CounterPunch - Jonathan Cook - A rabbi from one of the most violent settlements in the West Bank was questioned on suspicion of incitement last week as Israeli police stepped up their investigation into a book in which he sanctions the killing of non-Jews, including children and babies.
Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira is one of the leading ideologues of the most extreme wing of the religious settler movement. He is known to be a champion of the “price-tag” policy of reprisal attacks on Palestinians, including punishing them for attempts by officials to enforce Israeli law against the settlements.
So far the policy has chiefly involved violent harassment of Palestinians, with settlers inflicting beatings, attacking homes, throwing stones, burning fields, killing livestock and poisoning wells.
It is feared, however, that Shapira’s book The King’s Torah, published last year, is intended to offer ideological justifications for widening the scope of such attacks to include killing Palestinians, even children.
Although Shapira was released a few hours after his questioning last Monday, dozens of rabbis, as well as several members of parliament, rallied to his side, condemning the arrest.
Shlomo Aviner, one of the settlement movement’s leaders, defended the book’s arguments as a “legitimate stance” and one that should be taught in Jewish seminaries.
But in a sign of mounting official unease at Shapira’s influence on the settlement movement, the Israeli military authorities also threatened last week to enforce a decade-old demolition order on Yitzhar’s seminary, which was built without a permit.
Dror Etkes, a Tel Aviv-based expert on the settlements, said the order was unlikely to be carried out but was a way to pressure Yitzhar’s 500 inhabitants to rein in their more violent attacks.
He said the authorities had begun taking a harder line against Yitzhar only since Shapira and several of his students were suspected of torching a mosque in the neighboring village of Yasuf last December.
“Shapira is trying to redefine the conflict with the Palestinians, turning it from a national conflict into a religious one. That frightens Israel. It doesn’t want to look as though it is fighting the whole Islamic world,” Etkes said.
He added that the rabbi and his supporters were closely associated with Kach, a movement founded by the late Rabbi Meir Kahane that demands the expulsion of all Palestinians from a “Greater Israel”. Despite Kach being banned, officials have largely turned a blind eye as its ideology has flourished in the settlements.
“It may be illegal to call oneself Kach but the authorities are more than tolerant of settlers who hold such views and carry out violent attacks. In fact, what Kahane was doing in the 1980s seems like child’s play compared with today’s settlers.”
In the 230-page book, Shapira and his co-author, Rabbi Yosef Elitzur, also from Yitzhar, argue that Jewish law permits the killing of non-Jews in a wide variety of circumstances. The terms “gentiles” and “non-Jews” in the book are widely understood as references to Palestinians.
They write that Jews have the right to kill gentiles in any situation in which “a non-Jew’s presence endangers Jewish lives” even if the gentile is “not at all guilty for the situation that has been created”.
The book sanctions the killing of non-Jewish children and babies: “There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such a situation they may be harmed deliberately, and not only during combat with adults.”
The rabbis suggest that harming the children of non-Jewish leaders is justified if it is likely to bring pressure to bear on them to change policy.
The authors also advocate committing “cruel deeds to create the proper balance of terror” and treating all members of an “enemy nation” as targets for retaliation, even if they are not directly participating in hostile activities.
The rabbis appear to be offering justifications in Jewish law for collective punishment and other war crimes of the kind committed by the Israeli army in its attack on Gaza in the winter of 2008.
Pamphlets similarly calling on soldiers to “show no mercy” were distributed by the army’s rabbinate as troops prepared for the Gaza operation, in which 1,400 Palestinians, the majority of them civilians, were killed. Religious settlers have come to dominate many combat units.
An investigation last year by Yesh Din, an Israeli human rights group, found Shapira’s seminary had received government funds worth at least $300,000 in recent years. American and British groups have also contributed tens of thousands of dollars in tax-deductible donations.
According to the Jerusalem Post newspaper, the Yitzhar settlers have responded to the demolition order against their seminary by threatening to publish documents showing that the housing and transport ministries were closely involved in the project too.
The settlers have repeatedly rampaged through nearby Palestinian villages, most notoriously in September 2008, when they were filmed shooting at homes in Assira al-Kabaliya, smashing properties and daubing Stars of David on homes. Ehud Olmert, the prime minister of the time, termed the settlers’ actions a “pogrom”.
The same year a religious student from Yitzhar was arrested for firing home-made rockets at Palestinian villages close by.
In April, Yitzhar’s settlers marched through the village of Huwara and pelted a Palestinian family’s home with stones in “reprisal” for the arrest of 11 of their number.
A settler from Yitzhar was questioned last month over the fatal shooting of a 16-year-old Palestinian, Aysar Zaban, in May, reportedly after stones were thrown at the settler’s car. The teenager was shot in the back.
Last week, the settlers attacked Burin, shooting at villagers and burning fields.
In most of these cases, the settlers who were arrested were released a short time later either by the police or the courts. In January, a Jerusalem judge freed Rabbi Shapira for lack of evidence in the arson attack on the mosque.
Yitzhak Ginsburg, an authority on Jewish law and a mentor to Shapira, was questioned by police last Thursday over his endorsement of the book. In the past Ginsburg has praised Baruch Goldstein, a settler who opened fire in Hebron’s Ibrahimi mosque in 1994, killing 29 Palestinian worshippers.
In 2003 Ginsburg was accused of incitement for publishing a book that called for the expulsion of Palestinians from Israel and the occupied territories, but the charges were dropped after he issued a “clarification statement”.
A group calling itself “Students of Yitzhak Ginsburg” recently distributed a leaflet urging Israeli soldiers to “spare your lives and the lives of your friends and show no concern for a population that surrounds us and harms us”.
Kach was founded in 1971 by the late Meir Kahane, an American rabbi who immigrated to Israel. He won a seat in the Israeli parliament in 1984 on a platform of expelling all Palestinians from Israel and the occupied territories. As an MP, he drafted legislation to revoke the Israeli citizenship of non-Jews and ban sexual relations between Jews and gentiles.
The political party was banned from running for the Israeli parliament in 1988 and the movement was outlawed six years later. Although the group is considered a terrorist organization in the United States and most of Europe, its ideology has been allowed to thrive in the settlements.
Today, dozens of rabbis espouse an interpretation of Jewish religious law identical to or worse than Kahane’s.
Michael Ben Ari, a former Kach leader, was elected as an MP last year for the far-right National Union party, which holds four seats in the 120-member parliament.
Avigdor Lieberman, who leads the parliament’s third largest party and is foreign minister, briefly joined the party before it was banned. His own party’s anti-Arab “No loyalty, no citizenship” program includes echoes of Kahane’s ideology.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Israeli forces attack, injure Palestinian villagers and Arab Member of Knesset in Negev; demolish homes
IMEMC - Salem Abu Mdeighim, field researcher of the Adalah center, stated that a large Israeli police force attacked on Wednesday the residents of al-Araqeeb village in the Negev, and demolished their homes for the second time this week.
The police also attacked the researcher of Adalah along with dozens of residents of the village leading to several injuries, some requiring hospitalization.
Eyewitnesses reported that the police attacked the village with armored jeeps, bulldozers and military vehicles in order to demolish the homes that were rebuilt after being previously demolished by the police.
Yousef Abu Zayed, head of the Committee for Defending al-Araqeeb, stated that the police invaded the village with the intention to demolish the homes, and that this is the second attack since last week as the Israeli police demolished several homes then.
The Higher Follow-up Committee held an urgent meeting in al-Araqeeb unrecognized village last week and decided to rebuild all leveled homes and to challenge the illegal Israeli measures against the Arab villages in the Negev.
Hundreds of residents gathered in the village and protested against the Israeli policies that target all Arab residents in the Negev.
The Regional Council for Unrecognized Villages in the Negev stated that the demolishing of some 20 homes in al-Araqeeb is a crime against humanity.
The council added that attacking the residents, including the head of the Regional Council for Unrecognized Villages, and Arab member of Knesset, Talab al-Sane’, are part of the ongoing Israeli violations against the Arab and Bedouin residents in the country.
It is worth mentioning that Al Sane’ was violently attacked by the Israeli police and lost consciousness before he was moved to Soroka hospital in Be’er Seva.
The police also kidnapped seven other residents, including residents who came from other area to show solidarity with the village.
The police also attacked the researcher of Adalah along with dozens of residents of the village leading to several injuries, some requiring hospitalization.
Eyewitnesses reported that the police attacked the village with armored jeeps, bulldozers and military vehicles in order to demolish the homes that were rebuilt after being previously demolished by the police.
Yousef Abu Zayed, head of the Committee for Defending al-Araqeeb, stated that the police invaded the village with the intention to demolish the homes, and that this is the second attack since last week as the Israeli police demolished several homes then.
The Higher Follow-up Committee held an urgent meeting in al-Araqeeb unrecognized village last week and decided to rebuild all leveled homes and to challenge the illegal Israeli measures against the Arab villages in the Negev.
Hundreds of residents gathered in the village and protested against the Israeli policies that target all Arab residents in the Negev.
The Regional Council for Unrecognized Villages in the Negev stated that the demolishing of some 20 homes in al-Araqeeb is a crime against humanity.
The council added that attacking the residents, including the head of the Regional Council for Unrecognized Villages, and Arab member of Knesset, Talab al-Sane’, are part of the ongoing Israeli violations against the Arab and Bedouin residents in the country.
It is worth mentioning that Al Sane’ was violently attacked by the Israeli police and lost consciousness before he was moved to Soroka hospital in Be’er Seva.
The police also kidnapped seven other residents, including residents who came from other area to show solidarity with the village.
Israeli NGO: Israel ongoing building in the West Bank makes freeze “meaningless” - 2,000 Israeli housing units under construction in Palestinian territory
AsiaNews - According to a report by Peace Now, an Israeli peace movement, 2,000 housing units are currently under construction in the occupied Palestinian territory. At least 492 are illegal. In November 2009, Israel had accepted a construction freeze on its West Bank settlements, but the report now raises serious doubts about Israel’s good “intentions regarding the moratorium”.
Tel Aviv (AsiaNews/Peace Now) – The ten months since Israel announced its moratorium on settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories in November 2009 have been a waste and meaningless, this according to a report released on Monday by Israel’s Peace Now, a movement founded in 1978 to promote peace between Israel and Palestine and the two-state solution.
The report indicates that the settlement moratorium, supposedly without exceptions or loopholes, was a farce and that the Government of Israel is not upholding the moratorium.
Based on its analysis, Peace Now found that about 2,000 new housing units are presently under construction in the settlements, and that most were started before the freeze.
However, at least 600 new housing units were started during the moratorium and that at least 462 new housing units have been built illegally in violation of the freeze. Of these, 31 are caravans and 7 are permanent structures, built in outposts that not only violate the settlement freeze but also violate Israel’s own planning and construction laws.
Over the course of the last decade, on average 1,700 new housing units were built each year in the settlements, this according to data from the Central Bureau of Statistics, which do not include illegal construction.
Now an estimated 603 new units have been built. This shows an almost 50 per cent drop in annual total. However for Peace Now, “there should have been no new construction starts whatsoever.”
Last year, Israel allowed at least 693 structures whose construction began before the freeze. Therefore, “only if the freeze continues will it have a meaningful effect on the ground. Restarting construction will render the 10-month freeze insignificant.”
“The fact that the Government of Israel approved an unusually large amount of settlement construction just before the moratorium was implemented, and then insisted that this construction be exempted from the moratorium, cast doubt from the start on the seriousness of the GOI’s intentions regarding the moratorium from the start,” the report said.
“We believe that it must be extended with no more game-playing. [. . . .] Otherwise, the entire debate over whether or not to impose the moratorium or whether or not to extend it is little more than an empty words.”
Tel Aviv (AsiaNews/Peace Now) – The ten months since Israel announced its moratorium on settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories in November 2009 have been a waste and meaningless, this according to a report released on Monday by Israel’s Peace Now, a movement founded in 1978 to promote peace between Israel and Palestine and the two-state solution.The report indicates that the settlement moratorium, supposedly without exceptions or loopholes, was a farce and that the Government of Israel is not upholding the moratorium.
Based on its analysis, Peace Now found that about 2,000 new housing units are presently under construction in the settlements, and that most were started before the freeze.
However, at least 600 new housing units were started during the moratorium and that at least 462 new housing units have been built illegally in violation of the freeze. Of these, 31 are caravans and 7 are permanent structures, built in outposts that not only violate the settlement freeze but also violate Israel’s own planning and construction laws.
Over the course of the last decade, on average 1,700 new housing units were built each year in the settlements, this according to data from the Central Bureau of Statistics, which do not include illegal construction.
Now an estimated 603 new units have been built. This shows an almost 50 per cent drop in annual total. However for Peace Now, “there should have been no new construction starts whatsoever.”
Last year, Israel allowed at least 693 structures whose construction began before the freeze. Therefore, “only if the freeze continues will it have a meaningful effect on the ground. Restarting construction will render the 10-month freeze insignificant.”
“The fact that the Government of Israel approved an unusually large amount of settlement construction just before the moratorium was implemented, and then insisted that this construction be exempted from the moratorium, cast doubt from the start on the seriousness of the GOI’s intentions regarding the moratorium from the start,” the report said.
“We believe that it must be extended with no more game-playing. [. . . .] Otherwise, the entire debate over whether or not to impose the moratorium or whether or not to extend it is little more than an empty words.”
Israeli forces ransack Palestinian homes at midnight, take three boys
Ma'an -- Israeli forces entered the town of Azzun shortly after midnight on Friday morning and took three 14-year-old boys from their homes, head of the municipal council told Ma'an.
Local official Ahmad E’mran said the town, west of Qalqiliya, was targeted during a night raid, and that a total of five homes were entered and three teenagers taken to an unknown location.
E'mran identified the boys as Nehad Ibrahim, Hamedu Abu Haniyeh and Raed Radwan.
He noted that the homes of Sa’eed Al-Shallu and Mus’ab Al-Drar Radwan were also entered and searched, with families reporting the homes as ransacked.
An Israeli military spokeswoman said three young Palestinians were detained on Thursday evening, saying they were suspected of hurling rocks that damaged Israeli military vehicles on a patrol in the area.
She said the boys were identified and military personnel later entered the town and searched for the teenagers. All three were taken into Israeli custody and were held for questioning.
Local official Ahmad E’mran said the town, west of Qalqiliya, was targeted during a night raid, and that a total of five homes were entered and three teenagers taken to an unknown location.
E'mran identified the boys as Nehad Ibrahim, Hamedu Abu Haniyeh and Raed Radwan.
He noted that the homes of Sa’eed Al-Shallu and Mus’ab Al-Drar Radwan were also entered and searched, with families reporting the homes as ransacked.
An Israeli military spokeswoman said three young Palestinians were detained on Thursday evening, saying they were suspected of hurling rocks that damaged Israeli military vehicles on a patrol in the area.
She said the boys were identified and military personnel later entered the town and searched for the teenagers. All three were taken into Israeli custody and were held for questioning.
Hamas says it was not involved in recent rocket launches, has policy of only carrying out attacks from inside Palestine
Ma'an -- Hamas' armed wing the Al-Qassam Brigades released a statement late Thursday night attesting total non-involvement with the Monday rocket launches that hit Eilat and Aqaba.
"Military acts from the resistance are carried out inside of Palestine," spokesman of the brigades Abu Obeida said, added in a statement that also welcomed "any resistance targeting the occupation, whether from in our outside of Palestine."
Abu Obeida said that if fighters had launched the Monday rockets "toward Umm Ar-Rashrash [Eilat], than the brigades would not have been afraid of announcing the attacks as soon as they were carried out."
The spokesman said the fighters had a strict polity of "not using the lands of any state to carry out our military attacks, the borders of our acts are inside historical Palestine."
Accusations against Hamas to justify planned Israeli war
In throwing suspicion on Hamas for the launch of some seven rockets from the northern Sinai, which hit in the Red Sea port towns of Eilat, Israel, and Aqaba, Jordan, Abu Obeida said Israel was "attempting to export a crisis and justify their planned attack against Gaza."
The Hamas spokesman warned Arab nations away from the Israeli accusations, adding that "any party who lines up with Israel on this is participating in the Israeli aggression."
