one state] proposal, demographic changes might  lead to a greater Arab population than a Jewish population in the single entity, which is why some Israeli politicians, such as opposition leader Tzipi Livni, have accepted the need for a separate Palestinian state.

P.S. The Washington Post has more work to do. The National Review has run this evangelical Jewish piece by Barbara Lerner: “Instead of the ‘two-state solution,’ restore what God gave Abraham’s people.“ Abraham’s people are not Muslims, no, Lerner is into the religious war: “This war began in the seventh century, when Muhammad, believing that God had ordered him to conquer and rule the whole world in the name of Islam, first used Taqqiya to trick and then slaughter Jews in Saudi Arabia who did not bow to his new religion…”

Gaza students discuss ‘Occupy Wall Street’

Jan 09, 2012

Yousef M. Aljamal

Amin Husain (right) speaking to activists in Zuccotti Park.
(Photo: AP/ Mark Lennihan)

The Occupy movement is an international protest movement which is primarily directed against economic and social inequality. The first Occupy protest to receive wide coverage was Occupy Wall Street in New York City’s Zuccotti Park, which began on September 17, 2011. It was noticed that many of the participants in the movement were pro-Palestinian, and took to the streets holding banners that read “Occupy Wall Street Not Palestine”. The movement received support and solidarity from The BDS National Committee and the Palestinian Grassroots Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign.

The protests should not be interpreted in isolation from the entire context of the issue, in which Americans feel sick of their government’s policies of intervening in other countries’ affairs. A group of activists gathered to discuss the movement in relevance to Palestine at CPDS, a Gaza-based think-tank. Amin Husain, a Palestinian activist living in New York City and one of the organizers of Occupy Wall Street talked by video link about the main goals of the movement and the context in which it was established.

Those who follow mass media in the US notice that the movement went unnoticed at the very beginning. “Mass media like CNN and Fox News is controlled by people whose interests are against the goals of the movement like Robert Murdoch”, said Husain. “They are the 1% who own wealth. We used social media and made visits to churches, mosques and synagogues to get our voices heard”, he added.

Known for its strength and influence in decision-making circles in the US, students wondered if the Zionist lobby played a major role in putting the movement down. Rawan Yaghi, a 18-year old English-Literature student at the Islamic University of Gaza asked about its role. “The movement was against lobbies whatsoever” replied Husain.

The lecturer invited the participants to make use of the movement to the serve the Palestinian cause. He added that a great number of Occupy Wall Street activists feel sick of their country paying Israel $3 billion dollars a year as Americans graduates from colleges and universities are not able to find  jobs to make a living.

“As Palestinians, we should make use of the momentum it received to serve our issue and expose Israel’s violations of human rights and the occupation of the Palestinian Territories. Making use of non-violent means, which were used in the movement to protest occupation would be useful”, he added.

The movement, which was partially inspired by The Arab Spring adopted non-violent methods to get its goals achieved. Though, many tried to introduce violence to harm its image and serve their own ends.

“It’s important to keep the movement non-violent for many try to pull it to the circle of violence to defame its image and get it away from its goals”, said Iyad Al-tahrawi, a 22-year old IT student at Al-Azhar University.

This video link is the first in series of links, seminars and lectures to be held at CPDS to discuss global issues related to Palestine in the presence of Palestinians and Internationals to raise Palestinians’ awareness of global issues and causes taking place in the world, with the entire region in flux.

US millionaire Kenneth Abramowitz funds settlers linked to attacks on IDF

Jan 09, 2012

Alex Kane

Kenneth Abramowitz (center) at a Westchester County, New York event for the Israeli military (Photo: Israelsoldiers.org)

The narrative that Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing coalition is “cracking down” on those wild West Bank settlers is falling apart with Haaretz‘s revelation that the leader of Netanyahu’s political party passed on information about Israeli military movements to settlers seeking to block moves against outposts.

