Israel’s goal since it occupied East Jerusalem in 1967 has been to empty it of its original inhabitants, that is its non-Jewish residents. The Israelis have been bulldozing Palestinian homes with the dubious reason of them being illegally built or expanded without permits – permits that are never issued to Palestinians – while simultaneously constructing houses for Jews only. The only reason why the Obama administration made a bigger deal out of this was that Vice President Biden was embarrassed by the pie-to-his-face Israeli housing announcement. Otherwise, it probably would have been a business-as-usual response issued by the State Department that “it is not helping” on the Israeli land theft which has continued unabated.

So Secretary Clinton defended the Obama administration’s criticism of the latest Israeli actions and yet in the same breath, she vowed “unwavering” and “enduring” support for Israel. In order to change an undesirable behavior, a verbal rebuke has to have some teeth. There should be a threat that follows the rebuke, for example, threatening to withhold the $3 billion dollars a year aid to Israel, for it to be effective. By proclaiming unwavering and enduring support for Israel, why should the Israelis be doing anything different from what they have been doing, since they are fully aware of the “rock solid” and “forever” support? This is like telling your child that he should not be bullying his playmates but then immediately give him a lollipop and tell him no matter what he does, he will always be rewarded with candies. It is this unwavering and enduring support we have provided Israel for so long that have directly resulted in the stalemate we have today.

The only way for us to make Israel change its destructive policies, which are not only detrimental to the Israelis but are also endangering the lives of our servicemen and women serving in the Middle East, is to threaten to withhold $3 billion dollars aid. Or better still, threaten to be fair. Secretary Clinton stated that “our credibility in this process depends in part on our willingness to praise both sides when they are courageous, and when we don’t agree, to say so, and say so unequivocally,” but to say and not act on it is like a toothless tiger. Being fair to both sides will go a long way to restoring whatever that is left of our credibility and removing the anything but perceived favoritism for Israel.

Update 2.

Update 3.

Take a good look at them. These are the Israel-first American organizations and politicians who place Israel’s interests above America’s.

AIPAC (America Israel Public Affairs Committee):

The Obama Administration’s recent statements regarding the U.S. relationship with Israel are a matter of serious concern. AIPAC calls on the Administration to take immediate steps to defuse the tension with the Jewish State.

Instead calling Israel to stop obstructing efforts by the Obama administration in its attempt to resolve the conflict, AIPAC, which apparently has sworn allegiance to Israel, has the chutzpah to tell the administration to take immediate steps to defuse the tension.

ADL (Anti Defamation League):

We are shocked and stunned at the Administration’s tone and public dressing down of Israel on the issue of future building in Jerusalem. We cannot remember an instance when such harsh language was directed at a friend and ally of the United States. One can only wonder how far the U.S. is prepared to go in distancing itself from Israel in order to placate the Palestinians in the hope they see it is in their interest to return to the negotiating table.

A true friend and ally does not endanger the lives of the citizens of his friend. A true friend and ally does not throw up road blocks in every attempt by his friend in finding a resolution for the conflicts he is currently involved with.

Elliott Abrams, former Special Assistant to President GW Bush:

The current friction in U.S.-Israel relations has one source: the mishandling of those relations by the Obama administration.

Yes, blame it on the Obama administration. Why couldn’t the Obama administration just keep its mouth shut when Israel decided to steal more land from the Palestinians to build more houses for Jews in Jerusalem?

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT):

“Let’s cut the family fighting, the family feud,” Lieberman said. “It’s unnecessary; it’s destructive of our shared national interest. It’s time to lower voices, to get over the family feud between the U.S. and Israel. It just doesn’t serve anybody’s interests but our enemies.”

Israel and the United States DO NOT have a shared national interest. This so-called shared national interest myth is conned by Israel-firster like Joe Lieberman, whom when it comes to Israel has never thought of America’s interest first. We certainly do not share the same enemies. If Israel wishes to continue the antagonistic policies with its neighbors, it should be dealing with the consequences of its policies alone, and not drag us into the pile of shit it created.

Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS):

“It’s hard to see how spending a weekend condemning Israel for a zoning decision in its capital city amounts to a positive step towards peace,” said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan. He complained that the administration was attacking a “staunch ally and friend” when it should be focusing on the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear problem.

No matter how hard it tries empty Jerusalem of its original inhabitants by populating with its Jewish citizens and making lives as difficult as possible for Palestinians, the occupied and illegally annexed East Jerusalem IS NOT Israel’s capital city. But that fact is probably too difficult for a Christian Zionist like Sen. Brownback to comprehend.

Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev):

It was an “irresponsible overreaction”.

Rep. Shelley Berkley, how much money are you getting from pro-Israel organizations?

Rep. Christopher Carney (D-PA) and Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL):

“We urge your Administration to refrain from further public criticism of Israel and to focus on more pressing issues affecting this vital relationship, such as signing and enforcing the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act when it comes to your desk.”

Rep. Carney and Rep. Kirk, i urge you to stop putting interests of a foreign state above America’s. You are after all elected officials in the United States of America, not Israel.

Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY):

“We should not have a disproportionate response to Israel. We need to be careful and measured in our response, and I think we all have to take a step back.”

Telling a so-called friend like Israel to stop sabotaging every effort made so far by this administration is considered “disproportionate response”? Seriously, Rep. Engel, are you sure you are not a member of the Knesset?

Eric Cantor (R-VA):

To say that I am deeply concerned with the irresponsible comments that the White House, Vice President, and the Secretary of State have made against Israel is an understatement. In an effort to ingratiate our country with the Arab world, this Administration has shown a troubling eagerness to undercut our allies and friends. Israel has always been committed to the peace process, including advocating for direct talks between Israelis and Palestinians, in effort to bring this conflict to an end. Unfortunately, the Palestinian Government continues to insist on indirect talks and slowing down the process.

Israel has always been “committed” to the peace process by stealing more land from the Palestinians and settling them with Jews only. In fact, in the years that followed the signing of Oslo peace accords in 1993, the number of Jewish settlers in the occupied territories (excluding East Jerusalem) grew from 116,000 to more than 300,000. Good people of Virginia should probably be concerned that their representative not only has a propensity to lie and misconstrue but also the obvious demonstrative behavior of not putting America’s interests first.

Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY):

“The Administration, to the extent that it has disagreements with Israel on policy matters, should find way to do so in private and do what they can to defuse this situation.”

Again, blame the Obama administration for being stabbed in the back by the Israeli government. Oh yes, the administration should do what they can to defuse this situation, just like a rape victim should probably not wear that rape-inducing dress in order to defuse the situation with her rapist. For Rep. Israel, America always come first when it comes to choosing who to blame between her and Israel.

Update 2:
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN), at the annual AIPAC policy conference:

On the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapons capability, “the State of Israel can’t run even a 5 percent chance of that happening and neither can we,” Bayh added.

Bayh … earned the first standing ovation of the conference when he commented on the U.N.’s Goldstone report on the Gaza conflict. “The truth of the matter is that the Israeli Defense Forces risked their lives to avoid civilian casualties,” he said.

“I think the timing of the housing announcement was unfortunate and some of the rhetoric on our side was probably too aggressive, but the main thing is the relationship is strong and unshakable and we should now move forward and build on that,” Bayh said.

The state of Israel may not be able to risk a 5 percent chance of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons capability, but what the fuck has that got to do with us? Once again, Mr. Israel-First is trying to bamboozled us into thinking that Israel and us share the exact same interests.

“The truth of the matter is that the Israeli Defense Forces risked their lives to avoid civilian casualties” ? So had IDF not “risked their lives to avoid civilian casualties”, are we talking about tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza massacred instead of just 1400?

“Some of the rhetoric on our side was probably too aggressive” ? Are you fucking kidding me? Is telling Israel to stop doing things that endanger the lives of our servicemen and women in Middle East too aggressive? Once again, it is undeniably clear whose interest Sen. Bayh has in his mind when it comes to Israel and us.

Update 3.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), 3/23/2010:

“We in Congress stand by Israel,” the leader of the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, assured Netanyahu at an all-smiles appearance before the cameras. “In Congress we speak with one voice on the subject of Israel.”

For your information, in Congress, only you and your likes of Israel-firsters speak with one voice on the subject of Israel. True patriot like Rep. Ron Paul does not blindly stand by Israel.

Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), 3/23/2010:

“I never thought I’d live to see the day that an American administration would denounce the state of Israel for rebuilding Jerusalem,” Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana said on the House floor Tuesday after meeting Netanyahu. “I urge the president to stop all this talk about settlements in Jerusalem and start focusing on isolating a threatening and menacing and rising nuclear Iran,” he said.

So illegally tearing down Palestinian homes while building Jews-only homes is now considered “rebuilding” ? May be i should just head over to Rep. Pence’s house to tear it down and build myself a swimming pool, since this is all about “rebuilding” right?

Mark Regev, a spokesman for Mr. Netanyahu, said the final status of the existing settlements would be determined in negotiations with the Palestinians. “In the interim, normal life should be allowed to continue in those communities,” Mr. Regev said.

Ah…pulling the same old “final status” trick again. The last time Palestinians were deceived into believing that everything would be resolved in the “final status” negotiations, the settler populations in the occupied West Bank, excluding East Jerusalem, increased by more than 114,000 in the 10 years since Oslo (1994 – 2004) with more land being stolen for growth of existing settlements, construction of new settlements and Jews-only bypass roads.

In the same article:

In an interview with Army Radio on Monday, Ehud Barak, the defense minister and leader of the center-left Labor Party, gave a hypothetical example of a family of four that originally moved into a two-room home in a settlement. “Now there are six children,” he said. “Should they be allowed to build another room or not?”

He added, “Ninety-five percent of people will tell you it cannot be that someone in the world honestly thinks an agreement with the Palestinians will stand or fall over this.”