"Military acts from the resistance are carried out inside of Palestine," spokesman of the brigades Abu Obeida said, added in a statement that also welcomed "any resistance targeting the occupation, whether from in our outside of Palestine."
Abu Obeida said that if fighters had launched the Monday rockets "toward Umm Ar-Rashrash [Eilat], than the brigades would not have been afraid of announcing the attacks as soon as they were carried out."
The spokesman said the fighters had a strict polity of "not using the lands of any state to carry out our military attacks, the borders of our acts are inside historical Palestine."
Accusations against Hamas to justify planned Israeli war
In throwing suspicion on Hamas for the launch of some seven rockets from the northern Sinai, which hit in the Red Sea port towns of Eilat, Israel, and Aqaba, Jordan, Abu Obeida said Israel was "attempting to export a crisis and justify their planned attack against Gaza."
The Hamas spokesman warned Arab nations away from the Israeli accusations, adding that "any party who lines up with Israel on this is participating in the Israeli aggression."
Israel prevents Palestinian journalist from traveling to US; stops Palestinian nonviolence leader from flying abroad for speaking engagements
Ma'an -- Israeli authorities have prevented a Palestinian journalist from travelling abroad to complete his doctoral studies.
Suheil Khalaf, a correspondent for the Jerusalem-based Al-Quds newspaper, told Ma'an that he attempted to cross over the Allenby Bridge terminal to Jordan but was surprised when Israeli authorities prevented him from leaving without providing any explanation.
Khalaf, who lectures in the department of political science at An-Najah University in the northern West Bank city of Nablus, said his most recent attempt was the second in less than a year to join his PhD program at Cairo University. The journalist called the procedure unjustified and said he obtained approval in advance.
A Palestinian activist from Ramallah, meanwhile, was stopped Wednesday, his colleagues said.
The Bil'in village's Popular Organizing Committee said community organizer Mohammed Khatib was stopped at the crossing, which he was not allowed to cross for "security reasons" and was told to "go back home."
Khatib's colleagues said he had obtained Israeli court permission to travel in advance, and was en route to the Amman airport for a flight to Spain, where he had several speaking engagements to attend.
Khatib was required to seek permission from Israeli officials for travel because of standing charges of incitement and organizing demonstrations demonstrations against Israel's separation wall.
Khatib's lawyer, Gaby Lasky, said the ban was not "security, but rather politically-motivated vengeance."
Suheil Khalaf, a correspondent for the Jerusalem-based Al-Quds newspaper, told Ma'an that he attempted to cross over the Allenby Bridge terminal to Jordan but was surprised when Israeli authorities prevented him from leaving without providing any explanation.
Khalaf, who lectures in the department of political science at An-Najah University in the northern West Bank city of Nablus, said his most recent attempt was the second in less than a year to join his PhD program at Cairo University. The journalist called the procedure unjustified and said he obtained approval in advance.
A Palestinian activist from Ramallah, meanwhile, was stopped Wednesday, his colleagues said.
The Bil'in village's Popular Organizing Committee said community organizer Mohammed Khatib was stopped at the crossing, which he was not allowed to cross for "security reasons" and was told to "go back home."
Khatib's colleagues said he had obtained Israeli court permission to travel in advance, and was en route to the Amman airport for a flight to Spain, where he had several speaking engagements to attend.
Khatib was required to seek permission from Israeli officials for travel because of standing charges of incitement and organizing demonstrations demonstrations against Israel's separation wall.
Khatib's lawyer, Gaby Lasky, said the ban was not "security, but rather politically-motivated vengeance."
Israel razes historic Muslim cemetary - says 12th century gravestones were 'built illegally'
Ma'an -- Israel's Jerusalem Municipality said Thursday that tombstones razed by Israeli authorities a day earlier in a 12th-century Muslim cemetery were "built illegally with the aim to take over the plot."
At least 15 tombstones and structures were torn apart Wednesday in the Mamilla (Ma'man Allah) cemetery, the Al-Aqsa Foundation for Waqf and Heritage said. The latest demolitions follow the disinterment of over 1,500 graves in 2009 to make way for a controversial Museum of Tolerance. The foundation quickly denounced the move, describing it as a "heinous crime."
Mandated with renovating burial grounds, the foundation said its crew led by Fawaz Hassan and Mustafa Abu Zuhra tried to block the bulldozers with their bodies but were removed by police. Israeli authorities razed the tombstones in the northeastern part of the cemetery, despite the crew's objection, and left an hour after.
A spokesman for Israel's national police did not return multiple calls seeking comment, but the Jerusalem municipality said in a statement that it had "located illegal activity at the site," filed a complaint with police, and "turned to the Israel Land Administration, who owns the land, to restore [it] to its prior condition. The ILA cleared the vacant tombstones, which were built illegally with the aim to take over the plot."
Dating back 1,000 years, the Mamilla cemetery was an active burial ground until 1948, when West Jerusalem became part of the newly declared State of Israel. According to Muslim tradition, it is the burial site of the Prophet Mohammad's companions, Salah Ad-Din's warriors, Sufi saints, as well as judges, scholars, and Palestinian dignitaries.
Plans for the museum, funded by the Simon Wisenthal Center, a Jewish charity in the US, were unveiled in 2004 and sparked immediate controversy. Palestinian descendants with relatives buried at the site have launched a lengthy legal and public relations battle in a bid to stay the museum's construction. In 2008, however, they lost a case before Israel's High Court, which ruled in favor of the museum.
One descendant is US academic Rashid Khalidi, the Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University. He told Ma'an that "If it is true that further graves in the Mamilla cemetery have in fact been bulldozed, then clearly the ongoing process of desecration of this sacred space has not been halted by the efforts of the families of those interred there to bring this issue before a variety of international forums."
"As far as the Israeli authorities are concerned, some graves merit respect, and some do not. Those of our ancestors in this cemetery, going back in some cases for many hundreds of years, obviously do not."
In February, Mamilla descendants filed a petition with the UN, later submitting evidence compiled by the Israeli daily Haaretz, which revealed in a three-part expose the extent of disinterment, publishing photographs of remains being stuffed haphazardly into cardboard boxes. The families of those buried at the site say the Israeli government has yet to inform them of the location of their relatives' remains.
Gideon Sulimani, an archeologist with Israel's Antiquities Authority who carried out the initial digs in 2009, told the newspaper at the time: "They call this an archaeological excavation but it’s really a clearing-out, an erasure of the Muslim past. It is actually Jews against Arabs."
In June, Nazareth-based journalist Jonathan Cook revealed that a second dig was in the works, with Israel planning a courthouse on the historic site. At least three tombstones were removed that same month.
Most of the graves are unrecognisable and in disrepair, owing to decades of neglect. Descendants of those buried there say personal attempts to replace or maintain tombstones have been repeatedly quashed and swiftly removed by Israeli authorities. The Al-Aqsa Foundation's renovation crew says the municipality regularly thwarts their attempts to maintain the site.
The municipality says it "will not allow extremist elements to act illegally to change the status quo."
At least 15 tombstones and structures were torn apart Wednesday in the Mamilla (Ma'man Allah) cemetery, the Al-Aqsa Foundation for Waqf and Heritage said. The latest demolitions follow the disinterment of over 1,500 graves in 2009 to make way for a controversial Museum of Tolerance. The foundation quickly denounced the move, describing it as a "heinous crime."
Mandated with renovating burial grounds, the foundation said its crew led by Fawaz Hassan and Mustafa Abu Zuhra tried to block the bulldozers with their bodies but were removed by police. Israeli authorities razed the tombstones in the northeastern part of the cemetery, despite the crew's objection, and left an hour after.
A spokesman for Israel's national police did not return multiple calls seeking comment, but the Jerusalem municipality said in a statement that it had "located illegal activity at the site," filed a complaint with police, and "turned to the Israel Land Administration, who owns the land, to restore [it] to its prior condition. The ILA cleared the vacant tombstones, which were built illegally with the aim to take over the plot."
Dating back 1,000 years, the Mamilla cemetery was an active burial ground until 1948, when West Jerusalem became part of the newly declared State of Israel. According to Muslim tradition, it is the burial site of the Prophet Mohammad's companions, Salah Ad-Din's warriors, Sufi saints, as well as judges, scholars, and Palestinian dignitaries.
Plans for the museum, funded by the Simon Wisenthal Center, a Jewish charity in the US, were unveiled in 2004 and sparked immediate controversy. Palestinian descendants with relatives buried at the site have launched a lengthy legal and public relations battle in a bid to stay the museum's construction. In 2008, however, they lost a case before Israel's High Court, which ruled in favor of the museum.
One descendant is US academic Rashid Khalidi, the Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University. He told Ma'an that "If it is true that further graves in the Mamilla cemetery have in fact been bulldozed, then clearly the ongoing process of desecration of this sacred space has not been halted by the efforts of the families of those interred there to bring this issue before a variety of international forums."
"As far as the Israeli authorities are concerned, some graves merit respect, and some do not. Those of our ancestors in this cemetery, going back in some cases for many hundreds of years, obviously do not."
In February, Mamilla descendants filed a petition with the UN, later submitting evidence compiled by the Israeli daily Haaretz, which revealed in a three-part expose the extent of disinterment, publishing photographs of remains being stuffed haphazardly into cardboard boxes. The families of those buried at the site say the Israeli government has yet to inform them of the location of their relatives' remains.
Gideon Sulimani, an archeologist with Israel's Antiquities Authority who carried out the initial digs in 2009, told the newspaper at the time: "They call this an archaeological excavation but it’s really a clearing-out, an erasure of the Muslim past. It is actually Jews against Arabs."
In June, Nazareth-based journalist Jonathan Cook revealed that a second dig was in the works, with Israel planning a courthouse on the historic site. At least three tombstones were removed that same month.
Most of the graves are unrecognisable and in disrepair, owing to decades of neglect. Descendants of those buried there say personal attempts to replace or maintain tombstones have been repeatedly quashed and swiftly removed by Israeli authorities. The Al-Aqsa Foundation's renovation crew says the municipality regularly thwarts their attempts to maintain the site.
The municipality says it "will not allow extremist elements to act illegally to change the status quo."
Human rights organizations report that Israeli abuse of Palestinian child prisoners is "widespread, systematic and institutionalised" - over 6,700 have been imprisoned in recent years
Ma'an - Testimonials and events documented by human rights organizations show the abuse of Palestinian children in Israeli prisons to be regular and widespread.
Physical abuse, sexual abuse, torture, threats and intimidation as well as the denial of basic basic human rights, such as access to education are the most common forms of abuse, documents show.
In 2009, a report from the UK-based children's rights group Defence for Children International found, there were 305 Palestinian children being held in Israeli jails. The US-based NGO Save the Children further estimates, that over 6,700 children were arrested between October 2000 and April 2009. Both organizations confirm Israel routinely prosecutes Palestinian children as young as 12, describing the ill-treatment and torture of Palestinian children as "widespread, systematic and institutionalised."
Forms of abuse
In 2009, DCI collected 100 sworn affidavits from Palestinian children and teenagers who said they were abused in Israeli military and police custody. Almost 70 percent complained of being beaten, four percent reported being sexually assaulted, and 12 percent said they were threatened with sexual assault.
According to the report, most of the incidents occurred during interrogation and were used against detainees to force a confession.
Physical abuse
The physical abuse of children by soldiers has most frequently been documented as involving "slaps, kicks, punches or blows with a rifle stock or club," DCI stated.
Nearly all children surveyed by DCI, 97 percent, were held for hours with their hands cuffed, and 92 percent were blindfolded for long periods of time. Twenty-six percent said they were forced to remain in painful positions.
In 2010, Palestinian lawyer Hiba Masalha reported the case of Muhammad Rashid Abu Shahin, 16, from the Balata refugee camp. After being arrested, the youth said he was manhandled and beaten by soldiers using rifle butts. He was then transported to the Huwwara detention centre where where he was beaten with a plastic pipe to force a confession. The child is suffering chronic back pain as a result of being hit on the spine.
Sexual abuse
Fourteen percent of child prisoners surveyed by DCI said they were sexually abused or threatened with sexual assault to pressure them into confessions.
In May 2010, the Dubai-based Al-Jazeera news network published the testimony of an unnamed Palestinian child released from an Israeli jail.
"There was a dog barking outside the room… The soldier told me he would bring it in to f**k me if I didn't confess… I was so scared… The guy then took out a stick; he whipped it forward and it got longer. He told his friends, who were looking on and laughing at me: "This boy doesn't want to talk. Let's pull down his pants so I can shove this stick up his a**."
"I tried to hold on to the chair; he kept poking me, groping my privates with the stick, trying to get me off the chair."
Threats and intimidation
Many Palestinian child prisoners testify to being forced into confession by threats and intimidation, including threats against family members, threats of prolonged imprisonment and threats of physical and sexual abuse.
Abuse by other prisoners
Palestinian child prisoners are reportedly confined in close quarters with adult prisoners and become the subject of physical and sexual abuse.
Denial of basic services
Palestinian children in Israeli detention only received limited education in two out of five prisons and no education whatsoever in any of the interrogation and detention centers. According to Save the children, in 2009, Israel prevented 1,821 detainees from writing the high school certification exam, known locally as the Tawjihi.
Typical scenario
According to Save the Children, Palestinian children are typically arrested between midnight and 4a.m. without their families being notified where the child is being taken. The children are normally handcuffed, blindfolded, and subjected to physical abuse in addition to humiliating treatment during arrest and can be detained up to 90 days without access to a lawyer whilst being interrogated. Children can be detained for two years from the time charged until the trial.
Stone throwing is the most common offense Palestinian children are charged with under Israeli military law accounting for 26.7% of cases. The maximum penalty is 20 years imprisonment. Save the Children reports that in 91 percent of cases involving Palestinian children, bail is denied. The group also says that currently, 32.9 percent of sentenced children are 15 years of age or younger and that 21.25 percent are sentenced for a one-year period or longer.
Effects on the child
A 2009 report by Save the Children says most detainees develop Post Traumatic Stress symptoms as a direct result of their abuse in prison. The psycho-social consequences of detention affect the immediate behavior of children, the way they think including their analysis of the outside world.
International and domestic law
The UN Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty states imprisoning children should only be a "last resort and for the minimum period and should be limited to exceptional cases" further stating that "fundamental international law must be respected at all times with no exceptions" and "the welfare, special needs, best interests, and human rights of juveniles "shall be a primary consideration".
Despite being a State member of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Israel identifies a "child" as any person below the age of 12, "youth" as any person between 12 and 14, "young adult" as any person between 14 and 16 and "adult" as any person above 16. Israeli citizens however, are legally considered an adult at 18. This denies Palestinian children many of the basic services granted to Israelis of the same age.
Israeli accountability
Reports by groups such as B'Tselem, Save the children and DCI are regularly dismissed by the Israeli military as "inaccurate" and are rarely investigated. A 2009 report from the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, says that from 600 complaints regarding abuse of children all were dismissed without a single criminal investigation.
Physical abuse, sexual abuse, torture, threats and intimidation as well as the denial of basic basic human rights, such as access to education are the most common forms of abuse, documents show.
In 2009, a report from the UK-based children's rights group Defence for Children International found, there were 305 Palestinian children being held in Israeli jails. The US-based NGO Save the Children further estimates, that over 6,700 children were arrested between October 2000 and April 2009. Both organizations confirm Israel routinely prosecutes Palestinian children as young as 12, describing the ill-treatment and torture of Palestinian children as "widespread, systematic and institutionalised."
Forms of abuse
In 2009, DCI collected 100 sworn affidavits from Palestinian children and teenagers who said they were abused in Israeli military and police custody. Almost 70 percent complained of being beaten, four percent reported being sexually assaulted, and 12 percent said they were threatened with sexual assault.
According to the report, most of the incidents occurred during interrogation and were used against detainees to force a confession.
Physical abuse
The physical abuse of children by soldiers has most frequently been documented as involving "slaps, kicks, punches or blows with a rifle stock or club," DCI stated.
Nearly all children surveyed by DCI, 97 percent, were held for hours with their hands cuffed, and 92 percent were blindfolded for long periods of time. Twenty-six percent said they were forced to remain in painful positions.
