Palestinian boys in Nabi Saleh village present a Red Card to an Israeli lieutenant
Photo: Issam Rimawi
The
Eurovision Song Contest, held annually among the member countries of the
European Broadcasting Union, is very important to Israelis. Is perhaps more
important to them than to the Europeans themselves. Israelis want very much to
be part of Europe. It is important to Israelis who originally came from Europe,
and perhaps even more important to Israelis who originally came from countries
outside Europe. It is important to Israelis to be part of the Eurovision Song Contest, as
it is important to them to be part of the European Soccer Championships and the
European Basketball Championships and the European Association of Scientific Exchanges
and numerous other European organizations and associations. It is only the
European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg which most Israeli citizens would
prefer stay away from (at one time, this court strongly criticized the acts of the British army
and security services in Northern Ireland…)
This
is a tremendous manifestation of reaching out across borders, linking hands between
different countries, different cultures!" announced the three moderators
to the crowd of thousands at the huge hall in Vienna and the audience of
millions at their TV screens at home. Some doubt can be cast on the
inter-cultural part, given that almost all the songs were sung in English rather
than the national language of the participating countries, and that song after song
seemed all derived from a single culture – a rather shallow culture,
originating in the United States of the Twentieth Century, though the Americans
themselves did not take part in this European event.
Also
the song "Golden Boy" sung there by the young Israeli Nadav Guedj did not deviate much from this rule, the main Israeli
element in it being the refrain "Let me show you Tel Aviv." Before
Guedj came on Israel, like the other participating countries, got a chance to present
two minutes of its characteristic landscapes to the audience of millions across
Europe. In the Israeli footage, a few seconds of the hotel-lined beach of Tel Aviv flashed
across the screen, followed by a long leisurely shot of alpine vistas of a snow-covered mountain complete
with cable car taking skiers to the summit – undoubtedly the most European landscape
which Israel could present. No one bothered to mention to European viewers that
this was in fact snowy Mount Hermon, part of the Golan Heights which Israel
captured from Syria and whose unilateral annexation aroused at the time strong
reactions from Europe. Of course, as long as the Syrian Civil War lasts, Israel
has a respite from pressures to give
back that particular area.
In
truth, even if there was not very much of a real bridging of cultures, this
musical event did see some bridging political differences. Despite all the
tensions around Ukraine, the Russian song (in English) garnered considerable
support and was in lead for much of the competition, though eventually
overtaken by the Swedish song (in English).
In
all, the Israeli public felt satisfied with their Guedj, who managed to gain 97
points and ended at the ninth place in Europe. "I feel that I won, it was
an experience greater than life, an enormous experience, I was told that people
in the streets were talking about the song contest, I got a lot of likes on
Facebook and people wrote nice compliments like 'With God's help you have
warmed the hearts of the entire Jewish People'. One can sum up that in the political
universe we are in a bad international situation but in the universe of music
and interpersonal relations, Israel is much beloved and desired”.
For a
moment the political universe did threaten to invade the podium of the
Eurovision Song Contest. The Hungarian Singers who presented at the contest the song "Wars in Vain" originally
intended to illustrate their anti-war message with a clip of slides referring
to specific wars in the past year and the number of their victims – included among
other things, the words "Gaza 2014:
two-thirds of the victims were civilians, including over 500 children”.
But the Israeli Ambassador to Budapest had taken decisive action in time,
approaching the Hungarian government and pointing out that political statements
are not allowed in the Eurovision. It worked, and the offending video clip was censored,
and the European viewers were spared the reference to the children killed in
Gaza.
Tzipi
Hotovely, who was appointed as Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister when Netanyahu
decided to keep this portfolio in his own hands, came up with a different
approach to Israel’s position in the international arena. Upon taking office
she convened the senior diplomats charged with representing Israel around the
world, and urged them to play down the argument that Israel needs the
territories it occupied in 1967 for security reasons. Instead, they should say
loud and clear that the land belongs to the Jews since God Himself promised it to
them. Hotoveli provided the diplomats with a quote from the great commentator
Rashi (Rabbi Shalomo Yitzchaki). Already in his lifetime in Medieval France –
so explained the new Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs - Rashi foresaw that
one day the Jews would need to justify their rule over the Promised Land. When
faced with moral arguments by the Palestinians, who complain that their land
was stolen from them and that they live under oppressive occupation,
representatives of the State of Israel should simply cite the clinching
counter-argument provided by Rashi – simply, that at the very moment of the Creation
of the World, God already designated this land for the exclusive use of the Jews
and them only. Reportedly, the veteran Israeli diplomats were not really
enthusiastic about the new PR line offered by their new boss. For his part, Prime
Minister Netanyahu quickly appointed his loyal Dore Gold as Director General of
the Foreign Ministry. Gold is considered a political hawk, not favorable to the
Palestinians, but religious arguments in politics are not his forte.
US President Barack Obama did not
mention Tzipi Hotovely in his speech at the Adas Israel Synagogue in
Washington, nor in his interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in “The Atlantic ".