What’s more is that a separate Haaretz investigation published over the weekend reveals that Kenneth Abramowitz, a New York-based millionaire and the national chairman of American Friends of Likud, founded an organization linked to recent settler attacks on the Israeli military. Abramowitz is also a board member for the major US fundraiser for the Israeli military, Friends of the Israel Defense Forces. In addition, Abramowitz is a major donor to Likud Knesset members Yisrael Katz and Yuli Edelstein.

These revelations further blur the line between the settlers and the state–and also indicates that the Netanyahu government’s recent moves against radical settlers is a show for the international community. Close friends and members of the Likud Party are the very same people linked to the recent settler attacks on the Israeli military.

The Haaretz piece was written by the crusading Israeli journalist Uri Blau, who only recently returned to Israel after being threatened with prosecution for his journalism. Some choice excerpts from Blau’s piece:

The announcement was posted three weeks ago at 1:23 in the morning on the popular Israeli website Rotter.net (Hebrew only): “Tonight again, warning about [Israeli] forces in Samaria. Roadblocks in the direction of Yitzhar.” The post continued: “Tatzpit [Observation] news agency reports that police and army forces are now deployed across Samaria. The report received by Tatzpit cites roadblocks in the Yitzhar area. It is also reported that right-wing activists who followed a police convoy that was traveling toward Samaria were detained by the police.”

This wasn’t the only report by Tatzpit in recent months that was aimed at updating activists seeking to block the possible evacuation of settlers in the West Bank. Forty-eight hours earlier, during a wild night that saw right-wingers invade the base of the Ephraim Brigade, Tatzpit reported on its Facebook page: “The police forces have just stopped between Shilo and Eli. The forces are escorting two bulldozers, a bus and jeeps.” Also: “Jinspot junction near Ramat Gilad has been blocked to movement of Jews. The fear of demolition tonight is mounting!”

Who solicits donations for this group, which aids the right-wing struggle against the Israel Defense Forces? An investigation by Haaretz Magazine finds that the donations to Tatzpit and to several other right-wing groups pass through an organization called the “Israel Independence Fund [Hakeren Le’atzmaut Yisrael] – Public Benefit Company Ltd,” founded in 2007. The chairman is Nachman Eyal, from the settlement of Psagot, a well-known activist who is also the director general of the National Union party. One member of the company’s board of directors is attorney Dafna Netanyahu, the prime minister’s sister-in-law…

The [Legal Forum for the Land of Israel, a branch of the Israel Independence Fund], which in 2010 received donations totaling NIS 940,000 (an increase of nearly 50 percent over the previous year), is headed by the same Nachman Eyal of the IIF. About NIS 870,000 was donated in 2010 to the Legal Forum by the Central Fund for Israel (AK: see Mondoweiss’ reporting on CFI here), a U.S.-based nonprofit organization – a conduit for the transfer of funds to right-wing groups in Israel – and about NIS 40,000 came from the IIF…

A U.S. millionaire and illegal land grabs

In 2008, the Israel Independence Fund was founded in New York. The nonprofit’s declared areas of activity are philanthropy, volunteering and distributing grants. The person behind the fund is Kenneth Abramowitz, a New York businessman and partner in NGN Capital, which describes itself as “a venture capital firm dedicated to health-care investing.”

Abramowitz is also national chairman of American Friends of Likud and donated thousands of shekels to the campaigns of Yisrael Katz and Yuli Edelstein in the last party primaries. He also appears on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “list of millionaires” − i.e., potential donors to Likud’s 2007 primaries. The existence of the list was exposed last year by the newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth.

Abramowitz is also a hefty donor to Israel’s Media Watch ‏(in which Dafna Netanyahu, as mentioned, is a member‏). The donation is used to fund a journalism prize in his name. At the awards ceremony last year he said that apart from the freebie Israel Hayom, financed by Jewish-American billionaire Sheldon Adelson, the media in Israel are not objective.

A Year of Foreboding: What next for the Arab Spring?