In the occupied East Jerusalem, where Israel has been making substantial changes in its demography by settling Jews in areas originally occupied by Palestinians, Palestinian homes have been demolished because they were “built without the required permits,” which were never granted to Palestinians as part of a deliberate Israeli policy to push them out of Jerusalem. Should the Palestinians in East Jerusalem be allowed to build another room or not? That is the question Ehud Barak should be asking himself. If Palestinians are not allowed to grow in areas they legally owned, do you think that Jews should be allowed to grow in settlements deemed completely illegal by the international community?

U.S. law specifically banned the use of any portion of the $3 billion dollars we give Israel each year for the illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank but why is no one making the same argument that the $3 billion dollars sent by us allowed Israel to divert money to settlement activities?

In a review of tax records conducted by Reuters last year, it was determined that “at least 13 American organizations have been claiming charitable status as they have pumped more than US$35 million into the settlement enterprise over the past five years.” These organizations have claimed the tax exempt status because they are “charitable” organizations and the IRS responded that the groups are qualified if the funds go to “charitable, religious and educational purposes”. But that’s the exact claim made by founders of Holy Land Foundation and look where they have ended up.

What is so special about Israel that “more than half the members of the House and Senate attended Monday night’s dinner” at the conference and that a leading Democrat was overheard in a wiretap promising to seek leniency for two pro-Israel lobbyists, who were indicted for giving classified information to foreign agents? Is it because they are all Christian Zionists believing that the return of Jews to the Holy Land is a precursor to Armageddon? Or do they actually believe the myth that Israel is the “only democracy in the Middle East”, where non-Jewish Israelis are treated like second class citizens?

I cannot even fathom a pro-China lobbying group hosting an event where members of congress swear – on their moms’ lives – one after another to support China and to protect it from its enemies at any cost. A concerned citizen would have justifiably questioned the loyalty of our elected officials, had they attended the imaginary pro-China event similar to the AIPAC Policy Conference. The pro-Israel lobby, aka the Lobby, has done precisely that and has been able to shield itself from the legitimate question on where their loyalty belongs by playing the “anti-semitic” card. Had i done to China what those in the Lobby have been doing to support Israel, there is no doubt in my mind that my loyalty would have been scrutinized, and rightfully so. And yet, some pro-Israel supporters at the conference have the chutzpah to regard the question on their loyalty as “unfair” and “toxic” and that they find the dual loyalty issue “offensive”. Dig a little deeper on the legitimate question of loyalty and you will soon find yourself dealing with accusations of being an anti-semite.

There is really nothing American about AIPAC. It might as well be known as Israel Public Affairs Committee. Our strategic interests do not go hand in hand with Israel’s. What is good for Israel is not always good for us. In fact, i would argue that our Israel-centric policy in the Middle East has been more of a liability than an asset. What is so successful about pro-Israel lobbying group like AIPAC is that it is able to hoodwink us into believing that we share the exact same interests, and that any threat to Israel is a threat to us. Our gutless politicians, Congressman Ron Paul and a handful of others excluded, got their balls grabbed by the Lobby in its power to elect and to keep them in office. So this annual ritual of one-upping each other to proclaim one’s loyalty to Israel continues unabated.

Olmert boasting about embarrassing Rice was not the worst part of the story.  The astounding part of the article was how Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert managed to get her to abstain:

“I said: ‘Get me President Bush on the phone,’” Olmert said in a speech in the southern Israeli city of Ashkelon. “They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn’t care: ‘I need to talk to him now.’ He got off the podium and spoke to me.”

Olmert said he argued that the United States should not vote in favor, and the president then called Rice and told her not to do so.

I wonder how much of this was exaggeration by Olmert and how much of it was as happened.  

Regardless of the side you are on, if any of this is true, does it not concern you tax-paying Americans the fact the head of state of a foreign country having so much clout over a departing lame duck President of this country, who does not even have to worry about being re-elected?  

The Prime Minister of a sovereign state that receives more than $3 billion of aid from us annually, bragging in public how he was able to get our President right off the podium in the middle of his speech, and was able to redirect our foreign policy at his whim.  

Amazing.  Simply Amazing.

12.31.2008 | LATEST UPDATED Formatted Original (.doc)
By Adam Sheets

normanfinkelstein.com

It is crucial that one has her/his facts straight about Israel’s war on Gaza. What events brought about this dreadful situation? What needs to be done to make it stop? These questions will be answered in the content of this article, using concrete facts from a variety of news sources.

Let’s first investigate the recent cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. The cease-fire began in June 2008. The terms were as follows:

1. Israel would drastically reduce its military blockade of Gaza.
2. Israel would halt all military incursions into Gaza.
3. Hamas would halt all rocket attacks into Israel.

From the outset of the cease-fire, Israel did little to ease its military blockade. As a result, Gazans continued to suffer from a lack of food, fuel, financial aid, electricity, clean water, medical supplies, and more. This has been, inarguably, an attack on innocent Palestinian civilians.