In 2010, Palestinian lawyer Hiba Masalha reported the case of Muhammad Rashid Abu Shahin, 16, from the Balata refugee camp. After being arrested, the youth said he was manhandled and beaten by soldiers using rifle butts. He was then transported to the Huwwara detention centre where where he was beaten with a plastic pipe to force a confession. The child is suffering chronic back pain as a result of being hit on the spine.
Sexual abuse
Fourteen percent of child prisoners surveyed by DCI said they were sexually abused or threatened with sexual assault to pressure them into confessions.
In May 2010, the Dubai-based Al-Jazeera news network published the testimony of an unnamed Palestinian child released from an Israeli jail.
"There was a dog barking outside the room… The soldier told me he would bring it in to f**k me if I didn't confess… I was so scared… The guy then took out a stick; he whipped it forward and it got longer. He told his friends, who were looking on and laughing at me: "This boy doesn't want to talk. Let's pull down his pants so I can shove this stick up his a**."
"I tried to hold on to the chair; he kept poking me, groping my privates with the stick, trying to get me off the chair."
Threats and intimidation
Many Palestinian child prisoners testify to being forced into confession by threats and intimidation, including threats against family members, threats of prolonged imprisonment and threats of physical and sexual abuse.
Abuse by other prisoners
Palestinian child prisoners are reportedly confined in close quarters with adult prisoners and become the subject of physical and sexual abuse.
Denial of basic services
Palestinian children in Israeli detention only received limited education in two out of five prisons and no education whatsoever in any of the interrogation and detention centers. According to Save the children, in 2009, Israel prevented 1,821 detainees from writing the high school certification exam, known locally as the Tawjihi.
Typical scenario
According to Save the Children, Palestinian children are typically arrested between midnight and 4a.m. without their families being notified where the child is being taken. The children are normally handcuffed, blindfolded, and subjected to physical abuse in addition to humiliating treatment during arrest and can be detained up to 90 days without access to a lawyer whilst being interrogated. Children can be detained for two years from the time charged until the trial.
Stone throwing is the most common offense Palestinian children are charged with under Israeli military law accounting for 26.7% of cases. The maximum penalty is 20 years imprisonment. Save the Children reports that in 91 percent of cases involving Palestinian children, bail is denied. The group also says that currently, 32.9 percent of sentenced children are 15 years of age or younger and that 21.25 percent are sentenced for a one-year period or longer.
Effects on the child
A 2009 report by Save the Children says most detainees develop Post Traumatic Stress symptoms as a direct result of their abuse in prison. The psycho-social consequences of detention affect the immediate behavior of children, the way they think including their analysis of the outside world.
International and domestic law
The UN Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty states imprisoning children should only be a "last resort and for the minimum period and should be limited to exceptional cases" further stating that "fundamental international law must be respected at all times with no exceptions" and "the welfare, special needs, best interests, and human rights of juveniles "shall be a primary consideration".
Despite being a State member of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Israel identifies a "child" as any person below the age of 12, "youth" as any person between 12 and 14, "young adult" as any person between 14 and 16 and "adult" as any person above 16. Israeli citizens however, are legally considered an adult at 18. This denies Palestinian children many of the basic services granted to Israelis of the same age.
Israeli accountability
Reports by groups such as B'Tselem, Save the children and DCI are regularly dismissed by the Israeli military as "inaccurate" and are rarely investigated. A 2009 report from the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, says that from 600 complaints regarding abuse of children all were dismissed without a single criminal investigation.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
2009 settlement report says population up 40-fold
Ma'an -- The number of Israelis living in illegal West Bank settlements increased more than 40 times between 1972 and 2009, according to a report issued Tuesday by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics.
By comparison, the number of Israelis living in Israel and the occupied Syrian Golan has doubled during the same period, PCBS' statistics revealed. By the end of 2009, the report read, there were 517,774 Israeli settlers living in the West Bank, the majority of whom live in occupied East Jerusalem (approximately 267,325).
In the Ramallah and Al-Bireh district, the settler population reached 92,625, PCBS reported, while in Bethlehem the number reached 57,325 and 31,404 in Salfit. The lowest settler population was recorded in Tubas at 1,340 residents.
The report revealed that in 2009, the number of settlements in the West Bank was 144, the majority of which, 26, are located in East Jerusalem.
The PCBS said the data indicated that settlements in the West Bank were distributed into four strips, defined as follows:
-- The eastern strip, which includes 28 settlements
-- The mountain strip, which includes 31 settlements
-- The western hills strip, which includes 48 settlements
-- The greater Jerusalem strip, which includes 37 settlements
By comparison, the number of Israelis living in Israel and the occupied Syrian Golan has doubled during the same period, PCBS' statistics revealed. By the end of 2009, the report read, there were 517,774 Israeli settlers living in the West Bank, the majority of whom live in occupied East Jerusalem (approximately 267,325).
In the Ramallah and Al-Bireh district, the settler population reached 92,625, PCBS reported, while in Bethlehem the number reached 57,325 and 31,404 in Salfit. The lowest settler population was recorded in Tubas at 1,340 residents.
The report revealed that in 2009, the number of settlements in the West Bank was 144, the majority of which, 26, are located in East Jerusalem.
The PCBS said the data indicated that settlements in the West Bank were distributed into four strips, defined as follows:
-- The eastern strip, which includes 28 settlements
-- The mountain strip, which includes 31 settlements
-- The western hills strip, which includes 48 settlements
-- The greater Jerusalem strip, which includes 37 settlements
Attacking Iran: US options
Arab News - Gwynne Dyer - When Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the highest-ranking American officer, was asked recently on NBC’s Meet The Press show whether the United States has a military plan for an attack on Iran, he replied simply: “We do.”
General staffs are supposed to plan for even the most unlikely future contingencies. Right down to the 1930s, for example, the United States maintained and annually updated plans for the invasion of Canada — and the Canadian military made plans to pre-empt the invasion. But what the planning process will have revealed, in this case, is that there is no way for the United States to win a nonnuclear war with Iran.
The US could “win” by dropping hundreds of nuclear weapons on Iran’s military bases, nuclear facilities and industrial centers (i.e. cities) and killing five to 10 million people, but short of that, nothing works. On this we have the word of Richard Clarke, counterterrorism adviser in the White House under three administrations.
In the early 1990s, Clarke revealed in an interview with the New York Times four years ago, the Clinton administration had seriously considered a bombing campaign against Iran, but the military professionals told them not to do it.
“After a long debate, the highest levels of the military could not forecast a way in which things would end favorably for the United States,” he said. The Pentagon’s planners have war-gamed an attack on Iran several times in the past 15 years, and they just can’t make it come out as a US victory.
It’s not the fear of Iranian nuclear weapons that makes the US Joint Chiefs of Staff so reluctant to get involved in a war with Iran. Those weapons don’t exist, and the whole justification for the war would be to make sure that they never do.
The problem is that there’s nothing the US can do to Iran, short of nuking the place, that would really force Tehran to kneel and beg for mercy.
It can bomb Iran’s nuclear sites and military installations to its heart’s content, but everything it destroys can be rebuilt in a few years. And there is no way that the United States could actually invade Iran.
There are some 80 million people in Iran, and although many of them don’t like the present regime they are almost all fervent patriots who would resist a foreign invasion. Iran is a mountainous country, and very big: Four times the size of Iraq. The Iranian Army currently numbers about 450,000 men, slightly smaller than the US Army — but unlike the US Army, it does not have its troops scattered across literally dozens of countries.
If the White House were to propose anything larger than minor military incursions along Iran’s south coast, senior American generals would resign in protest. Without the option of a land war, the only lever the United States would have on Iranian policy is the threat of yet more bombs — but if they aren’t nuclear, then they aren’t very persuasive. Whereas Iran would have lots of options for bringing pressure on the United States.
Just stopping Iran’s own oil exports would drive the oil price sky-high in a tight market: Iran accounts for around seven percent of internationally traded oil. But it could also block another 40 percent of global oil exports just by sinking tankers coming from Iraq, and the Arab Gulf states with its lethal Noor anti-ship missiles.
The Noor anti-ship missile is a locally built version of the Chinese YJ-82. It has a 200-km. (140-mile) range, enough to cover all the major choke points in the Gulf. It flies at twice the speed of sound just meters above the sea’s surface, and it has a tiny radar profile. Its single-shot kill probability has been put as high as 98 percent.
Iran’s mountainous coastline extends along the whole northern side of the Gulf, and these missiles have easily concealed mobile launchers. They would sink tankers with ease, and in a few days insurance rates for tankers planning to enter the Gulf would become prohibitive, effectively shutting down the region’s oil exports completely.
Meanwhile Iran would start supplying modern surface-to-air missiles to the Taleban in Afghanistan, and that would soon shut down the US military effort there. (It was the arrival of US-supplied Stinger missiles in Afghanistan in the late 1980s that drove Russian helicopters from the sky and ultimately doomed the whole Soviet intervention there.)
Iranian ballistic missiles would strike US bases on the southern side of the Gulf, and Iran’s Hezbollah allies in Beirut would start dropping missiles on Israel. The United States would have no options for escalation other than the nuclear one, and pressure on it to stop the war would mount by the day as the world’s industries and transport ground to a halt.
The end would be an embarrassing retreat by the United States, and the definitive establishment of Iran as the dominant power of the Gulf region.
That was the outcome of every war-game the Pentagon played, and Mike Mullen knows it. So there is a plan for an attack on Iran, but he would probably rather resign than put it into action. It is all bluff. It always was.
— Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist.
General staffs are supposed to plan for even the most unlikely future contingencies. Right down to the 1930s, for example, the United States maintained and annually updated plans for the invasion of Canada — and the Canadian military made plans to pre-empt the invasion. But what the planning process will have revealed, in this case, is that there is no way for the United States to win a nonnuclear war with Iran.
The US could “win” by dropping hundreds of nuclear weapons on Iran’s military bases, nuclear facilities and industrial centers (i.e. cities) and killing five to 10 million people, but short of that, nothing works. On this we have the word of Richard Clarke, counterterrorism adviser in the White House under three administrations.
In the early 1990s, Clarke revealed in an interview with the New York Times four years ago, the Clinton administration had seriously considered a bombing campaign against Iran, but the military professionals told them not to do it.
“After a long debate, the highest levels of the military could not forecast a way in which things would end favorably for the United States,” he said. The Pentagon’s planners have war-gamed an attack on Iran several times in the past 15 years, and they just can’t make it come out as a US victory.
It’s not the fear of Iranian nuclear weapons that makes the US Joint Chiefs of Staff so reluctant to get involved in a war with Iran. Those weapons don’t exist, and the whole justification for the war would be to make sure that they never do.
The problem is that there’s nothing the US can do to Iran, short of nuking the place, that would really force Tehran to kneel and beg for mercy.
It can bomb Iran’s nuclear sites and military installations to its heart’s content, but everything it destroys can be rebuilt in a few years. And there is no way that the United States could actually invade Iran.
There are some 80 million people in Iran, and although many of them don’t like the present regime they are almost all fervent patriots who would resist a foreign invasion. Iran is a mountainous country, and very big: Four times the size of Iraq. The Iranian Army currently numbers about 450,000 men, slightly smaller than the US Army — but unlike the US Army, it does not have its troops scattered across literally dozens of countries.
If the White House were to propose anything larger than minor military incursions along Iran’s south coast, senior American generals would resign in protest. Without the option of a land war, the only lever the United States would have on Iranian policy is the threat of yet more bombs — but if they aren’t nuclear, then they aren’t very persuasive. Whereas Iran would have lots of options for bringing pressure on the United States.
Just stopping Iran’s own oil exports would drive the oil price sky-high in a tight market: Iran accounts for around seven percent of internationally traded oil. But it could also block another 40 percent of global oil exports just by sinking tankers coming from Iraq, and the Arab Gulf states with its lethal Noor anti-ship missiles.
The Noor anti-ship missile is a locally built version of the Chinese YJ-82. It has a 200-km. (140-mile) range, enough to cover all the major choke points in the Gulf. It flies at twice the speed of sound just meters above the sea’s surface, and it has a tiny radar profile. Its single-shot kill probability has been put as high as 98 percent.
Iran’s mountainous coastline extends along the whole northern side of the Gulf, and these missiles have easily concealed mobile launchers. They would sink tankers with ease, and in a few days insurance rates for tankers planning to enter the Gulf would become prohibitive, effectively shutting down the region’s oil exports completely.
Meanwhile Iran would start supplying modern surface-to-air missiles to the Taleban in Afghanistan, and that would soon shut down the US military effort there. (It was the arrival of US-supplied Stinger missiles in Afghanistan in the late 1980s that drove Russian helicopters from the sky and ultimately doomed the whole Soviet intervention there.)
Iranian ballistic missiles would strike US bases on the southern side of the Gulf, and Iran’s Hezbollah allies in Beirut would start dropping missiles on Israel. The United States would have no options for escalation other than the nuclear one, and pressure on it to stop the war would mount by the day as the world’s industries and transport ground to a halt.
The end would be an embarrassing retreat by the United States, and the definitive establishment of Iran as the dominant power of the Gulf region.
That was the outcome of every war-game the Pentagon played, and Mike Mullen knows it. So there is a plan for an attack on Iran, but he would probably rather resign than put it into action. It is all bluff. It always was.
— Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist.
VIDEO: Palestinian boy, five, begs Israeli soldiers not to take his father
YouTube
The incident reportedly occurred in Hebron in the West Bank, where the father was being "arrested" by Israeli forces illegally occupying his land. The alleged charge was that he was "stealing" his own water.
The incident reportedly occurred in Hebron in the West Bank, where the father was being "arrested" by Israeli forces illegally occupying his land. The alleged charge was that he was "stealing" his own water.
Israeli forces abduct Palestinian student, 15 others throughout West Bank
Ma'an -- Israeli forces entered a village in the northern West Bank on Thursday and detained a university student who had been released from custody only one year earlier.
Ahmad Mahmud As-Said, 21, of the Deir Istya village northwest of Salfit, served two years in Israeli prison on charges of resisting Israel and was released in the summer of 2009.
Israeli military officials said a total of 16 detentions were carried out in the Nablus, Jenin, Bethlehem, Qalqiliya and Ramallah areas overnight. All of the detainees were taken in for questioning to unknown locations.
Ahmad Mahmud As-Said, 21, of the Deir Istya village northwest of Salfit, served two years in Israeli prison on charges of resisting Israel and was released in the summer of 2009.
Israeli military officials said a total of 16 detentions were carried out in the Nablus, Jenin, Bethlehem, Qalqiliya and Ramallah areas overnight. All of the detainees were taken in for questioning to unknown locations.
Israeli forces demolish 23 Palestinian farm structures, bringing total to 126 - 3,000 demoliton orders outstanding
Ma'an – Israel's Civil Administration crews returned to the Jordan Valley on Thursday to demolish 23 structures recently re-built by residents and farmers in Al-Farisiya.
The town, in the Tubas governorate, is located across the highway from the Nahal Rotem settlement, part of the nearby Sdemot Mehola.
The area has a total of five settlements, most engaged in farming, with more than half of the settlement-occupied land in the northern part of the Jordan Valley used for agriculture.
On 19 July, Civil Administration forces entered the area and demolished 20 animal shelters and agricultural buildings, saying they were constructed without authorization in an area designated "Area C" by the 1993 Oslo Agreements. Under the plan, areas outside of major Palestinian cities were to have remained under Israeli civil and military control and gradually be handed over to the Palestinian administration.
The buildings were re-constructed by residents, who called the demolitions illegal.
A UN report said 86 structures in the Jordan Valley were demolished two weeks ago, and 17 others were demolished in other areas of the West Bank the week after.
"The spate of demolitions raises concerns over whether Israeli authorities could further escalate demolitions throughout Area C," a UN Report said, noting more than 3,000 demolition orders handed down by Israeli officials to locals were still outstanding.
"Currently, it is nearly impossible for Palestinians to obtain building permits to maintain, repair or construct homes, animal shelters or necessary infrastructure in Area C," the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said in its latest report on Area C.