Jan 09, 2012

Deepak Tripathi

Ongoing protests in Syria are just one question facing the region in 2012
(Photo: AP/Muzaffar Salman)

An old BBC colleague who was a distinguished Africa expert used to say, “When the mainstream media focus on one half of the story in a continent full of brutal and corrupt dictators who have been bought by foreign powers, it becomes the duty of a journalist to tell the other half of that story.” His advice was worth heeding.

The year gone by has been one of civil protests, upheaval and violence in many parts of the world. Old wars continued, most notably in Afghanistan and Iraq. Peaceful awakening movements that sprang out with much hope in Algeria and Tunisia turned violent as they spread east from North Africa to the Gulf region. A brief and bloody war in Libya, with an overt display of NATO’s military power on behalf of the anti-Gaddafi forces, resulted in his overthrow and brutal killing. For NATO, the Libya war was over, but not for Libyans. A fledgling government now competes with warlords for territorial control and legitimacy in a fragmented country.

External intervention in Syria is more vocal internationally, but shrouded in secrecy on the ground. Accounts of the conflict are based on claims and counterclaims and not much independent evidence to corroborate. If detractors are to be believed, the Ba’athist regime of President Basher al-Assad is on the brink of collapse. The outcome of the Syrian conflict will have profound consequences for the balance of power in the Middle East, in particular for Syria’s ally Iran, as well as in Lebanon and Palestine.

Human aspirations for liberty and freedom from oppression defined the year 2011. Paradoxically, great powers who played a role in sustaining oppressive systems, and still do where it suites them, declared themselves on the side of liberty in other places. The result is confusion, division, conflict and a more insecure world. Afghanistan and Iraq in the last decade were America’s “bleeding wounds,” a term first coined by Mikhail Gorbachev in the 1980s Soviet war in Afghanistan. With both Iraq and Afghanistan far from stable, there is an unwelcome prospect of Libya and Syria also extracting a high price in terms of security threats and energy costs in the current decade.

Past events cannot be reversed, nor are their consequences easy to contain. So I have in mind events which I believe the world in 2012 would be better off without. In the United States, from President Obama and administration hawks to his Republican opponents have been talking about punitive action against Iran and others in this election year. Powerful voices in the ruling circles of Israel, France and Britain are egging the American president on. The gap between rhetoric and posturing can lead to something far more serious. How civil movements can be manipulated by external forces for their own interests has been demonstrated during the current upheaval in the Arab world.

The overthrow and killing of Gaddafi may have resolved the conflict in Libya in the West’s view. Now the prospect of real power remaining with the militias, and an ineffective Western-supported government, reminds of Afghanistan following the 1992 collapse of the last Communist leader Najibullah. Libya, with its porous borders, surrounded by Tunisia, Algeria, Niger, Chad, Sudan and Egypt, is vulnerable itself and threatens others. The year 2012 could be decisive, not only for Libya, but for the region and beyond.

The situation in Syria is very dangerous. Unlike Libya, Syrian state institutions are more robust. The regime’s friends are not many, but Russia and China are taking a much tougher line with the West. Iran, its ruling allies in Iraq, and Lebanese and Palestinian groups have huge stakes in Syria. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, supported by the West, are determined to see the end of the current Syrian regime.

Turkey, a NATO member, has moved from its previous “independent” position to a stance much more in tune with the Western interests in the Middle East. Once a close ally of Syria, Turkey hosts the anti-Assad Free Syrian Army and allows the group to train its fighters and orchestrate attacks inside Syria. The Turkish military guards the Syrian rebel base, and a refugee camp, just across the Syrian border.

For Turkey’s governing Justice and Development Party, which professed to seek close relations with its neighbors, this is a complete about face. Two factors appear to be at work here. The Sunni support base of the party is one. The prospect of joining the European Union, an idea that France and Germany in particular oppose, may be the other.

How far Turkey’s moderate Islamic government will go is difficult to predict. It has its own Kurdish insurgency to contend with, so the strategy is risky. Turkey’s growing involvement in Syria reminds of the 1980s when, from a small beginning, Pakistan, in the midst of ethnic insurgencies, became a base for anti-Communist Afghan forces. The consequences were disastrous.