• Gaza faces a humanitarian “catastrophe” if Israel continues to prevent aid reaching the territory by blocking crossing points, the head of the main UN aid agency for the Palestinians said on Friday … Israel had restricted goods into Gaza despite the truce, which calls on militants to halt rocket attacks in return for Israel easing its embargo on the territory … Israel also held up deliveries of European Union-funded fuel for the power plant, which generates about a third of the electricity consumed by Gazans… Ailments associated with insufficient food were surfacing among the impoverished coastal strip’s 1.5 million population, including growing malnutrition.
  –Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 21, 2008 [1]
• A former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, has told the BBC she was taken aback by the “terrible” conditions in Gaza on a recent visit. Mrs Robinson said it was “almost unbelievable” that the world did not care about what she called “a shocking violation of so many human rights” … Israel tightened a blockade on Gaza after Hamas took control there in 2007 … “Their whole civilisation has been destroyed, I’m not exaggerating,” said Mrs Robinson …Israel says the blockade, under which it has allowed little more than basic humanitarian aid into Gaza, is needed to isolate the militant group and stop it and other militants from firing rockets into Israel. Israel came to a truce with Palestinian groups in June this year, but Mrs Robinson said this had had little effect on people’s lives and “just brought a bitter taste in the mouth”.
  –BBC News, Nov. 4, 2008 [2]
• The UN in the Gaza Strip says it will run out of food aid in two days unle Israel’s blockade – which it describes as “shameful and unacceptable” – eases. The UN refugee agency UNWRA, which distributes food to half of Gaza’s 1.5m people, called the blockade “a physical as well as a mental punishment”. Israel is now allowing a limited amount of fuel acro the border, but it is still blocking food deliveries … In a statement, UNWRA spokesman Christopher Gunne said food distribution operations would end on Thursday unle Israeli authorities allowed deliveries of wheat, luncheon meat, powdered milk and cooking oil without delay. “This is both a physical as well as a mental punishment of the population – of mothers and parents trying to feed their children – who are being forced to live hand to mouth,”he said … “It is a further illustration of the barbarity of this inhuman blockade.” … “It is also shameful and unacceptable that the largest humanitarian actor in Gaza is being forced into yet another cycle of crisis management,” Mr Gunne added.
  –BBC News, Nov. 11, 2008 [3]
• International aid agencies, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, have said virtually no medical supplies were reaching Gaza. –Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 9, 2008 [14]
• The UN has no more food to distribute in the Gaza Strip, the head of relief efforts in the area has warned. John Ging said handouts for 750,000 Gazans would have to be suspended until Saturday at the earliest, and called Gaza’s economic situation “a disaster”. Israel earlier denied entry to a convoy carrying humanitarian supplies… The United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) distributes emergency aid to about half of Gaza’s 1.5m population. “We have run out [of food aid] this evening,” said Mr Ging, UNRWA’s senior official in Gaza. “Unle the crossing points open… we won’t be able to get that food into Gaza,” he told Reuters news agency … Also on Thursday, Israel refused permission for a group of senior European diplomats to visit the coastal enclave. It has also prevented journalists, including those from the BBC, from entering the territory.
  –BBC News, Nov. 13, 2008 [4]
• Since June 2007, Israel has allowed little more than basic humanitarian aid to enter the Gaza Strip. Many there hoped that policy would change, five months ago, when Hamas and Israel agreed to a truce. But while there were some increases in the amount of aid allowed in, Israel’s strict restrictions on the movement of goods and people into and out of Gaza largely remained… Serious fuel shortages have led to widespread power cuts acro Gaza City. That, in turn, has caused problems in pumping water to homes, and sewage to treatment plants. Israel is preventing many aid workers, and all journalists from entering Gaza too … “I never thought we would see days like this,” says Monther Shublak, head of Gaza’s water authority. “The water system was severely stretched even before this crisis, but now, things are much worse. For the last four days, around 40% of people in Gaza City have had no acce to running water in their homes at all.” … “But we are putting all of our resources into sewage pumping. The health consequences of that system totally failing are too worrying to think about, but it could happen unle things change.”
  –BBC News, Nov. 20, 2008 [5]
• Israel has refused to allow cash to enter Gaza in recent weeks to ratchet up pressure on the ruling Hamas militant group. With the supply of currency dwindling, banks have limited withdrawals over the past two weeks, and some have posted signs telling customers they cannot take out any more money … The United Nations halted cash handouts to 98,000 of Gaza’s poorest residents last week, and economists and bank officials warn that tens of thousands of civil servants won’t be able to cash their paychecks next month … “No society can operate without money, but that’s the situation we are reaching in Gaza,” said Gaza economist Omar Shaban … Israel and Egypt have restricted movement through Gaza’s border crossings since the Islamic militants of Hamas violently seized control of the coastal territory in June 2007. Since then, closures have been eased or tightened, depending on the security situation. But even in quiet times, when Gaza militants refrained from firing rockets at Israeli border towns, only limited shipments of food, medicine and commercial goods were allowed in… Shlomo Dror, an Israel Defense Ministry spokesman, questioned the seriousness of the currency shortage. “We are used to the Palestinians inventing things and we are looking into their claim,” he said.
  –Washington Post, Nov. 24, 2008 [6]

Despite the intense blockade against Gazan civilians, the cease-fire held until November 4, 2008. On that date, the Israeli military made an incursion into Gaza and killed six Palestinians. The Israeli government sought to justify these actions, saying that they suspected these Palestinians of plotting to kidnap Israeli soldiers. Palestinian fighters responded to the attack by launching rockets into Israel. Thus began the unraveling of the cease-fire.