Village council official and coordinator of the Save the Jordan Valley campaign Fathi Khdeiri said the demolitions were an "attack by occupation forces and an attempt to displace the residents of the Jordan Valley."
Representatives of the Civil Administration could not immediately be reached by phone.
The town, in the Tubas governorate, is located across the highway from the Nahal Rotem settlement, part of the nearby Sdemot Mehola.
The area has a total of five settlements, most engaged in farming, with more than half of the settlement-occupied land in the northern part of the Jordan Valley used for agriculture.
On 19 July, Civil Administration forces entered the area and demolished 20 animal shelters and agricultural buildings, saying they were constructed without authorization in an area designated "Area C" by the 1993 Oslo Agreements. Under the plan, areas outside of major Palestinian cities were to have remained under Israeli civil and military control and gradually be handed over to the Palestinian administration.
The buildings were re-constructed by residents, who called the demolitions illegal.
A UN report said 86 structures in the Jordan Valley were demolished two weeks ago, and 17 others were demolished in other areas of the West Bank the week after.
"The spate of demolitions raises concerns over whether Israeli authorities could further escalate demolitions throughout Area C," a UN Report said, noting more than 3,000 demolition orders handed down by Israeli officials to locals were still outstanding.
"Currently, it is nearly impossible for Palestinians to obtain building permits to maintain, repair or construct homes, animal shelters or necessary infrastructure in Area C," the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said in its latest report on Area C.
Village council official and coordinator of the Save the Jordan Valley campaign Fathi Khdeiri said the demolitions were an "attack by occupation forces and an attempt to displace the residents of the Jordan Valley."
Representatives of the Civil Administration could not immediately be reached by phone.
Israeli soldiers redeploy along Lebanon border
Ma'an -- Tension prevailed on both sides of the border after Israeli forces resumed routine activity in the area where deadly clashes took place Tuesday between Israeli and Lebanese soldiers.
The Israeli forces managed to cut down the tree which ignited the skirmishes, Israel's Army Radio reported. The army said it had the right to remove trees if they hinder visibility and make Israeli forces vulnerable to attacks.
The radio report asserted that heavy Israeli forces deployed in the area signaling a clear message to Lebanon. Armored vehicles had been stationed in the area to protect Israeli machinery used to cut down the tree which ignited Tuesday’s clashes.
Israel and Lebanon blame each other for the brief exchange of fire that left one Israeli soldier, two Lebanese troops, and a Lebanese journalist dead by Tuesday afternoon.
UNIFIL, the interim UN force stationed along the border area between Israel and Lebanon, released findings saying that the trees being cut by the Israeli army were located south of the Blue Line on the Israeli side, as alleged by Israeli officials at the time.
The trees, on the Lebanon side of the border fence, appear to have in fact been on Israeli-controlled lands, with the fence and the interim borders not aligning in several places.
"Following the exchange of fire between the Lebanese army and the Israeli army across the Blue Line in El Adeisse yesterday, the UNIFIL investigators were on the ground and commenced investigations," UNIFIL said in a statement. "The investigations are still ongoing and the findings will be intimated on conclusion of the investigations."
The statement added: "The UN position is that the Blue Line must be respected in its entirety by all parties. UNIFIL is in contact with both the parties to keep the situation under control and to ensure that there is no violation of the Blue Line in this area."
Giraldi: House resolution could lead to war with Iran; ignores Pentagon views
Antiwar.com - "A Cakewalk Against Iran - Everyone who is concerned that yet another war in the Middle East could wreck what remains of the United States economy and probably strip away even more of our liberties should be troubled by the numerous calls for war against Iran. No one believes that Iran is anything but a nation that is one small step away from becoming a complete religious dictatorship, but the country has a small economy, a tiny defense budget, and, as far as the world’s intelligence services can determine, neither nuclear weapons nor a program to develop them. Labeling the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a new Hitler and describing the regime as "Islamofascist" is convenient but hardly conveys the reality of the complex political interaction taking place inside today’s Iran. Ironically, the animus directed against Tehran relates not so much to what it is doing as to what its government might do, hardly an adequate pretext for going to war and a standard of behavior that many countries in the world would fail.
A resolution (HR 1553) is making its way through Congress that that would endorse an Israeli attack on Iran, which would be going to war by proxy as the US would almost immediately be drawn into the conflict when Tehran retaliates. The resolution provides explicit US backing for Israel to bomb Iran, stating that Congress supports Israel’s use of "all means necessary…including the use of military force." The resolution is non-binding, but it is dazzling in its disregard for the possible negative consequences that would ensue for the hundreds of thousands of US military and diplomatic personnel currently serving in the Near East region. Even the Pentagon opposes any Israeli action against Iran, knowing that it would mean instant retaliation against US forces in Iraq and also in Afghanistan. The resolution has appeared, not coincidentally, at the same time as major articles by leading neoconservatives Reuel Marc Gerecht and Bill Kristol calling for military action.
Both Gerecht and Kristol insist that action by Israel or the US would be better than doing nothing and both downplay the ability of Iran to counter-attack effectively. One might note that both Kristol and Gerecht have been dramatically wrong in the past, most notably in their analyses of developments in Iraq.
Kristol is a poseur, a foreign policy wannabe, framing policy around his own Straussian beliefs. Gerecht, who actually does know quite a bit about Iran and its internal politics, is the more dangerous of the two as he is able to use his knowledge, which he sprinkles throughout the article, to appear credible. But as is so often the case with the neoconservatives, the thinking is based on false assumptions, optimistic assessments, and leaps of the imagination about what might occur. One might recall neocon predictions of a "cakewalk" in Iraq, a war that still embroils tens of thousands of US troops and that kills Americans nearly every day.
In his article entitled "Should Israel Bomb Iran? – Better Safe than Sorry" Gerecht begins with three paragraphs outlining what might happen if Iran is attacked, to include attacks on US troops, shock oil prices, terrorist attacks worldwide, tumult in the Muslim world, and a rush by Iran to develop a nuclear weapon to defend itself. He concludes, however, that "These fears are mostly overblown."
Why Gerecht thinks that Iranian retaliation would be minimal is not completely clear, but he spends the next seven pages explaining why an attack on Iran might be a positive step. He opines that bombing Iran "remains the only conceivable means of derailing or seriously delaying Iran’s nuclear program…" Bombing would also result in "traumatizing Tehran." And he provides a second reason for staging an attack, his argument that "Iran has already embraced terrorism against Israel and the United States" and that its regime supports the "indiscriminate killing" of Jews. He presumes that Iran is hell bent on acquiring a nuclear weapon and would use it against Israelis "who must live with the Middle East’s merciless power politics…" or give it to terrorist groups to accomplish the same end. Gerecht recommends that Israel should attack Iran to "rock the system" to make the regime "lose face" and suffer a military defeat that could have fatal consequences for its survivability. He returns to the theme, mentioning oddly that "American fear of Iranian capabilities in Iraq and Afghanistan has been exaggerated" and then excoriates "an ugly anti-Israeli reflex" on the part of many Europeans when Israel uses lethal force to defend itself.
Gerecht is doing two things. First, he is ignoring any role that Israel might have had in creating its own predicament vis-Ã -vis Iran and its other neighbors. Israel is, for him, always the victim and never the instigator meaning that whatever it does is always self-defense and justifiable. Second, he assumes that Iran is manifestly evil and will always choose the most despicable option for its own behavior while he simultaneously only assumes the best motives and best possible outcome for any Israeli or American military action. He ignores the fact that Iran has no nuclear weapons program and assumes that Tehran is willing to bear the enormous expense and risk to develop a nuclear device and use it on Israel or give it to a terrorist even though that would be national suicide. He reflexively judges every group in the Middle East that is opposed to Israel as a terrorist and lumps them in as enemies of Washington as well as of Israel whether or not they have actually carried out attacks against the US. If Iran reacts to being bombed, he notes that "It is entirely possible that Khamenei would use terrorism against the United States after an Israeli strike," an asymmetrical response using available resources that many might consider self-defense against an attacker but which Gerecht chooses to dismiss as terrorism. Gerecht dismisses any legitimate criticism of the actions of the state of Israel as anti-Semitic or "ugly."
The reality is that an Israeli attack on Iran will trigger an all-out war in the region, which will quickly include the United States. It might or might not eliminate Iran’s technical ability to build a nuclear weapon and it would almost certainly accelerate that process. It would not bring down the Iranian regime and usher in reformers who would embrace Israel and the United States while singing "Kumbaya" around the campfire. It would be extremely nasty, would not solve any problems in the Middle East, and would kill tens of thousands of innocent people, if not more. It could easily lead to the use of nuclear weapons by either the United States or Israel. For the neoconservatives, it is easy to dismiss the possible downside while emphasizing the upside that they perceive, which is protecting Israel by damaging Iran’s nuclear program and possibly bringing about some version of regime change. But we have seen too many times in the past how the neoconservatives can be wrong — think only of the "cakewalk" that has been Iraq now seven years on and still running. A new war in the Middle East would be an unmitigated disaster for Iran, the United States, and even for Israel. It must be avoided at all costs.
A resolution (HR 1553) is making its way through Congress that that would endorse an Israeli attack on Iran, which would be going to war by proxy as the US would almost immediately be drawn into the conflict when Tehran retaliates. The resolution provides explicit US backing for Israel to bomb Iran, stating that Congress supports Israel’s use of "all means necessary…including the use of military force." The resolution is non-binding, but it is dazzling in its disregard for the possible negative consequences that would ensue for the hundreds of thousands of US military and diplomatic personnel currently serving in the Near East region. Even the Pentagon opposes any Israeli action against Iran, knowing that it would mean instant retaliation against US forces in Iraq and also in Afghanistan. The resolution has appeared, not coincidentally, at the same time as major articles by leading neoconservatives Reuel Marc Gerecht and Bill Kristol calling for military action.
Both Gerecht and Kristol insist that action by Israel or the US would be better than doing nothing and both downplay the ability of Iran to counter-attack effectively. One might note that both Kristol and Gerecht have been dramatically wrong in the past, most notably in their analyses of developments in Iraq.
Kristol is a poseur, a foreign policy wannabe, framing policy around his own Straussian beliefs. Gerecht, who actually does know quite a bit about Iran and its internal politics, is the more dangerous of the two as he is able to use his knowledge, which he sprinkles throughout the article, to appear credible. But as is so often the case with the neoconservatives, the thinking is based on false assumptions, optimistic assessments, and leaps of the imagination about what might occur. One might recall neocon predictions of a "cakewalk" in Iraq, a war that still embroils tens of thousands of US troops and that kills Americans nearly every day.
In his article entitled "Should Israel Bomb Iran? – Better Safe than Sorry" Gerecht begins with three paragraphs outlining what might happen if Iran is attacked, to include attacks on US troops, shock oil prices, terrorist attacks worldwide, tumult in the Muslim world, and a rush by Iran to develop a nuclear weapon to defend itself. He concludes, however, that "These fears are mostly overblown."
Why Gerecht thinks that Iranian retaliation would be minimal is not completely clear, but he spends the next seven pages explaining why an attack on Iran might be a positive step. He opines that bombing Iran "remains the only conceivable means of derailing or seriously delaying Iran’s nuclear program…" Bombing would also result in "traumatizing Tehran." And he provides a second reason for staging an attack, his argument that "Iran has already embraced terrorism against Israel and the United States" and that its regime supports the "indiscriminate killing" of Jews. He presumes that Iran is hell bent on acquiring a nuclear weapon and would use it against Israelis "who must live with the Middle East’s merciless power politics…" or give it to terrorist groups to accomplish the same end. Gerecht recommends that Israel should attack Iran to "rock the system" to make the regime "lose face" and suffer a military defeat that could have fatal consequences for its survivability. He returns to the theme, mentioning oddly that "American fear of Iranian capabilities in Iraq and Afghanistan has been exaggerated" and then excoriates "an ugly anti-Israeli reflex" on the part of many Europeans when Israel uses lethal force to defend itself.
Gerecht is doing two things. First, he is ignoring any role that Israel might have had in creating its own predicament vis-Ã -vis Iran and its other neighbors. Israel is, for him, always the victim and never the instigator meaning that whatever it does is always self-defense and justifiable. Second, he assumes that Iran is manifestly evil and will always choose the most despicable option for its own behavior while he simultaneously only assumes the best motives and best possible outcome for any Israeli or American military action. He ignores the fact that Iran has no nuclear weapons program and assumes that Tehran is willing to bear the enormous expense and risk to develop a nuclear device and use it on Israel or give it to a terrorist even though that would be national suicide. He reflexively judges every group in the Middle East that is opposed to Israel as a terrorist and lumps them in as enemies of Washington as well as of Israel whether or not they have actually carried out attacks against the US. If Iran reacts to being bombed, he notes that "It is entirely possible that Khamenei would use terrorism against the United States after an Israeli strike," an asymmetrical response using available resources that many might consider self-defense against an attacker but which Gerecht chooses to dismiss as terrorism. Gerecht dismisses any legitimate criticism of the actions of the state of Israel as anti-Semitic or "ugly."
The reality is that an Israeli attack on Iran will trigger an all-out war in the region, which will quickly include the United States. It might or might not eliminate Iran’s technical ability to build a nuclear weapon and it would almost certainly accelerate that process. It would not bring down the Iranian regime and usher in reformers who would embrace Israel and the United States while singing "Kumbaya" around the campfire. It would be extremely nasty, would not solve any problems in the Middle East, and would kill tens of thousands of innocent people, if not more. It could easily lead to the use of nuclear weapons by either the United States or Israel. For the neoconservatives, it is easy to dismiss the possible downside while emphasizing the upside that they perceive, which is protecting Israel by damaging Iran’s nuclear program and possibly bringing about some version of regime change. But we have seen too many times in the past how the neoconservatives can be wrong — think only of the "cakewalk" that has been Iraq now seven years on and still running. A new war in the Middle East would be an unmitigated disaster for Iran, the United States, and even for Israel. It must be avoided at all costs.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Former Intelligence Officers warn Israel may attack Iran this month and drag US into another war; discuss ways to stop it
Ray McGovern - Warning to the President
We write to alert you to the likelihood that Israel will attack Iran as early as this month. This would likely lead to a wider war. Israel’s leaders would calculate that once the battle is joined, it will be politically untenable for you to give anything less than unstinting support to Israel, no matter how the war started, and that U.S. troops and weaponry would flow freely. Wider war could eventually result in destruction of the state of Israel. This can be stopped, but only if you move quickly to preempt an Israeli attack by publicly condemning such a move before it happens.
We believe that comments by senior American officials, you included, reflect misplaced trust in Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Actually, the phrasing itself can be revealing, as when CIA Director Panetta implied cavalierly that Washington leaves it up to the Israelis to decide whether and when to attack Iran, and how much “room” to give to the diplomatic effort. On June 27, Panetta casually told ABC’s Jake Tapper, “I think they are willing to give us the room to be able to try to change Iran diplomatically … as opposed to changing them militarily.”
Similarly, the tone you struck referring to Netanyahu and yourself in your July 7 interview with Israeli TV was distinctly out of tune with decades of unfortunate history with Israeli leaders. “Neither of us try to surprise each other,” you said, “and that approach is one that I think Prime Minister Netanyahu is committed to.” You may wish to ask Vice President Biden to remind you of the kind of surprises he has encountered in Israel.
Blindsiding has long been an arrow in Israel’s quiver. During the emerging Middle East crisis in the spring of 1967, some of us witnessed closely a flood of Israeli surprises and deception, as Netanyahu’s predecessors feigned fear of an imminent Arab attack as justification for starting a war to seize and occupy Arab territories. We had long since concluded that Israel had been exaggerating the Arab “threat” – well before 1982 when former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin publicly confessed:
“In June 1967, we had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that [Egyptian President] Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.”
Israel had, in fact, prepared well militarily and also mounted provocations against its neighbors, in order to provoke a response that could be used to justify expansion of its borders.
Given this record, one would be well advised to greet with appropriate skepticism any private assurances Netanyahu may have given you that Israel would not surprise you with an attack on Iran.