The conflict in Syria continues to simmer. The sanctions on Iran are steadily being tightened. The talk of military action is persistent and the risk of a weak U.S. president facing reelection being pushed into a war against Iran is haunting. Sectarian violence in Iraq is on the rise. The country faces a new political crisis after an arrest warrant was issued for the Sunni Vice-President Tariq al-Hashemi on terrorism charges, prompting the mainly Sunni party al-Arabiya to boycott parliament. And the Syrian conflict threatens further instability in Lebanon and the wider region.

In these circumstances, a war against Iran will be long and catastrophic. From Libya in North Africa to Pakistan on the edge of South Asia, the region has seldom been so explosive. The year ahead is going to be one of foreboding developments.

Loury says Iran attack talk is ‘anti-Islamic hyper-pro-Israeli genuflection’

Jan 09, 2012

 Scott McConnell

 

Glenn Loury and John McWhorter, two of the country’s leading (and very mainstream) black intellectuals have a fascinating talk about Ron Paul. One of my favorite parts is the way they rather delicately refer to the general weirdness of the Israel lobby’s extreme influence on American discourse (between 3:00 and 6:00)—though so far as I know neither man has made writing about the Mideast any kind of priority. Also revealing and impressive is their dismissive attitude towards the “Ron Paul is a terrible racist” camp; they view Paul as certainly implicated in the newsletters and find them unfortunate but seem to perceive (and why shouldn’t they have some sixth sense about this?) that racism is not at all an important part of who Ron Paul is. I have to admit, though I’ve read and admired Loury and McWhorter’s pieces for many years, there is something about this video which makes me almost choke up with gratitude for America’s civil rights movement.

From the video:

LOURY: [Paul asks] ‘Why do you want to go bomb Iran?’ Can you give me an answer other than genuflection at some politically-correct nonsense? Will you please tell me why you’re going to war with Iran, rather than this anti-Islamic hyper-pro-Israeli pandering? That’s completely contemptuous of the people listening to this political discussion that you would talk in those terms.

So he deserves to be refuted rather than written out because he farted in church… He’s very important to the political discussion.

McWHORTER [echoing]: Suppose a child asked you, ‘Why are you going to bomb Iran?… Why are we so concerned with not ruffling the feathers of Israel?’ Just a child… Ron Paul’s…capable… of asking questions like that… It’s sad that a person who asks questions on that level and is not afraid to and is clearly somebody of intelligence could not be elected….

A personal appeal– PennBDS needs your help

Jan 09, 2012

Annie Robbins

Everyone who has ever met me can attest I am a totally cool, calm and collected person. Not! I am completely beside myself about attending the PennBDS conference next month. I can’t wait and am counting the days. I registered and booked my plane ticket! The idea of being at the conference with so many of us together in one place; focused, directed and empowered by the growing global Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement, in solidarity, has me bursting at the seams in anticipation.

(Graphic: pennbds.org)

Have you noticed the level of shrill discourse from hasbarists lately? The other side is freaking out because our diverse coalition united, empowered and in strength creates a political firewall they cannot compete with, and they know it. We know that they are hearing us when they use terms like warfare and weapons to combat the growing non-violent threat we have become.

Check out the line up of speakers assembled by the team at PennBDS?  Out of the ballpark!(Okay okay, I know I should calm down but I can’t). But that isn’t why I am writing here today….

The organizers could really use some additional donations as they gear up to pay for a bunch of big expenses. The registration fee for this conference is so cheap (seriously, I was aghast when I went to register online, it’s like the cost of 2 movie tickets for the friggin’ weekend!), but unfortunately the overhead isn’t. So if everyone and anyone who can afford it can justhead on over to PennBDS website and make an extra donation that would be simply splendiferous and very much appreciated.

From Remi Kanazi’s spoken word :

“Palestinian civil society has spoken

don’t cross this picket line or cash in that paycheck signed apartheid

put down Stolen Beauty

cancel that gig

and join the rest of us on the right side of history.”

Preliminary Agenda