• At least six Hamas militants have been killed after Israel’s first incursion into the Gaza Strip since June’s truce. Israel said its troops had uncovered a tunnel along central Gaza’s frontier which had been dug by militants intending to abduct Israeli soldiers. Clashes ensued when troops were sent to thwart the threat, Israel said. One militant died, Palestinian reports say. A subsequent Israeli air strike on Hamas positions in southern Gaza killed at least five fighters, medics said. An Israeli army spokeswoman said the air strike targeted militants who had fired mortars at Israeli forces… Tuesday evening’s fighting broke out after Israeli tanks and a bulldozer moved 250m into the central part of the coastal enclave, backed by military aircraft, says the BBC’s Aleem Maqbool in Ramallah. Residents of central Gaza’s el-Bureij refugee camp said a missile fired from an unmanned Israeli drone flying over the area injured another three Hamas gunmen. A truce between the two sides had held since it was declared on 19 June. Israel said the raid was not a violation of the ceasefire, but rather a legitimate step to remove an immediate threat.
  –BBC News, Nov. 5, 2008 [7]
• An Israel Air Force air strike in the southern Gaza Strip killed at least five militants and wounded several others on Tuesday, Palestinians said. Earlier, Israel Defense Forces soldiers killed a Hamas gunman and wounded two others on Tuesday in the first armed clash in the Gaza Strip since a ceasefire was declared in the territory in June, Palestinian medics said … An Egypt-brokered cease-fire agreement between Israel and the Gaza Strip was signed earlier this year, and went into effect on June 19. The IDF argued that the raid did not constitute a violation of the cease fire, but instead was a legitimate step to remove an immediate threat to Israel from Gaza, which is controlled by the Islamic militant group Hamas.
  –Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 5, 2008 [8]
• Two weeks ago, an already fragile humanitarian situation resulting from the mounting effects of months of shortages, saw a dramatic downturn. The fighting resumed, with an Israeli army incursion into Gaza and a retaliatory barrage of militant rocket fire.
  –BBC News, Nov. 20, 2008 [5]

As the cease-fire began to crumble, the violence from both sides intensified. Efforts to redeem the cease-fire ultimately failed.

• Palestinian armed groups in Gaza remain committed to a truce with Israel if Jerusalem reciprocates, Hamas’s Gaza leader said on Friday, even as militants launched more attacks from the coastal territory … “I have met with armed factions over the past two days and they stated their position clearly: they are committed to calm as long as (Israel) abides by it,” said Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas’s most senior representative in Gaza. –Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 21, 2008 [9]
• Hamas announced on Sunday that militant groups in Gaza have agreed to cease cross-border attacks if Israel opens crossings into the coastal territory, Ma’an news reported.
  –Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 24, 2008 [10]
• After expressing contradictory positions on Sunday, Hamas’ leadership on Monday adopted a united stance: The cease-fire with Israel, which expires this Friday, will not be extended … Hamas’ spokesman in the Gaza Strip, Ayman Taha, said the movement had concluded that there was no point in extending the truce “as long as Israel isn’t abiding by its terms” – though he added that talks on continuing the cease-fire were still taking place. Specifically, Taha said, Israel was supposed to have expanded the truce to the West Bank – something Hamas demanded but Israel in fact never promised – and opened the Gaza border crossings, and “this hasn’t happened.”
  –Haaretz Israel News, Dec. 16, 2008 [11]

Following the end of the cease-fire, Israel moved closer to an invasion of the territory. The Israeli government claimed that this was the only remaining option to eliminate rocket attacks from Gaza. However, as cited in the sources above, this was clearly not the case. Israel had failed to abide by the terms of the cease-fire. For the overwhelming majority of the six-month truce, Israel had refused to ease its military blockade of Gaza to any significant degree. In addition, it was the initial violator of the cease-fire when it sent tanks and aircraft into Gaza and killed six Palestinians on November 4, 2008. In fact, there is evidence that Israel was planning to strike Gaza even while the cease-fire was still in effect.

• Barak told the assembled lawmakers that the defense establishment spent months preparing for the Gaza operation.
  –Haaretz Israel News, Dec. 29, 2008 [16]

In the interest of peace, Hamas, and especially Fatah, have firmly established that they are willing to participate in negotiations that are based on internationally recognized borders and rights.