Netanyahu’s Calculations
Netanyahu believes he holds the high cards, largely because of the strong support he enjoys in our Congress and our strongly pro-Israel media. He reads your reluctance even to mention in controversial bilateral issues publicly during his recent visit as affirmation that he is in the catbird seat in the relationship. During election years in the U.S. (including mid-terms), Israeli leaders are particularly confident of the power they and the Likud Lobby enjoy on the American political scene.
This prime minister learned well from Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon. Netanyahu’s attitude comes through in a video taped nine years ago and shown on Israeli TV, in which he bragged about how he deceived President Clinton into believing he (Netanyahu) was helping implement the Oslo accords when he was actually destroying them. The tape displays a contemptuous attitude toward – and wonderment at – an America so easily influenced by Israel. Netanyahu says:
“America is something that can be easily moved. Moved in the right direction. … They won’t get in our way. … Eighty percent of the Americans support us. It’s absurd.”
Israeli columnist Gideon Levy wrote that the video shows Netanyahu to be “a con artist … who thinks that Washington is in his pocket and that he can pull the wool over its eyes,” adding that such behavior “does not change over the years.” As mentioned above, Netanyahu has had instructive role models.
None other than Gen. Brent Scowcroft told the Financial Times that former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had George W. Bush “mesmerized,” that “Sharon just has him “wrapped around his little finger.” (Scowcroft was promptly relieved of his duties as chair of the prestigious President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and told never again to darken the White House doorstep.)
If further proof of American political support for Netanyahu were needed, it was manifest when Senators McCain, Lieberman, and Graham visited Israel during the second week of July. Lieberman asserted that there is wide support in Congress for using all means to keep Iran from becoming a nuclear power, including “through military actions if we must.” Graham was equally explicit: “The Congress has Israel’s back,” he said. More recently, 47 House Republicans have signed onto H.R. 1553 declaring “support for Israel’s right to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by Iran … including the use of military force.”
The power of the Likud Lobby, especially in an election year, facilitates Netanyahu’s attempts to convince those few of his colleagues who need convincing that there may never be a more auspicious time to bring about “regime change” in Tehran. And, as we hope your advisers have told you, regime change, not Iranian nuclear weapons, is Israel’s primary concern.
If Israel’s professed fear that one or two nuclear weapons in Iran’s arsenal would be a game changer, one would have expected Israeli leaders to jump with up and down with glee at the possibility of seeing half of Iran’s low enriched uranium shipped abroad. Instead, they dismissed as a “trick” the tripartite deal, brokered by Turkey and Brazil with your personal encouragement, that would ship half of Iran’s low enriched uranium outside Tehran’s control.
The National Intelligence Estimate
The Israelis have been looking on intently as the U.S. intelligence community attempts to update, in a “Memorandum to Holders” of the NIE of November 2007 on Iran’s nuclear program. It is worth recalling a couple of that Estimate’s key judgments:
“We judge with high confidence that in fall of 2003 Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program. … We assess with moderate confidence Tehran has not restarted its nuclear program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons….”
Earlier this year, public congressional testimony by former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair (February 1 and 2) and Defense Intelligence Agency Director Gen. Ronald Burgess with Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. James Cartwright (April 14) did not alter those key judgments. Blair and others continued to underscore the intelligence community’s agnosticism on one key point: as Blair put it earlier this year, “We do not know if Iran will eventually decide to build a nuclear weapon.”
The media have reported off-the-cuff comments by Panetta and by you, with a darker appraisal – with you telling Israeli TV, “all indicators are that they [the Iranians] are in fact pursuing a nuclear weapon,” and Panetta telling ABC, “I think they continue to work on designs in that area [of weaponization].” Panetta hastened to add, though, that in Tehran, “There is a continuing debate right now as to whether or not they ought to proceed with the bomb.”
Israel probably believes it must give more weight to the official testimony of Blair, Burgess, and Cartwright, which dovetail with the earlier NIE, and the Israelis are afraid that the long-delayed Memorandum to Holders of the 2007 NIE will essentially affirm that Estimate’s key judgments. Our sources tell us that an honest Memorandum to Holders is likely to do precisely that, and that they suspect that the several-months-long delay means intelligence judgments are being “fixed” around the policy – as was the case before the attack on Iraq.
One War Prevented
The key judgments of the November 2007 NIE shoved an iron rod into the wheel spokes of the Dick Cheney-led juggernaut rolling toward war on Iran. The NIE infuriated Israel leaders eager to attack before President Bush and Cheney left office. This time, Netanyahu fears that issuance of an honest Memorandum might have a similar effect.
Bottom line: more incentive for Israel to preempt such an Estimate by striking Iran sooner rather than later.
Last week’s announcement that U.S. officials will meet next month with Iranian counterparts to resume talks on ways to arrange higher enrichment of Iranian low-enriched uranium (LEU) for Tehran’s medical research reactor was welcome news to all but the Israeli leaders. In addition, Iran reportedly has said it would be prepared to halt enrichment to 20 percent (the level needed for the medical research reactor) and has made it clear that it looks forward to the resumption of talks.
Again, an agreement that would send a large portion of Iran’s LEU abroad would, at a minimum, hinder progress toward nuclear weapons, should Iran decide to develop them. But it would also greatly weaken Israel’s scariest rationale for an attack on Iran. Bottom line: with the talks on what Israel’s leaders earlier labeled a “trick” now scheduled to resume in September, incentive builds in Tel Aviv for the Israelis to attack before any such agreement can be reached. We’ll say it again: the objective is regime change. Creating synthetic fear of Iranian nuclear weapons is simply the best way to “justify” bringing about regime change. Worked well for Iraq, no?
Another War in Need of Prevention
A strong public statement by you, personally warning Israel not to attack Iran, would most probably head off such an Israeli move. Follow-up might include dispatching Adm. Mullen to Tel Aviv with military-to-military instructions to Israel: Don’t even think of it.
In the wake of the 2007 NIE, President Bush overruled Vice President Cheney and sent Adm. Mullen to Israel to impart that hard message. A much-relieved Mullen arrived home that spring sure of step and grateful that he had dodged the likelihood of being on the end of a Cheney-inspired order for him to send U.S. forces into war with Iran.
This time around, Mullen returned with sweaty palms from a visit to Israel in February 2010. Ever since, he has been worrying aloud that Israel might mousetrap the U.S. into war with Iran, while adding the obligatory assurance that the Pentagon does have an attack plan for Iran, if needed. In contrast to his experience in 2008, though, Mullen seemed troubled that Israel’s leaders did not take his warnings seriously.
While in Israel, Mullen insisted publicly that an attack on Iran would be “a big, big, big problem for all of us, and I worry a great deal about the unintended consequences.”
After his return, at a Pentagon press conference on Feb. 22 Mullen drove home the same point. After reciting the usual boilerplate about Iran being “on the path to achieve nuclear weaponization” and its “desire to dominate its neighbors,” he included the following in his prepared remarks:
“For now, the diplomatic and the economic levers of international power are and ought to be the levers first pulled. Indeed, I would hope they are always and consistently pulled. No strike, however effective, will be, in and of itself, decisive.”
Unlike younger generals – David Petraeus, for example – Adm. Mullen served in the Vietnam War. That experience is probably what prompts asides like this: “I would remind everyone of an essential truth: War is bloody and uneven. It’s messy and ugly and incredibly wasteful….” Although the immediate context for that remark was Afghanistan, Mullen has underscored time and again that war with Iran would be a far larger disaster. Those with a modicum of familiarity with the military, strategic, and economic equities at stake know he is right.
Other Steps
In 2008, after Mullen read the Israelis the riot act, they put their preemptive plans for Iran aside. With that mission accomplished, Mullen gave serious thought to ways to prevent any unintended (or, for that matter, deliberately provoked) incidents in the crowded Persian Gulf that could lead to wider hostilities.
Mullen sent up an interesting trial balloon at a July 2, 2008, press conference, when he indicated that military-to-military dialogue could “add to a better understanding” between the U.S. and Iran. But nothing more was heard of this overture, probably because Cheney ordered him to drop it.
It was a good idea – still is. The danger of a U.S.-Iranian confrontation in the crowded Persian Gulf has not been addressed, and should be. Establishment of a direct communications link between top military officials in Washington and Tehran would reduce the danger of an accident, miscalculation, or covert, false-flag attack.
In our view, that should be done immediately – particularly since recently introduced sanctions assert a right to inspect Iranian ships. The naval commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards reportedly has threatened “a response in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz” if anyone tries to inspect Iranian ships in international waters.
Another safety valve would result from successful negotiation of the kind of bilateral “incidents-at-sea” protocol that was concluded with the Russians in 1972 during a period of relatively high tension.
With only interim nobodies at the helm of the intelligence community, you may wish to consider knocking some heads together yourself and insisting that it finish an honest Memorandum to Holders of the 2007 NIE by mid-August – recording any dissents, as necessary. Sadly, our former colleagues tell us that politicization of intelligence analysis did not end with the departure of Bush and Cheney… and that the problem is acute even at the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, which in the past has done some of the best professional, objective, tell-it-like-it-is analysis.
Pundits, Think-Tanks: Missing the Point
As you may have noticed, most of page one of Sunday’s Washington Post Outlook section was given to an article titled, “A Nuclear Iran: Would America Strike to Prevent It? – Imagining Obama’s Response to an Iranian Missile Crisis.” Page five was dominated by the rest of the article, under the title “Who will blink first when Iran is on the brink?” A page-wide photo of a missile rolling past Iranian dignitaries on a reviewing stand (reminiscent of the familiar parades on Red Square) is aimed at the centerfold of the Outlook section, as if poised to blow it to smithereens.
Typically, the authors address the Iranian “threat” as though it endangers the U.S., even though Secretary Clinton has stated publicly that this is not the case. They write that one option for the U.S. is “the lonely, unpopular path of taking military action lacking allied consensus.” O Tempora, O Mores! In less than a decade, wars of aggression have become nothing more than lonely, unpopular paths.
What is perhaps most remarkable, though, is that the word Israel is nowhere to be found in this very long article. Similar think pieces, including some from relatively progressive think-tanks, also address these issues as though they were simply bilateral U.S.-Iranian problems, with little or no attention to Israel.
Guns of August?
The stakes could hardly be higher. Letting slip the dogs of war would have immense repercussions. Again, we hope that Adm. Mullen and others have given you comprehensive briefings on them. Netanyahu would be taking a fateful gamble by attacking Iran, with high risk to everyone involved. The worst, but conceivable case, has Netanyahu playing – unintentionally – Dr. Kevorkian to the state of Israel.
Even if the U.S. were to be sucked into a war provoked by Israel, there is absolutely no guarantee that the war would come out well. Were the U.S. to suffer significant casualties, and were Americans to become aware that such losses came about because of exaggerated Israeli claims of a nuclear threat from Iran, Israel could lose much of its high standing in the United States. There could even be a surge in anti-Semitism, as Americans conclude that officials with dual loyalties in Congress and the executive branch threw our troops into a war provoked, on false pretenses, by Likudniks for their own narrow purposes. We do not have a sense that major players in Tel Aviv or in Washington are sufficiently sensitive to these critical factors.
You are in position to prevent this unfortunate but likely chain reaction. We allow for the possibility that Israeli military action might not lead to a major regional war, but we consider the chances of that much less than even.
Footnote: VIPS Experience
We VIPS have found ourselves in this position before. We prepared our first Memorandum for the President on the afternoon of Feb. 5, 2003, after Colin Powell’s speech at the UN. We had been watching how our profession was being corrupted into serving up faux intelligence that was later criticized (correctly) as “uncorroborated, contradicted, and nonexistent” – adjectives used by former Senate Intelligence Committee chair Jay Rockefeller after a five-year investigation by his committee.
As Powell spoke, we decided collectively that the responsible thing to do was to try to warn the president before he acted on misguided advice to attack Iraq. Unlike Powell, we did not claim that our analysis was “irrefutable and undeniable.” We did conclude with this warning [.pdf]:
“After watching Secretary Powell today, we are convinced that you would be well served if you widened the discussion … beyond the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic.”
We take no satisfaction at having gotten it right on Iraq. Others with claim to more immediate expertise on Iraq were issuing similar warnings. But we were kept well away from the wagons circled by Bush and Cheney. Sadly, your own vice president, who was then chair of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, was among the most assiduous in blocking opportunities for dissenting voices to be heard. This is part of what brought on the worst foreign policy disaster in our nation’s history.
We now believe that we may also be right on (and right on the cusp of) another impending catastrophe of even wider scope – Iran – on which another president, you, are not getting good advice from your closed circle of advisers.
They are probably telling you that, since you have privately counseled Prime Minister Netanyahu against attacking Iran, he will not do it. This could simply be the familiar syndrome of telling the president what they believe he wants to hear. Quiz them; tell them others believe them to be dead wrong on Netanyahu. The only positive here is that you – only you – can prevent an Israeli attack on Iran.
Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
Phil Giraldi, directorate of operations, CIA (20 years)
Larry Johnson, directorate of intelligence, CIA; Department of State, Department of Defense consultant (24 years)
W. Patrick Lang, colonel, USA, Special Forces (ret.); Senior Executive Service: defense intelligence officer for Middle East/South Asia; director of HUMINT Collection, Defense Intelligence Agency (30 years)
Ray McGovern, U.S. Army intelligence officer; directorate of intelligence, CIA (30 years)
Coleen Rowley, special agent and Minneapolis division counsel, FBI (24 years)
Ann Wright, colonel, U.S. Army Reserve (ret.), (29 years); Foreign Service officer, Department of State (16 years)
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: War With Iran
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: War With Iran
We write to alert you to the likelihood that Israel will attack Iran as early as this month. This would likely lead to a wider war. Israel’s leaders would calculate that once the battle is joined, it will be politically untenable for you to give anything less than unstinting support to Israel, no matter how the war started, and that U.S. troops and weaponry would flow freely. Wider war could eventually result in destruction of the state of Israel. This can be stopped, but only if you move quickly to preempt an Israeli attack by publicly condemning such a move before it happens.
We believe that comments by senior American officials, you included, reflect misplaced trust in Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Actually, the phrasing itself can be revealing, as when CIA Director Panetta implied cavalierly that Washington leaves it up to the Israelis to decide whether and when to attack Iran, and how much “room” to give to the diplomatic effort. On June 27, Panetta casually told ABC’s Jake Tapper, “I think they are willing to give us the room to be able to try to change Iran diplomatically … as opposed to changing them militarily.”
Similarly, the tone you struck referring to Netanyahu and yourself in your July 7 interview with Israeli TV was distinctly out of tune with decades of unfortunate history with Israeli leaders. “Neither of us try to surprise each other,” you said, “and that approach is one that I think Prime Minister Netanyahu is committed to.” You may wish to ask Vice President Biden to remind you of the kind of surprises he has encountered in Israel.
Blindsiding has long been an arrow in Israel’s quiver. During the emerging Middle East crisis in the spring of 1967, some of us witnessed closely a flood of Israeli surprises and deception, as Netanyahu’s predecessors feigned fear of an imminent Arab attack as justification for starting a war to seize and occupy Arab territories. We had long since concluded that Israel had been exaggerating the Arab “threat” – well before 1982 when former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin publicly confessed:
“In June 1967, we had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that [Egyptian President] Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.”
Israel had, in fact, prepared well militarily and also mounted provocations against its neighbors, in order to provoke a response that could be used to justify expansion of its borders.
Given this record, one would be well advised to greet with appropriate skepticism any private assurances Netanyahu may have given you that Israel would not surprise you with an attack on Iran.
Netanyahu’s Calculations
Netanyahu believes he holds the high cards, largely because of the strong support he enjoys in our Congress and our strongly pro-Israel media. He reads your reluctance even to mention in controversial bilateral issues publicly during his recent visit as affirmation that he is in the catbird seat in the relationship. During election years in the U.S. (including mid-terms), Israeli leaders are particularly confident of the power they and the Likud Lobby enjoy on the American political scene.
This prime minister learned well from Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon. Netanyahu’s attitude comes through in a video taped nine years ago and shown on Israeli TV, in which he bragged about how he deceived President Clinton into believing he (Netanyahu) was helping implement the Oslo accords when he was actually destroying them. The tape displays a contemptuous attitude toward – and wonderment at – an America so easily influenced by Israel. Netanyahu says:
“America is something that can be easily moved. Moved in the right direction. … They won’t get in our way. … Eighty percent of the Americans support us. It’s absurd.”
Israeli columnist Gideon Levy wrote that the video shows Netanyahu to be “a con artist … who thinks that Washington is in his pocket and that he can pull the wool over its eyes,” adding that such behavior “does not change over the years.” As mentioned above, Netanyahu has had instructive role models.
None other than Gen. Brent Scowcroft told the Financial Times that former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had George W. Bush “mesmerized,” that “Sharon just has him “wrapped around his little finger.” (Scowcroft was promptly relieved of his duties as chair of the prestigious President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and told never again to darken the White House doorstep.)
If further proof of American political support for Netanyahu were needed, it was manifest when Senators McCain, Lieberman, and Graham visited Israel during the second week of July. Lieberman asserted that there is wide support in Congress for using all means to keep Iran from becoming a nuclear power, including “through military actions if we must.” Graham was equally explicit: “The Congress has Israel’s back,” he said. More recently, 47 House Republicans have signed onto H.R. 1553 declaring “support for Israel’s right to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by Iran … including the use of military force.”
The power of the Likud Lobby, especially in an election year, facilitates Netanyahu’s attempts to convince those few of his colleagues who need convincing that there may never be a more auspicious time to bring about “regime change” in Tehran. And, as we hope your advisers have told you, regime change, not Iranian nuclear weapons, is Israel’s primary concern.
If Israel’s professed fear that one or two nuclear weapons in Iran’s arsenal would be a game changer, one would have expected Israeli leaders to jump with up and down with glee at the possibility of seeing half of Iran’s low enriched uranium shipped abroad. Instead, they dismissed as a “trick” the tripartite deal, brokered by Turkey and Brazil with your personal encouragement, that would ship half of Iran’s low enriched uranium outside Tehran’s control.
The National Intelligence Estimate
The Israelis have been looking on intently as the U.S. intelligence community attempts to update, in a “Memorandum to Holders” of the NIE of November 2007 on Iran’s nuclear program. It is worth recalling a couple of that Estimate’s key judgments:
“We judge with high confidence that in fall of 2003 Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program. … We assess with moderate confidence Tehran has not restarted its nuclear program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons….”
Earlier this year, public congressional testimony by former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair (February 1 and 2) and Defense Intelligence Agency Director Gen. Ronald Burgess with Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. James Cartwright (April 14) did not alter those key judgments. Blair and others continued to underscore the intelligence community’s agnosticism on one key point: as Blair put it earlier this year, “We do not know if Iran will eventually decide to build a nuclear weapon.”
The media have reported off-the-cuff comments by Panetta and by you, with a darker appraisal – with you telling Israeli TV, “all indicators are that they [the Iranians] are in fact pursuing a nuclear weapon,” and Panetta telling ABC, “I think they continue to work on designs in that area [of weaponization].” Panetta hastened to add, though, that in Tehran, “There is a continuing debate right now as to whether or not they ought to proceed with the bomb.”
Israel probably believes it must give more weight to the official testimony of Blair, Burgess, and Cartwright, which dovetail with the earlier NIE, and the Israelis are afraid that the long-delayed Memorandum to Holders of the 2007 NIE will essentially affirm that Estimate’s key judgments. Our sources tell us that an honest Memorandum to Holders is likely to do precisely that, and that they suspect that the several-months-long delay means intelligence judgments are being “fixed” around the policy – as was the case before the attack on Iraq.
One War Prevented
The key judgments of the November 2007 NIE shoved an iron rod into the wheel spokes of the Dick Cheney-led juggernaut rolling toward war on Iran. The NIE infuriated Israel leaders eager to attack before President Bush and Cheney left office. This time, Netanyahu fears that issuance of an honest Memorandum might have a similar effect.
Bottom line: more incentive for Israel to preempt such an Estimate by striking Iran sooner rather than later.
Last week’s announcement that U.S. officials will meet next month with Iranian counterparts to resume talks on ways to arrange higher enrichment of Iranian low-enriched uranium (LEU) for Tehran’s medical research reactor was welcome news to all but the Israeli leaders. In addition, Iran reportedly has said it would be prepared to halt enrichment to 20 percent (the level needed for the medical research reactor) and has made it clear that it looks forward to the resumption of talks.
Again, an agreement that would send a large portion of Iran’s LEU abroad would, at a minimum, hinder progress toward nuclear weapons, should Iran decide to develop them. But it would also greatly weaken Israel’s scariest rationale for an attack on Iran. Bottom line: with the talks on what Israel’s leaders earlier labeled a “trick” now scheduled to resume in September, incentive builds in Tel Aviv for the Israelis to attack before any such agreement can be reached. We’ll say it again: the objective is regime change. Creating synthetic fear of Iranian nuclear weapons is simply the best way to “justify” bringing about regime change. Worked well for Iraq, no?
Another War in Need of Prevention
A strong public statement by you, personally warning Israel not to attack Iran, would most probably head off such an Israeli move. Follow-up might include dispatching Adm. Mullen to Tel Aviv with military-to-military instructions to Israel: Don’t even think of it.
In the wake of the 2007 NIE, President Bush overruled Vice President Cheney and sent Adm. Mullen to Israel to impart that hard message. A much-relieved Mullen arrived home that spring sure of step and grateful that he had dodged the likelihood of being on the end of a Cheney-inspired order for him to send U.S. forces into war with Iran.
This time around, Mullen returned with sweaty palms from a visit to Israel in February 2010. Ever since, he has been worrying aloud that Israel might mousetrap the U.S. into war with Iran, while adding the obligatory assurance that the Pentagon does have an attack plan for Iran, if needed. In contrast to his experience in 2008, though, Mullen seemed troubled that Israel’s leaders did not take his warnings seriously.
While in Israel, Mullen insisted publicly that an attack on Iran would be “a big, big, big problem for all of us, and I worry a great deal about the unintended consequences.”
After his return, at a Pentagon press conference on Feb. 22 Mullen drove home the same point. After reciting the usual boilerplate about Iran being “on the path to achieve nuclear weaponization” and its “desire to dominate its neighbors,” he included the following in his prepared remarks:
“For now, the diplomatic and the economic levers of international power are and ought to be the levers first pulled. Indeed, I would hope they are always and consistently pulled. No strike, however effective, will be, in and of itself, decisive.”
Unlike younger generals – David Petraeus, for example – Adm. Mullen served in the Vietnam War. That experience is probably what prompts asides like this: “I would remind everyone of an essential truth: War is bloody and uneven. It’s messy and ugly and incredibly wasteful….” Although the immediate context for that remark was Afghanistan, Mullen has underscored time and again that war with Iran would be a far larger disaster. Those with a modicum of familiarity with the military, strategic, and economic equities at stake know he is right.
Other Steps
In 2008, after Mullen read the Israelis the riot act, they put their preemptive plans for Iran aside. With that mission accomplished, Mullen gave serious thought to ways to prevent any unintended (or, for that matter, deliberately provoked) incidents in the crowded Persian Gulf that could lead to wider hostilities.
Mullen sent up an interesting trial balloon at a July 2, 2008, press conference, when he indicated that military-to-military dialogue could “add to a better understanding” between the U.S. and Iran. But nothing more was heard of this overture, probably because Cheney ordered him to drop it.
It was a good idea – still is. The danger of a U.S.-Iranian confrontation in the crowded Persian Gulf has not been addressed, and should be. Establishment of a direct communications link between top military officials in Washington and Tehran would reduce the danger of an accident, miscalculation, or covert, false-flag attack.
In our view, that should be done immediately – particularly since recently introduced sanctions assert a right to inspect Iranian ships. The naval commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards reportedly has threatened “a response in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz” if anyone tries to inspect Iranian ships in international waters.
Another safety valve would result from successful negotiation of the kind of bilateral “incidents-at-sea” protocol that was concluded with the Russians in 1972 during a period of relatively high tension.
With only interim nobodies at the helm of the intelligence community, you may wish to consider knocking some heads together yourself and insisting that it finish an honest Memorandum to Holders of the 2007 NIE by mid-August – recording any dissents, as necessary. Sadly, our former colleagues tell us that politicization of intelligence analysis did not end with the departure of Bush and Cheney… and that the problem is acute even at the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, which in the past has done some of the best professional, objective, tell-it-like-it-is analysis.
Pundits, Think-Tanks: Missing the Point
As you may have noticed, most of page one of Sunday’s Washington Post Outlook section was given to an article titled, “A Nuclear Iran: Would America Strike to Prevent It? – Imagining Obama’s Response to an Iranian Missile Crisis.” Page five was dominated by the rest of the article, under the title “Who will blink first when Iran is on the brink?” A page-wide photo of a missile rolling past Iranian dignitaries on a reviewing stand (reminiscent of the familiar parades on Red Square) is aimed at the centerfold of the Outlook section, as if poised to blow it to smithereens.
Typically, the authors address the Iranian “threat” as though it endangers the U.S., even though Secretary Clinton has stated publicly that this is not the case. They write that one option for the U.S. is “the lonely, unpopular path of taking military action lacking allied consensus.” O Tempora, O Mores! In less than a decade, wars of aggression have become nothing more than lonely, unpopular paths.
What is perhaps most remarkable, though, is that the word Israel is nowhere to be found in this very long article. Similar think pieces, including some from relatively progressive think-tanks, also address these issues as though they were simply bilateral U.S.-Iranian problems, with little or no attention to Israel.
Guns of August?
The stakes could hardly be higher. Letting slip the dogs of war would have immense repercussions. Again, we hope that Adm. Mullen and others have given you comprehensive briefings on them. Netanyahu would be taking a fateful gamble by attacking Iran, with high risk to everyone involved. The worst, but conceivable case, has Netanyahu playing – unintentionally – Dr. Kevorkian to the state of Israel.
Even if the U.S. were to be sucked into a war provoked by Israel, there is absolutely no guarantee that the war would come out well. Were the U.S. to suffer significant casualties, and were Americans to become aware that such losses came about because of exaggerated Israeli claims of a nuclear threat from Iran, Israel could lose much of its high standing in the United States. There could even be a surge in anti-Semitism, as Americans conclude that officials with dual loyalties in Congress and the executive branch threw our troops into a war provoked, on false pretenses, by Likudniks for their own narrow purposes. We do not have a sense that major players in Tel Aviv or in Washington are sufficiently sensitive to these critical factors.
You are in position to prevent this unfortunate but likely chain reaction. We allow for the possibility that Israeli military action might not lead to a major regional war, but we consider the chances of that much less than even.
Footnote: VIPS Experience
We VIPS have found ourselves in this position before. We prepared our first Memorandum for the President on the afternoon of Feb. 5, 2003, after Colin Powell’s speech at the UN. We had been watching how our profession was being corrupted into serving up faux intelligence that was later criticized (correctly) as “uncorroborated, contradicted, and nonexistent” – adjectives used by former Senate Intelligence Committee chair Jay Rockefeller after a five-year investigation by his committee.
As Powell spoke, we decided collectively that the responsible thing to do was to try to warn the president before he acted on misguided advice to attack Iraq. Unlike Powell, we did not claim that our analysis was “irrefutable and undeniable.” We did conclude with this warning [.pdf]:
“After watching Secretary Powell today, we are convinced that you would be well served if you widened the discussion … beyond the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic.”
We take no satisfaction at having gotten it right on Iraq. Others with claim to more immediate expertise on Iraq were issuing similar warnings. But we were kept well away from the wagons circled by Bush and Cheney. Sadly, your own vice president, who was then chair of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, was among the most assiduous in blocking opportunities for dissenting voices to be heard. This is part of what brought on the worst foreign policy disaster in our nation’s history.
We now believe that we may also be right on (and right on the cusp of) another impending catastrophe of even wider scope – Iran – on which another president, you, are not getting good advice from your closed circle of advisers.
They are probably telling you that, since you have privately counseled Prime Minister Netanyahu against attacking Iran, he will not do it. This could simply be the familiar syndrome of telling the president what they believe he wants to hear. Quiz them; tell them others believe them to be dead wrong on Netanyahu. The only positive here is that you – only you – can prevent an Israeli attack on Iran.
Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
Phil Giraldi, directorate of operations, CIA (20 years)
Larry Johnson, directorate of intelligence, CIA; Department of State, Department of Defense consultant (24 years)
W. Patrick Lang, colonel, USA, Special Forces (ret.); Senior Executive Service: defense intelligence officer for Middle East/South Asia; director of HUMINT Collection, Defense Intelligence Agency (30 years)
Ray McGovern, U.S. Army intelligence officer; directorate of intelligence, CIA (30 years)
Coleen Rowley, special agent and Minneapolis division counsel, FBI (24 years)
Ann Wright, colonel, U.S. Army Reserve (ret.), (29 years); Foreign Service officer, Department of State (16 years)
Palestinian Family attacked by settlers after car crash
Ma'an - ...Palestinian Authority Police said the cars collided on the Burin junction, in which Abdul Min’em Owni Sabah, 26, his wife Shahrayar Yousef Daoud, 26, and their daughter Duha, three, were injured.
The report said the Palestinian was attacked by the family shortly after the collision, and all three were transferred to the Rafidiya Hospital for treatment.
The report said the Palestinian was attacked by the family shortly after the collision, and all three were transferred to the Rafidiya Hospital for treatment.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Clashes on Lebanon-Israel border, at least 3 dead, Israeli helicopters and fighter jet involved
Ma'an/Agencies - Three Lebanese soldiers were said to have been killed and at least four were injured in an exchange of fire with Israeli troops along the Israel-Lebanon border shortly after noon Tuesday.
News outlets said Israeli helicopters arrived on the scene before 2 p.m, and a fighter jet was circling the area as artillery fire slowed.
Al-Jadid TV reported shots fired from the helicopters toward the Lebanese town of Adeisseh, with reports of intermittent artillery fire and at least two homes set ablaze during the thick of the clash.
An Israeli military spokesman denied early reports that rockets were launched from southern Lebanon toward Israel, but confirmed Israeli fire toward a Lebanese military position.
He said reports that Israeli forces had entered Lebanon were false, adding that troops were between the blue line and the security fence.
Israeli news reports said a tank in the upper Galilee opened fire toward a Lebanese army position in southern Lebanon.
Lebanese news reports said Israeli soldiers were operating in the area, with some reports saying forces were attempting to install surveillance equipment, and others claiming the troops were removing trees to facilitate surveillance activity.
The Israeli activity in the area near the border zone appeared to have spurred the clash. Israseli military said soldiers had been "carrying out routine maintenance and was pre-coordinated with UNIFIL."
"It started when the Israelis wanted to cut a tree down inside Lebanon," a security source in Lebanon told the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz. "The Lebanese army fired warning shots at them and they responded by shelling."
An Israeli military statement said soldiers " immediately returned fire with light arms," and also "made use of artillery fire." The statement confirmed helicopter fire was also used, saying the aircraft fired at "LAF Battalion Command Center in Al-Taybeh, damaging several LAF armored combat vehicles."
Reports of 4 dead, 4 injured
Lebanese officials identified two injured early Tuesday as Hasan Nazzal, a civilian, and Lebanese soldier Ibrahim Abboud, the Lebanese news outlet Narnarnet reported.
By 2 p.m., Reuters reported two soldiers dead, and 45 minutes later AFP said three soldiers were killed.
The Lebanese-based Al-Manar TV said a high-ranking Israeli army officer was killed in the shelling and Israeli soldiers were trying to pull him out, which Israeli sources denied.
NOW Lebanon's correspondent identified Al-Akhbar daily reporter Assaf Abu Rahhal as killed by Israeli fire in dies in Adeisseh, following reports from the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation that a journalist was injured in the fire was confirmed by Al-Jazeera.
A reporter for the Lebanese Al-Manar TV, identified as Ali Chaayeb, was also reportedly injured.
Lebanon condemns
Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri condemned the Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty from his vacation in Sardinia, Italy, governmental news agencies reported.
The official made a call to the country's President Michel Suleiman, army commander General Jean Qahwaj and UNIFIL officials asking that the team follow up on the clashes.