• On June 6, 2006, Haniyeh met Dr. Jerome Segal of the University of Maryland in the Gaza Strip … At the end of the meeting, Haniyeh dictated a short message he asked Segal to transmit to President Bush … In the second paragraph, Haniyeh laid out the political platform he maintains to this day. “We are so concerned about stability and security in the area that we don’t mind having a Palestinian state in the 1967 borders and offering a truce for many years,” he wrote … Haniyeh called on Bush to launch a dialogue with the Hamas government. “We are not warmongers, we are peace makers and we call on the American government to have direct negotiations with the elected government,” he wrote … In his own letter, Segal emphasized that a state within the 1967 borders and a truce for many years could be considered Hamas’ de facto recognition of Israel. He noted that in a separate meeting, Youssuf suggested that the Palestinian Authority and Israel might exchange ambassadors during that truce period. This was not the only covert message from Hamas to senior Bush administration officials. However, Washington did not reply to these messages and maintained its boycott of the Hamas government.
  –Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 14, 2008 [12]
• The Hamas leader in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, said on Saturday his government was willing to accept a Palestinian state alongside Israel within the 1967 borders … Haniyeh told his guests Israel rejected his initiative … He said the Hamas government had agreed to accept a Palestinian state that followed the 1967 borders and to offer Israel a long-term hudna, or truce, if Israel recognized the Palestinians’ national rights… In response to a question about the international community’s impression that there are two Palestinian states, Haniyeh said: “We don’t have a state, neither in Gaza nor in the West Bank. Gaza is under siege and the West Bank is occupied. What we have in the Gaza Strip is not a state, but rather a regime of an elected government. A Palestinian state will not be created at this time except in the territories of 1967.” … “Our conflict is not with the Jews, our problem is with the occupation,” Haniyeh said.
  –Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 9, 2008 [14]
• The Palestinian Authority has placed a full-page advert in Israel’s Hebrew newspapers to promote an Arab peace plan first proposed in 2002. The Saudi-backed initiative offers Arab recognition of Israel in exchange for an end to Israel’s occupation of land captured in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. It also proposes what it calls a just solution for Palestinian refugees. The Israeli government has noted “positive aspects” in the plan but has not formally accepted it … Peace Now, and Israeli campaign group, welcomed the publication of the adverts. “On behalf of a majority of Israeli citizens who support peace with the Palestinian people on the basis of a two state solution – we embrace the Arab Peace Initiative and urge both governments to endorse it and negotiate the final status agreement in its spirit,” a statement from the group said … The text reads:“Fifty-seven Arab and Muslim countries will establish diplomatic relations with Israel in exchange for a full peace accord and the end of the occupation.”
  –BBC News, Nov. 20, 2008 [13]
• U.S. President-elect Barack Obama proclaimed himself “very impressed” with the Arab League’s peace plan when he discussed it with President Shimon Peres during a brief visit to Israel four months ago, Peres said Tuesday … The plan, originally proposed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in 2002 and later adopted by the Arab League, states that Israel would receive full relations with the entire Arab world in exchange for a full withdrawal from all the territory it captured in 1967, including East Jerusalem, plus a solution to the refugee problem. The Bush Administration has said it views the plan positively, but its own road map peace plan and the understandings reached at last year’s Annapolis summit have served as the basis of its diplomatic program.
  –Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 19, 2008 [15]

Since Israel began its strike on Gaza, 4 Israelis and 391 Palestinians have been killed [18]. The White House said that Israel will cease its attack when Hamas has agreed to a truce. Hamas said they are open to any cease-fire propositions. A cease-fire has been proposed, but Israel rejected this offer.

• “In order for the violence to stop, Hamas must stop firing rockets into Israel and agree to respect a sustainable and durable ceasefire,” White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said.
  –BBC News, Dec. 29, 2008 [17]
• Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has rejected international calls for a 48-hour truce in the Gaza Strip to allow in more humanitarian aid… The 48-hour ceasefire plan to allow more aid into Gaza, was proposed by French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner.Hamas spokesman Ayman Taha told AFP news agency that his group was open to any ceasefire propositions as long as they meant an end to the air strikes and a lifting of the Israeli blockade of Gaza.
  –BBC News, Dec. 31, 2008 [18]

The international community must continue to demand that a cease-fire be implemented. In order to be successful, any agreement must call for 1) an end to Israel’s blockade of Gaza, 2) an end to the Israeli invasion of Gaza, and 3) an end to all rocket attacks into Israel.

References:

[1] “UNRWA chief: Gaza on brink of humanitarian catastrophe.” Haaretz Israel News 21 Nov. 2008. .

[2] “Gaza residents ‘terribly trapped’.” BBC News 4 Nov. 2008. .

[3] “UN warns over Gaza food blockade.” BBC News 11 Nov. 2008. .

[4] “UN ‘has run out of Gaza food aid.” BBC News 13 Nov. 2008. .

[5] “Gazans despair over blockade.” BBC News 20 Nov. 2008. .

[6] “Gazans using tattered notes because of cash crunch.” Washington Post 24 Nov. 2008. .

[7] “Palestinians die in Gaza clashes.” BBC News 5 Nov. 2008. .

[8] “Hamas: Six Palestinians killed in first IDF raid since Gaza truce.” Haaretz Israel News 5 Nov. 2008. .