Speaker of the Lebanese parliament Nabih Berri urged officials to file a complaint against the Israel with the UN Security Council, days after Israel filed a complaint following the reported launch of a Grad-grade projectile from Gaza that landed in Israel on Friday.
Hariri told UNIFIL that he expected the UN to pressure Israel to implement UN Resolution 1701, which called for the demilitarization of the area within the blue line, where UN Interim Forces In Lebanon are stationed.
UNIFIL called on both Israel and Lebanon to exercise "maximum restraint," Lebanese media reported.
Israel's foreign ministry issued a statement holding Lebanon responsible for the incident, saying "Israel sees the firing on an IDF force which acted in coordination with UNIFIL in the border region in the last hours a blunt violation of Security Council Resolution 1701."
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman also said the country held Lebanon as responsible, for what he called a "grave incident," and warned of consequences if similar incidents are reported.
Leaders gather
News outlets in Israel and Lebanon said leaders were meeting to discuss the afternoon clash, with Israeli outlets announcing the opening of War Rooms in the Galilee, while Lebanese officials discussed sending complaints to the UN.
PFLP-GC reported acting in area
Online news agency Naharnet in Lebanon said the country's Voice of Free Lebanon reported "strange activity" in the central Bekaa Valley town of Qoussaya, near the Galilee.
The report said "strange, young bearded men have been seen in PFLP-GC bases in Qoussaya," and quoted locals saying "These elements have started deploying three weeks ago," wearing combat uniforms.
The PFLP-GC is a Palestinian faction, which broke off from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and formed the General Command unit.
Residents of the Galilee told the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz that several loud explosions were heard in the area in the afternoon.
The clashes follow one day after rockets landed in both Israel and Jordan, reportedly fired from the northern Egyptian Sinai. Egyptian security officials denied the claims.
The fire killed one Jordanian taxi driver in the port city of Aqaba.
News outlets said Israeli helicopters arrived on the scene before 2 p.m, and a fighter jet was circling the area as artillery fire slowed.
Al-Jadid TV reported shots fired from the helicopters toward the Lebanese town of Adeisseh, with reports of intermittent artillery fire and at least two homes set ablaze during the thick of the clash.
An Israeli military spokesman denied early reports that rockets were launched from southern Lebanon toward Israel, but confirmed Israeli fire toward a Lebanese military position.
He said reports that Israeli forces had entered Lebanon were false, adding that troops were between the blue line and the security fence.
Israeli news reports said a tank in the upper Galilee opened fire toward a Lebanese army position in southern Lebanon.
Lebanese news reports said Israeli soldiers were operating in the area, with some reports saying forces were attempting to install surveillance equipment, and others claiming the troops were removing trees to facilitate surveillance activity.
The Israeli activity in the area near the border zone appeared to have spurred the clash. Israseli military said soldiers had been "carrying out routine maintenance and was pre-coordinated with UNIFIL."
"It started when the Israelis wanted to cut a tree down inside Lebanon," a security source in Lebanon told the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz. "The Lebanese army fired warning shots at them and they responded by shelling."
An Israeli military statement said soldiers " immediately returned fire with light arms," and also "made use of artillery fire." The statement confirmed helicopter fire was also used, saying the aircraft fired at "LAF Battalion Command Center in Al-Taybeh, damaging several LAF armored combat vehicles."
Reports of 4 dead, 4 injured
Lebanese officials identified two injured early Tuesday as Hasan Nazzal, a civilian, and Lebanese soldier Ibrahim Abboud, the Lebanese news outlet Narnarnet reported.
By 2 p.m., Reuters reported two soldiers dead, and 45 minutes later AFP said three soldiers were killed.
The Lebanese-based Al-Manar TV said a high-ranking Israeli army officer was killed in the shelling and Israeli soldiers were trying to pull him out, which Israeli sources denied.
NOW Lebanon's correspondent identified Al-Akhbar daily reporter Assaf Abu Rahhal as killed by Israeli fire in dies in Adeisseh, following reports from the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation that a journalist was injured in the fire was confirmed by Al-Jazeera.
A reporter for the Lebanese Al-Manar TV, identified as Ali Chaayeb, was also reportedly injured.
Lebanon condemns
Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri condemned the Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty from his vacation in Sardinia, Italy, governmental news agencies reported.
The official made a call to the country's President Michel Suleiman, army commander General Jean Qahwaj and UNIFIL officials asking that the team follow up on the clashes.
Speaker of the Lebanese parliament Nabih Berri urged officials to file a complaint against the Israel with the UN Security Council, days after Israel filed a complaint following the reported launch of a Grad-grade projectile from Gaza that landed in Israel on Friday.
Hariri told UNIFIL that he expected the UN to pressure Israel to implement UN Resolution 1701, which called for the demilitarization of the area within the blue line, where UN Interim Forces In Lebanon are stationed.
UNIFIL called on both Israel and Lebanon to exercise "maximum restraint," Lebanese media reported.
Israel's foreign ministry issued a statement holding Lebanon responsible for the incident, saying "Israel sees the firing on an IDF force which acted in coordination with UNIFIL in the border region in the last hours a blunt violation of Security Council Resolution 1701."
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman also said the country held Lebanon as responsible, for what he called a "grave incident," and warned of consequences if similar incidents are reported.
Leaders gather
News outlets in Israel and Lebanon said leaders were meeting to discuss the afternoon clash, with Israeli outlets announcing the opening of War Rooms in the Galilee, while Lebanese officials discussed sending complaints to the UN.
PFLP-GC reported acting in area
Online news agency Naharnet in Lebanon said the country's Voice of Free Lebanon reported "strange activity" in the central Bekaa Valley town of Qoussaya, near the Galilee.
The report said "strange, young bearded men have been seen in PFLP-GC bases in Qoussaya," and quoted locals saying "These elements have started deploying three weeks ago," wearing combat uniforms.
The PFLP-GC is a Palestinian faction, which broke off from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and formed the General Command unit.
Residents of the Galilee told the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz that several loud explosions were heard in the area in the afternoon.
The clashes follow one day after rockets landed in both Israel and Jordan, reportedly fired from the northern Egyptian Sinai. Egyptian security officials denied the claims.
The fire killed one Jordanian taxi driver in the port city of Aqaba.
Defence for Children International submits evidence of Israeli forces using 14-year-old as human shield to UN, asks for investigation
DCI-Pal - On 3 August 2010, DCI-Palestine submitted a case involving the use of a child as a human shield to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture for further investigation.
DCI-Palestine has received credible evidence that on 16 April 2010, a 14-year-old boy was used as a human shield by units of the Israeli army whilst conducting operations in the village of Beit Ummar, near Hebron, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. It is alleged that two soldiers forced the boy to walk in front of them in an attempt to shield the soldiers from stones being thrown during clashes with local Palestinian youths. The boy was subsequently tied, blindfolded and beaten, before being released several hours later, without charge. Part of the incident was photographed and reported in Ma'an News.
The practice of using human shields involves forcing civilians to directly assist in military operations or using them to shield an area or troops from attack. Both of these circumstances expose civilians to physical, and sometimes, mortal danger. Civilians are usually threatened and/or physically coerced into performing these tasks, most of the time at gunpoint. The practice is illegal under both international and Israeli domestic law.
Since April 2004, DCI-Palestine has documented 15 cases involving Palestinian children being used as human shields by the Israeli army. Fourteen of the 15 cases, occurred after the Israeli High Court of Justice ruled the practice to be illegal in October 2005, suggesting that the army is not effectively implementing the Court's decision.
On 7 April 2009, DCI-Israel wrote to the Israeli Ministers of Justice and Defence requesting information regarding what measures the authorities had taken to investigate five specified incidents involving the use of children as human shields. Some seven months later, DCI received a response from the authorities, dated 3 November 2009, requesting further information regarding just one of the incidences referred to, the case of nine-year-old Majed R. who was used as a human shield during the war in Gaza. Two soldiers were subsequently charged in the case with deviating from authority to the extent of endangering life or health and unbecoming behaviour, in circumstances where the child was forced at gunpoint to search bags thought to potentially contain explosives. A decision has yet to be handed down in the case. As far as DCI is aware, no other investigations leading to charges have been conducted in the 14 other documented cases, and the authorities have not requested any further information.
DCI reiterates its position that full and impartial investigations meeting international standards must be carried out in all cases involving the use of children as human shields, and that the army be given adequate training and supervision to ensure compliance with the 2005 ruling of the Israeli High Court of Justice.
The 14-year-old boy the subject of the present complaint continues to experience behavioural problems, lack of concentration and memory loss since reportedly being used as a human shield in April 2010.
DCI-Palestine has received credible evidence that on 16 April 2010, a 14-year-old boy was used as a human shield by units of the Israeli army whilst conducting operations in the village of Beit Ummar, near Hebron, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. It is alleged that two soldiers forced the boy to walk in front of them in an attempt to shield the soldiers from stones being thrown during clashes with local Palestinian youths. The boy was subsequently tied, blindfolded and beaten, before being released several hours later, without charge. Part of the incident was photographed and reported in Ma'an News.
Since April 2004, DCI-Palestine has documented 15 cases involving Palestinian children being used as human shields by the Israeli army. Fourteen of the 15 cases, occurred after the Israeli High Court of Justice ruled the practice to be illegal in October 2005, suggesting that the army is not effectively implementing the Court's decision.
| # | Name | Date of incident | Age at incident | Nature of incident |
| 1 | M.B. | 15 Apr 04 | 13 | Tied to the bonnet of a military jeep for four hours during clashes. |
October 2005 Israeli High Court rules that the use of civilians as human shields is illegal | ||||
| 2 | A.E. | 26 Feb 07 | 15 | Forced at gunpoint to walk in front of soldiers during clashes. |
| 3 | J.D. | 28 Feb 07 | 11 | Forced at gunpoint to walk in front of soldiers and enter an abandoned house in search of combatants. |
| 4 | I.M. | 11 Apr 07 | 14 | Forced to sit for 15 minutes on the bonnet of a jeep during clashes. |
| 5 | O.G. | 11 Apr 07 | 15 | Forced to sit for 10 minutes on the bonnet of a jeep during clashes. |
| 6 | R.N. | 11 Jul 07 | 14 | Wounded whilst being forced to evacuate a house. |
| 7 | A.S. | 04 Jan 09 | 14 | Detained for 10 days and forced to search houses during war in Gaza. |
| 8 | A.A. | 05 Jan 09 | 15 | Detained close to military operations for four days during war in Gaza. |
| 9 | A.A. | 05 Jan 09 | 16 | Detained close to military operations for four days during war in Gaza. |
| 10 | N.A. | 05 Jan 09 | 17 | Detained close to military operations for four days during war in Gaza. |
| 11 | K.A. | 05 Jan 09 | 15 | Detained close to military operations for four days during war in Gaza. |
| 12 | H.A. | 05 Jan 09 | 12 | Detained close to military operations for four days during war in Gaza. |
| 13 | Majed R. | 15 Jan 09 | 9 | Forced at gunpoint to search bags thought to contain explosives during war in Gaza. |
| 14 | D.A. | 18 Feb 10 | 16 | Forced at gunpoint to search for a weapon. |
| 15 | S.A. | 16 Apr 10 | 14 | Forced at gunpoint to walk in front of soldiers during clashes. |
DCI reiterates its position that full and impartial investigations meeting international standards must be carried out in all cases involving the use of children as human shields, and that the army be given adequate training and supervision to ensure compliance with the 2005 ruling of the Israeli High Court of Justice.
The 14-year-old boy the subject of the present complaint continues to experience behavioural problems, lack of concentration and memory loss since reportedly being used as a human shield in April 2010.
Israel releases 57-year-old woman after 14 days of detention, "harshly interrogated"
Ma'an – Israeli authorities released a Palestinian woman with Jordanian citizenship from detention after holding her for 14 days, the Tulkarem resident said in a statement Tuesday.
Fathiyeh Swess, 57, said she was "harshly interrogated," was barred from sleep, and made to stand for long hours while she was held at the Al-Julmah detention center. She said Israeli officers threatened to detain her brothers and often verbally assaulted her.
She described the detention center as "bad and terrible," adding that the cells "were not fit for human beings and smell bad." Swess further said the food was inedible and that prison staff treated and interrogated detainees in "inhumane ways."
Head of the Ahrar Detainees Center Foad Al-Khafsh said Swess, the oldest woman in Israeli custody, was released after authorities could not charge her and failed to coerce a false confession from her.
Fathiyeh Swess, 57, said she was "harshly interrogated," was barred from sleep, and made to stand for long hours while she was held at the Al-Julmah detention center. She said Israeli officers threatened to detain her brothers and often verbally assaulted her.
She described the detention center as "bad and terrible," adding that the cells "were not fit for human beings and smell bad." Swess further said the food was inedible and that prison staff treated and interrogated detainees in "inhumane ways."
Head of the Ahrar Detainees Center Foad Al-Khafsh said Swess, the oldest woman in Israeli custody, was released after authorities could not charge her and failed to coerce a false confession from her.
Two Lebanese soldiers killed in border clash with Israeli troops, homes set ablaze, civlians injured
Ma'an - Lebanon-based Al-Manar TV reported two Lebanese soldiers were killed and at least two civilians injured in an ongoing exchange of fire with Israeli troops along the Israel-Lebanon border that began shortly after noon on Tuesday.
News outlets said Israeli helicopters arrived on the scene before 2p.m., with Al-Jadid TV reporting shots fired by the helicopters toward the Lebanese town of Adeisseh, with reports of intermittent artillery fire, and at least two homes set ablaze.
An Israeli military spokesman denied reports that rockets were launched from southern Lebanon toward Israel, but confirmed Israeli fire toward a Lebanese military position. He said reports that Israeli forces had entered Lebanon were false, adding that troops were between the blue line and the security fence.
Israeli news reports said a tank in the upper Galilee opened fire toward a Lebanese army position in southern Lebanon, responding to Lebanese fire.
2 dead, injured
Lebanese officials identified the two injured in Tuesday's clash as Hasan Nazzal, a civilian, and Lebanese soldier Ibrahim Abboud, Narnarnet reported, with Reuters saying that by 2 o'clock, clashes had killed two soldiers.
PFLP-GC reported acting in area
Online news agency Naharnet in Lebanon said the country's Voice of Free Lebanon reported "strange activity" in the central Bekaa Valley town of Qoussaya, near the Galilee.
The report said "strange, young bearded men have been seen in PFLP-GC bases in Qoussaya," and quoted locals saying "These elements have started deploying three weeks ago," wearing combat uniforms.
The PFLP-GC is a Palestinian faction, which broke off from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and formed the General Command unit.
Residents of the Galilee told the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz that several loud explosions were heard in the area in the afternoon.
The clashes follow one day after rockets landed in both Israel and Jordan, reportedly fired from the northern Egyptian Sinai. Egyptian security officials denied the claims.
The fire killed one Jordanian taxi driver in the port city of Aqaba.
News outlets said Israeli helicopters arrived on the scene before 2p.m., with Al-Jadid TV reporting shots fired by the helicopters toward the Lebanese town of Adeisseh, with reports of intermittent artillery fire, and at least two homes set ablaze.
An Israeli military spokesman denied reports that rockets were launched from southern Lebanon toward Israel, but confirmed Israeli fire toward a Lebanese military position. He said reports that Israeli forces had entered Lebanon were false, adding that troops were between the blue line and the security fence.
Israeli news reports said a tank in the upper Galilee opened fire toward a Lebanese army position in southern Lebanon, responding to Lebanese fire.
2 dead, injured
Lebanese officials identified the two injured in Tuesday's clash as Hasan Nazzal, a civilian, and Lebanese soldier Ibrahim Abboud, Narnarnet reported, with Reuters saying that by 2 o'clock, clashes had killed two soldiers.
PFLP-GC reported acting in area
Online news agency Naharnet in Lebanon said the country's Voice of Free Lebanon reported "strange activity" in the central Bekaa Valley town of Qoussaya, near the Galilee.
The report said "strange, young bearded men have been seen in PFLP-GC bases in Qoussaya," and quoted locals saying "These elements have started deploying three weeks ago," wearing combat uniforms.
The PFLP-GC is a Palestinian faction, which broke off from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and formed the General Command unit.
Residents of the Galilee told the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz that several loud explosions were heard in the area in the afternoon.
The clashes follow one day after rockets landed in both Israel and Jordan, reportedly fired from the northern Egyptian Sinai. Egyptian security officials denied the claims.
The fire killed one Jordanian taxi driver in the port city of Aqaba.
Israeli forces raid West Bank villages, abduct eight
Ma'an - Israeli forces took eight men from their homes and villages in the West Bank overnight, and transported them to an unknown location for questioning, a military official said.
Seven of those detained were from the village of Azzun, east of Qalqiliya, following a large entrance of Israeli forces into the region.
An eighth man was taken from the university town of Birzeit north of Ramallah.
All were taken for questioning as suspects of "terrorist activity," an Israeli military spokesman said.
Seven of those detained were from the village of Azzun, east of Qalqiliya, following a large entrance of Israeli forces into the region.
An eighth man was taken from the university town of Birzeit north of Ramallah.
All were taken for questioning as suspects of "terrorist activity," an Israeli military spokesman said.
Israel approves construction of 40 housing units in illegal East J'lem settlement
Ma'an - The Jerusalem Municipality’s planning committee approved the construction of 40 housing units on Monday in an illegal settlement in occupied East Jerusalem, Israeli media reported.
The approvals are part of a wider plan to construct 220 new houses in the Pisgat Ze’ev settlement, Israeli news site Ynet said, adding that 32 houses were approved last month.
The news comes as Palestinian negotiators demand an extension of the partial, temporary settlement freeze, which expires in September, as a precondition for direct talks to resume.
Palestinian officials have said that Israel cannot be considered a serious partner for peace while it continues to build illegal settlements on land which would be a future Palestinian state under any peace agreement.
The approvals are part of a wider plan to construct 220 new houses in the Pisgat Ze’ev settlement, Israeli news site Ynet said, adding that 32 houses were approved last month.
The news comes as Palestinian negotiators demand an extension of the partial, temporary settlement freeze, which expires in September, as a precondition for direct talks to resume.
Palestinian officials have said that Israel cannot be considered a serious partner for peace while it continues to build illegal settlements on land which would be a future Palestinian state under any peace agreement.
Israel prevents wife and children of deportee from traveling to Jordan to visit him in Gaza
Ma'an – "Nativity deportee says family denied entry to Jordan" - Israeli authorities on Friday stopped the wife and children of a Palestinian exiled by Israel following the siege of the Church of Nativity, the deportee said.
Naji Ubayyat said his family was en route to visit him in Gaza, hoping to travel from Jordan to Egypt and then over the Rafah crossing.
He added that this was the second time his family had been denied entry to Jordan by Israeli authorities, who he said did not provide an explanation for their decision.
The deportee called on President Mahmoud Abbas, chief PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat and Civil Affairs chief Hussein Ash-Sheikh to assist his family either by getting them permission to cross through the Erez crossing to the north of Gaza or via Rafah.
Ubayyat is one of 38 Palestinians exiled from the West Bank after Israeli forces laid siege to the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem in 2002 during Operation Defensive Shield. Twelve Palestinians were exiled to Europe and the rest were deported to Gaza.
Naji Ubayyat said his family was en route to visit him in Gaza, hoping to travel from Jordan to Egypt and then over the Rafah crossing.
He added that this was the second time his family had been denied entry to Jordan by Israeli authorities, who he said did not provide an explanation for their decision.
The deportee called on President Mahmoud Abbas, chief PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat and Civil Affairs chief Hussein Ash-Sheikh to assist his family either by getting them permission to cross through the Erez crossing to the north of Gaza or via Rafah.
Ubayyat is one of 38 Palestinians exiled from the West Bank after Israeli forces laid siege to the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem in 2002 during Operation Defensive Shield. Twelve Palestinians were exiled to Europe and the rest were deported to Gaza.
'Never in My Life have I Experienced Such Pressure'
Miftah - On July 29, the Arab League gave the Palestinians the green light to enter into direct negotiations with Israel, but said the final decision was President Mahmoud Abbas as to when the time was right to move forward. Qatari Foreign Affairs Minister Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Ath-Thani, who headed the meeting said that while "there is agreement, it is an agreement over the principles of what will be discussed and the manner of the direct negotiations," adding that he was "full of doubts" over Israel's seriousness.
Abbas, who was at the session held in Cairo, asked his fellow Arab leaders to continue to back the proximity talks until the original four-month period was over, saying the Palestinians would not return to direct talks until progress in proximity talks were made and Israel froze settlement construction. That is unlikely to happen, however, according to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on July 28, who told Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Moratinos in Jerusalem that continuing the construction freeze in settlements "would be impossible politically."
Nonetheless, the Palestinian President remains under immense pressure to return to talks. "Never in my life have I experienced such pressure," he said.
In this regard, PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi also described this pressure on the Palestinians in an interview with the Palestinian press on July 30. Ashrawi explained that the US has put such tremendous pressure on the Palestinian government to start up direct negotiations, it has come down to the message of "no one will stand by you or support you if you say 'no.'"
This pressure was not only from the United States. On July 25, the Palestinian press reported that President Abbas had received phone calls from German Chancellor Angela Merkel, British Prime Minister David Cameron and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, all urging the President to start direct talks with Israel.
Meanwhile, Israel is stepping up measures in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem. On July 30, 40-year-old Issa Batran from Hamas' military wing was killed in an Israeli bombing near the Nuseirat refugee camp. Eight others were injured. Israel bombed the Strip overnight in what Palestinians are calling the heaviest bombardment since the war on Gaza over a year ago. Israeli military sources say the bombings came after a Grad missile was fired into Israeli territory, falling in Asqalan. The National Resistance Committee claimed responsibility for the rocket, which caused no casualties.
Still, Israel wasted no time, lodging a complaint with the United Nations about Palestinian mortar and rocket fire from Gaza, claiming that they violate international law. "In response to the escalating threat of terrorism, Israel will exercise its right of self-defense and will continue to take all necessary measures to protect its citizens," Israel's UN ambassador Gabriela Shalev wrote to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.
In the West Bank, settlers have gone on rampages, particularly in the north near the city of Nablus. On July 30, dozens of settlers raided the village of Bourin, setting fire to the fields. The settlers, mostly from the illegal settlement of Bracha, broke into a new home still under construction in the village and tried to demolish it before being stopped by villagers and Israeli soldiers who intervened. In the ensuing clashes, the Israeli army tear gassed the villagers to disperse the crowds. The settlers, who started their rampage into the village three days earlier, were protesting the Israeli government decision to remove mobile homes in a settlement outpost near Bracha. On July 26, the first of the clashes broke out in Bourin during which three settlers and four Palestinians were injured.
In Jerusalem, nine families found themselves homeless on July 29 when Jewish settlers forced them from their apartment building in the Saadiyeh neighborhood of the Old City. The Qirresh family said Jewish settlers forced themselves into their homes after claiming ownership of the building. The family filed a petition with an Israeli court demanding an immediate evacuation of the settlers but must wait until July 31 for a hearing. Meanwhile the families spent the night outside their blocked off homes in the streets in hopes that the army, which stood by for the settlers' protection, blocked their entry into the houses.
UNRWA condemned the settler takeover, saying that two of the nine families are registered refugees and must be protected. UN Special Envoy to the Middle East Robert Serry also denounced the takeover, saying it was an "act of provocation at a critical time in the international community’s efforts to move the peace process forward.”
Inside Israel, the Bedouin village of Al Araqeeb was wiped off the map on July 27 when Israeli bulldozers with a backup of 1,300 policemen literally demolished the entire village. The government justified the move by saying the village never obtained official recognition and was therefore illegal. Thirty homes were torn down and trees uprooted.
Abbas, who was at the session held in Cairo, asked his fellow Arab leaders to continue to back the proximity talks until the original four-month period was over, saying the Palestinians would not return to direct talks until progress in proximity talks were made and Israel froze settlement construction. That is unlikely to happen, however, according to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on July 28, who told Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Moratinos in Jerusalem that continuing the construction freeze in settlements "would be impossible politically."
Nonetheless, the Palestinian President remains under immense pressure to return to talks. "Never in my life have I experienced such pressure," he said.
In this regard, PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi also described this pressure on the Palestinians in an interview with the Palestinian press on July 30. Ashrawi explained that the US has put such tremendous pressure on the Palestinian government to start up direct negotiations, it has come down to the message of "no one will stand by you or support you if you say 'no.'"
This pressure was not only from the United States. On July 25, the Palestinian press reported that President Abbas had received phone calls from German Chancellor Angela Merkel, British Prime Minister David Cameron and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, all urging the President to start direct talks with Israel.
Meanwhile, Israel is stepping up measures in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem. On July 30, 40-year-old Issa Batran from Hamas' military wing was killed in an Israeli bombing near the Nuseirat refugee camp. Eight others were injured. Israel bombed the Strip overnight in what Palestinians are calling the heaviest bombardment since the war on Gaza over a year ago. Israeli military sources say the bombings came after a Grad missile was fired into Israeli territory, falling in Asqalan. The National Resistance Committee claimed responsibility for the rocket, which caused no casualties.
Still, Israel wasted no time, lodging a complaint with the United Nations about Palestinian mortar and rocket fire from Gaza, claiming that they violate international law. "In response to the escalating threat of terrorism, Israel will exercise its right of self-defense and will continue to take all necessary measures to protect its citizens," Israel's UN ambassador Gabriela Shalev wrote to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.
In the West Bank, settlers have gone on rampages, particularly in the north near the city of Nablus. On July 30, dozens of settlers raided the village of Bourin, setting fire to the fields. The settlers, mostly from the illegal settlement of Bracha, broke into a new home still under construction in the village and tried to demolish it before being stopped by villagers and Israeli soldiers who intervened. In the ensuing clashes, the Israeli army tear gassed the villagers to disperse the crowds. The settlers, who started their rampage into the village three days earlier, were protesting the Israeli government decision to remove mobile homes in a settlement outpost near Bracha. On July 26, the first of the clashes broke out in Bourin during which three settlers and four Palestinians were injured.
In Jerusalem, nine families found themselves homeless on July 29 when Jewish settlers forced them from their apartment building in the Saadiyeh neighborhood of the Old City. The Qirresh family said Jewish settlers forced themselves into their homes after claiming ownership of the building. The family filed a petition with an Israeli court demanding an immediate evacuation of the settlers but must wait until July 31 for a hearing. Meanwhile the families spent the night outside their blocked off homes in the streets in hopes that the army, which stood by for the settlers' protection, blocked their entry into the houses.
UNRWA condemned the settler takeover, saying that two of the nine families are registered refugees and must be protected. UN Special Envoy to the Middle East Robert Serry also denounced the takeover, saying it was an "act of provocation at a critical time in the international community’s efforts to move the peace process forward.”
Inside Israel, the Bedouin village of Al Araqeeb was wiped off the map on July 27 when Israeli bulldozers with a backup of 1,300 policemen literally demolished the entire village. The government justified the move by saying the village never obtained official recognition and was therefore illegal. Thirty homes were torn down and trees uprooted.
Rights group: Silence over Israeli airstrikes spurs impunity - 64 civilians injured
Ma'an - Palestinian rights group Al-Mezan warned Monday that the international community’s silence over Israel’s escalation of attacks on Gaza encourages Israel to violate international law with impunity, a statement read.
The human rights center conducted field investigations of the damage caused by the weekend’s airstrikes, which killed one Palestinian and injured more than 21, and damaged 30 houses and institutions.
A series of aerial attacks overnight on Friday hit the former presidential compound east of Gaza City, while a separate attack on the central Gaza Strip killed Issa Abdul-Hadi Al-Batran, 41. Al-Batran had lost his wife and five of his children in an airstrike in January 2009 during Israel’s war on the Strip.
The same night, Israeli warplanes fired missiles at the Gaza-Egypt border in Rafah.
Israel continued to launch missiles at Rafah on Sunday morning, while an aerial attack east of Khan Younis injured one civilian.
The Israeli military said the raids were in response to projectiles launched into Israel from the coastal enclave.
Monday morning, medics reported that 42 civilians were injured by a missile fired by an Israeli F16 fighter jet, however an Israeli military spokeswoman said there was no army or air force activity overnight.
Al-Mezan called for international intervention to protect the civilian population of Gaza against Israeli attacks, which residents have said are reminiscent of Operation Cast Lead.
The human rights center conducted field investigations of the damage caused by the weekend’s airstrikes, which killed one Palestinian and injured more than 21, and damaged 30 houses and institutions.
A series of aerial attacks overnight on Friday hit the former presidential compound east of Gaza City, while a separate attack on the central Gaza Strip killed Issa Abdul-Hadi Al-Batran, 41. Al-Batran had lost his wife and five of his children in an airstrike in January 2009 during Israel’s war on the Strip.
The same night, Israeli warplanes fired missiles at the Gaza-Egypt border in Rafah.
Israel continued to launch missiles at Rafah on Sunday morning, while an aerial attack east of Khan Younis injured one civilian.
The Israeli military said the raids were in response to projectiles launched into Israel from the coastal enclave.
Monday morning, medics reported that 42 civilians were injured by a missile fired by an Israeli F16 fighter jet, however an Israeli military spokeswoman said there was no army or air force activity overnight.
Al-Mezan called for international intervention to protect the civilian population of Gaza against Israeli attacks, which residents have said are reminiscent of Operation Cast Lead.
Lebanon arrests another alleged Israel spy - fourth telecommunications official arrested this year
Ma'an - Lebanese security forces last week arrested another senior official from the state's telecommunications network suspected of spying on behalf of Israel, Lebanese media reported.
Milad Eid, 66, is the fourth telecommunications official arrested this year in an alleged ring linked to Israel's intelligence service, the Israeli daily Haaretz reported quoting a Lebanese newspaper.
Eid is a senior technician at Ogero, the state-owned company that runs the country's land-line telephone. He retired last year and was then brought back to serve in the administrative position.
On 17 July, Lebanese security forces detained a third national suspected of spying for Israel via Lebanon's telecommunication sector, Agence France-Presse reported.
In response, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said Israel had complete control over Lebanon's telecommunication sector, calling for convicted spies to be hanged amid a widening probe into acts of espionage.
Lebanon has arrested three suspects over the past month in an expanding probe into an alleged network of Israeli spies employed in the country's telecommunication sector, the newswire reported.
Two of the alleged spies, technician Charbel Azzi and Tarek Al-Rabaa, were likely accomplices at the company Alfa, one of Lebanon's two mobile service providers, a source close to the investigation told AFP. Al-Rabaa was reportedly a transmissions engineer.
The third suspect was arrested and "is a former employee in Lebanon's telecommunications sector," the source said.
Two Lebanese citizens have already been sentenced to death for "collaborating with Israel and providing information on targets," with one of the two found guilty of providing Israel with targeting information during the 2006 war, AFP reported.
Milad Eid, 66, is the fourth telecommunications official arrested this year in an alleged ring linked to Israel's intelligence service, the Israeli daily Haaretz reported quoting a Lebanese newspaper.
Eid is a senior technician at Ogero, the state-owned company that runs the country's land-line telephone. He retired last year and was then brought back to serve in the administrative position.
On 17 July, Lebanese security forces detained a third national suspected of spying for Israel via Lebanon's telecommunication sector, Agence France-Presse reported.
In response, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said Israel had complete control over Lebanon's telecommunication sector, calling for convicted spies to be hanged amid a widening probe into acts of espionage.
Lebanon has arrested three suspects over the past month in an expanding probe into an alleged network of Israeli spies employed in the country's telecommunication sector, the newswire reported.
Two of the alleged spies, technician Charbel Azzi and Tarek Al-Rabaa, were likely accomplices at the company Alfa, one of Lebanon's two mobile service providers, a source close to the investigation told AFP. Al-Rabaa was reportedly a transmissions engineer.
The third suspect was arrested and "is a former employee in Lebanon's telecommunications sector," the source said.
Two Lebanese citizens have already been sentenced to death for "collaborating with Israel and providing information on targets," with one of the two found guilty of providing Israel with targeting information during the 2006 war, AFP reported.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