[9] “Haniyeh: If Israel abides by truce, so will Palestinian groups.” Haaretz Israel News 21 Nov. 2008. .

[10] “Report: Gaza militants agree to cease rocket fire if Israel opens crossings.” Haaretz Israel News 24 Nov. 2008. .

[11] “Agreement in Hamas: Cease-fire to end Friday.” Haaretz Israel News 16 Dec. 2008. .

[12] “Haniyeh recognized Israel in 2006 letter to President Bush.” Haaretz Israel News 14 Nov. 2008. .

[13] “Arab plan explained in Hebrew ads.” BBC News 20 Nov. 2008. .

[14] “Haniyeh: Hamas would accept state under 1967 borders.” Haaretz Israel News 9 Nov. 2008. .

[15] “Peres: Obama ‘very impressed’ by Arab League peace plan.” Haaretz Israel News 19 Nov. 2008. .

[16] “Barak: We’ll use every resource to stop ‘criminal’ rocket fire from Gaza.” Haaretz Israel News 29 Dec. 2008. .

[17] “Israel vows war on Hamas in Gaza.” BBC News 29 Dec. 2008. .

[18] “Israel rejects Gaza truce calls.” BBC News 31 Dec. 2008. .

In a conflict that has produced more than its share of suffering and tragedy, the name of Kafr Qassem lives on in infamy more than half a century after Israeli police gunned down 47 Palestinian civilians, including women and children, in the village.

This week Kafr Qassem’s inhabitants, joined by a handful of Israeli Jewish sympathizers, commemorated the anniversary of the deaths 52 years ago by marching to the cemetery where the victims were laid to rest.

They did so as the local media revisited the events, publishing testimonies from two former senior police officers who recalled the order from their commander to shoot all civilians breaking a last-minute curfew imposed on the village, which lies just inside Israel’s borders.

The two men, who were stationed at villages close to Kafr Qassem, suggested that, had they not personally disobeyed the order when confronted with Palestinians returning from work, the death toll would have been far higher.

Taking part in the annual march was one of the few survivors of the massacre. Saleh Khalil Issa is today 71, but back in 1956 he was an 18-year-old agricultural worker.

He remembered returning to the village on his bicycle, along with a dozen other workers, just after 5pm on 29 October 1956.

What he and the other villagers did not know was that earlier that day the Border Police, a special paramilitary unit that operates inside both Israel and the occupied territories, had agreed to set up checkpoints unannounced at the entrance to half a dozen Palestinian villages inside Israel.

The villages were selected because they lie close to the Green Line, the ceasefire line between Israel and Jordan, which was then occupying the West Bank, following the 1948 war.

At a briefing the commanding officer, Major Shmuel Malinki, ordered his men to shoot any civilian arriving home after 5pm.

Asked about the fate of women or children returning late, Malinki replied: “Without sentiment, the curfew applies to everyone.” Pressed on the point, he responded in Arabic: “Allah yarahmum [God have mercy on them]“, adding that this was the order from the brigade commander, Colonel Issachar Shadmi.

Mr. Issa said that, when his group reached the village, they were stopped by three policemen. “They told us to get off our bikes and form a line. The commander asked where we were from. When we replied ‘Kafr Qassem’, he took three steps back and told his colleagues, ‘Cut them down!’”

Mr. Issa, who was shot in the arm and leg, pretended to be dead among the bodies. He heard villagers’ cars arriving and the policemen ask the same question. Each new arrival was executed.

“Finally, I heard a bus arrive with female passengers, including young girls. I later learnt that there were 12 of them on board. They were forced to get out and shot too, though one survived like me.”

Mr. Issa said the policemen checked to see if any of the victims were moving, and then fired more bullets at them. While the police officers were not watching, he crawled away and hid behind a tree. He was found the next morning and taken to a hospital in nearby Petah Tikva, along with 12 other injured.

Of the dead, seven were children and nine women, including one who was pregnant.

Mohammed Arabi, today 84, arrived at the same checkpoint later that evening. A tailor, he had spent the day in Tel Aviv buying materials and hitched a lift home in the back of a truck with 26 other villagers.

When the driver tried to drop 11 of them off just outside the village, they came under fire. The 11 jumped back into the truck, he said, and the driver sped up the hill towards the village.

“When we reached the entrance to the village, we saw bodies everywhere. The driver panicked, frightened to go back, but forced to drive over several corpses lying in the street to get away.”

A short distance ahead, however, a detachment of policemen stopped them. Mr. Arabi overheard a debate between the policemen about whether to let them go home or take them to the eastern side of the village.

“I knew what was being suggested. The eastern side was the border with the West Bank. Palestinians were regularly shot on sight by the police for trying to cross into Israel. If we were killed there, it would look like we were infiltrators.”

The commander said he would follow behind the truck in his jeep and escort them to the village’s eastern entrance.

“We were saved by a shepherd who at that moment was driving a large flock of sheep into the village. The sheep separated us from the police, and the truck driver saw his chance. He drove off at top speed and escaped.

“He took us to his home and all 27 of us hid there for three days, too frightened to come out.”

Despite the appalling loss of life, Israel has been slow to come to terms with the massacre. Mr. Issa and other villagers were repeatedly arrested in subsequent years as they tried to stage a commemoration.

On the insistence of the government, the plaque erected in the village square to commemorate the deaths refers to the event as a “tragedy” rather a “massacre.” No government official has ever attended the annual march.

Kafr Qassem had to wait until December last year to receive what some interpreted as an official apology. President Shimon Peres, who in 1956 headed the Defense Ministry, told the villagers that “in the past a very serious event occurred that we greatly regret.”

In another possible sign of shifting attitudes, the Israeli media reexamined the massacre this month by interviewing two former officers in the Border Police who were given the task of imposing the last-minute curfew on villages neighboring Kafr Qassem.

The curfew was imposed in the immediate buildup to Israel’s surprise attack on the Sinai as part of the Suez war.

According to Israeli historian Tom Segev, it later emerged that the decision to seal off the villages was one element of a contingency plan to expel the inhabitants to Jordan under cover of the war. Mr. Arabi pointed out that the entrances to Kafr Qassem were shut on three sides, leaving open only an exit to the West Bank.

The government hushed up the massacre for two months. Excerpts from the Israeli state archives released in 2001 reveal a heated cabinet debate as ministers argued about whether to try the police officers in secret.

The prime minister of the day, David Ben-Gurion, eventually decided to go public, adding that “those who gave the order will get a strict verdict. I don’t think the soldiers are guilty.”

In fact, the Israeli media reported at the time that the policemen involved “all received a 50 per cent increase in their salaries” and that they were treated in the courtroom “as heroes.”

When a trial was held, the commander, Col. Shadmi, was found guilty of making an “administrative error” and fined a penny. Although his men received lengthy prison terms, they were pardoned and released after a short time.

Several went on to distinguished careers in public service, including Lieutenant Gavriel Dahan, who carried out the executions in Kafr Qassem. He was later appointed head of Arab affairs in the mixed town of Ramle.

Mr. Issa, who was called to testify, said: “The trial was a farce. It was a game, to make it look as though they were dealing with the matter seriously.” He was later awarded 700 lire compensation, less than a year’s wage.

The main outcome of the trial was a recommendation from the court that some orders were “manifestly unlawful” and should be disobeyed – or what has come to be referred to as a “black flag order.”

This month the Haaretz newspaper published lengthy interviews with two surviving former Border Police officers who were part of a team charged with enforcing the curfew.

They admitted that Major Malinki had urged them to shoot civilians at the briefing.

Nimrod Lampert, now aged 74 but then a 22-year-old lieutenant posted at Kafr Bara, recalled that Malinki thought “it would be desirable to have a few people killed in each village … It was also clear to me that Malinki’s order was effectively to murder people in cold blood.”

When faced with villagers arriving after the 5pm curfew, Lampert ignored his instructions and told his men to spare them.

Lampert remembered the company commander Haim Levy’s arrival at Bara. “He asked, ‘Well, not one person has been killed here? In other places people have been killed.’ I replied: What to do – should we take people out of their homes and shoot them?”

As news of the massacre broke, Lampert was ordered to drive to Kafr Qassem. “When I got there I thought I was going to pass out. There was no one there – only dozens of bodies scattered everywhere.”

Lampert said that during the subsequent trial his fellow officers “were very angry with me for not doing what they did … I also received threats on my life. For two years after the trial I received telephone threats.”

Lampert was not alone in refusing the order. Binyamin Kol, now 77, was 25 in 1956 and the senior officer assigned to the village of Jaljulya.

A refugee from Nazi Germany, he had experienced Kristallnacht in 1938 when Nazi troops conducted a pogrom against the local Jewish population. He was saved when a Nazi policeman warned him: “Run home fast, boy.”

Remembering that moment 18 years later as Arab workers arrived at his checkpoint, he said: “I fired in the air and shouted in Arabic – ‘Yallah, go home fast’ – just like the German policeman who warned me on Kristallnacht.”

Like Lampert, Kol admitted to feeling ashamed during the trial for refusing to obey his orders. He testified in court that, when he heard about the growing number of dead in Kafr Qasem, he felt “envious” of the commander there, Lieutenant Dahan.

Analyzing the transcripts of the trial, Mr. Segev has noted that the reason why many of the policemen followed a “manifestly unlawful” order was because of a general racism in Israeli society: “They hated Arabs.”

The threat of expulsion continues to haunt the inhabitants of Kafr Qassem and its neighboring villages. It is the main platform of Avigdor Lieberman, a politician who was appointed deputy prime minister at one point in Ehud Olmert’s government.

Mr. Arabi observed that the massacre at Kafr Qassem had changed Palestinians’ response to Israeli violence. “In the 1948 war, many people fled when faced with the Israeli army, expecting to return after the fighting. After Kafr Qassem, Palestinians learnt that Israel did not play by the rules of war. We learnt that sumud [steadfastness] was our only defense.”