He did express his growing concern with the direction Israel is going: “When I think about how
I came to know Israel, it was based on images of … kibbutzim, and Moshe Dayan,
and Golda Meir, and the sense that not only are we creating a safe Jewish
homeland, but also we are remaking the world. We’re repairing it. We are going
to do it the right way. We are going to make sure that the lessons we’ve
learned from our hardships and our persecutions are applied to how we govern
and how we treat others.(…) I want Israel, in the same way that I want the
United States, to embody the Judeo-Christian values and, ultimately then, what
I believe are human or universal values that have led to progress over a
millennium. The same values that led to the end of Jim Crow and slavery. The
same values that led to Nelson Mandela being freed and a multiracial democracy
emerging in South Africa. (…) There has been a very concerted effort on the
part of some political forces to equate being pro-Israel, and hence being
supportive of the Jewish people, with a rubber stamp on a particular set of
policies coming out of the Israeli government. So if you are questioning
settlement policy, that indicates you’re anti-Israeli, or that indicates you’re
anti-Jewish. If you express compassion or empathy towards Palestinian youth,
who are dealing with checkpoints or restrictions on their ability to travel,
then you are suspect in terms of your support of Israel. If you are willing to
get into public disagreements with the Israeli government, then the notion is
that you are being anti-Israel, and by extension, anti-Jewish. I completely
reject that.”
Several
ministers in the Netanyahu cabinet started an outcry about "Obama interfering
in the internal politics of Israel ". The same was also given a banner headline in Netanyahu’s mouthpiece,"Israel
Today “. However, quite a few people on the opposite side of the political
spectrum were less than impressed by the
President‘s impassioned worlds, given the large shipment of arms which Obama
promised to Israel immediately following the inauguration of the new government.
Moreover, the United States took care to nip in the bud Egypt’s efforts to
convene a conference for nuclear disarmament of the Middle East. The Egyptians’
aspiration to have the US demand of Israel the same which is demanded of Iran was
dismissed by American officials as “completely unrealistic”.
This
week a friend of mine, a Liberal American Jew, got a unique opportunity to
speak a few minutes alone with President Obama, and then to continue the
dialogue with him in the framework of a small and intimate audience. As she
later said: "I דsaid that I wanted to talk to him about the
Palestinians, that they are living in hell'. He paused with this
sympathetic look on his face and said “I know” in a strong voice. And I said,
“I was sure you would say that.” But
then, in front of the entire group, he said “The Israeli-Palestinian
conflict which is a mess, and will continue to be a mess for a very long time.
I have consulted with my generals and the CIA, and we all believe that Israel
needs our armaments and all the money we give because she cannot be vulnerable
to terrorism”. My friend came out of the meeting with the
President feeling acutely sad and disappointed. However, it should be noted
that in this meeting – as on other occasions - Obama kept a poker face on the
most sensitive issue: is he, or is he not, going to veto the draft resolution
which France intends to submit to the UN Security Council in September? Under
the proposed French text, the line of June 4, 1967 would be declared the basis
for peace border between Israel and Palestine. Before going seriously into all
that, Obama clearly intends to complete the agreement with Iran – with the target
date of June 30 fast approaching, and a tough fight on Capitol Hill expected to
follow.
***
The Civil
Rights struggle of Black Americans is of fundamental importance to President
Obama and his supporters, among whom Liberal American Jews are prominent. As it
happened, in the direct aftermath of the President's interview Haaretz
published a commentary entitled "The line connecting the Palestinian worker
with Rosa Parks”.
The
occasion for that was the long-lasting, extensive lobbying by West Bank settlers,
demanding that Palestinian workers returning home from work in Israel be
prevented from using the public transportation in which settlers travel.
"For the safety of our children and teens, the young boys and girls from
Samaria, it is unacceptable that they be forced
to travel daily in these buses daily along with thousands of Palestinian
workers. It is very dangerous to their safety and the Arabs also sexually
harass our girls!" declared settler leader Gershon Mesika. Due to the
pressures exerted by the settlers, Defense Minister Ya’alon announced a "test
run" of a new plan, whereby West Bank buses would be reserved for settlers
only, while Palestinian workers
returning from work in Israel (with permits duly issued by the army and
security services...) would be forced to a more tortuous route and go through
security checks, prolong their way home by an average of two hours.
Publication
of the plan sparked a wave of angry responses. Peace groups and left-wing
parties in Israel raised their voices, as did international bodies - and as
also did former Interior Minister Gideon Sa'ar, who six months ago positioned
himself as a potential successor to Prime Minister Netanyahu and who
periodically tries to cultivate a "liberal" image. A blatantly
displayed separation of buses was the last thing Netanyahu needed on the eve of
a crucial visit by the European Union's Commissioner of Foreign Affairs – and
within a few hours, Netanyahu summarily instructed Ya'alon to cancel the separation
program.
The
road connecting Beitin and other Palestinian villages northeast of Ramallah to
the city of Ramallah gained much less media attention - hardly any at all.
Fifteen years ago, during its effort to suppress the Second Intifada, the army
blocked this road to Palestinian traffic and reserved it for the travelling of
settlers only - and not just ordinary settlers, but residents of the Beit El
settlement, where many leaders of the “Judea and Samaria Council" live. The
Palestinians needed to take longer and more difficult routes in order to get to
the city. This week the army announced that, “as part of easing the living
conditions of the Palestinians", it will allow Palestinian traffic on this
road for the first time in fifteen years – though only for private cars, only
in one direction, and only provided that Palestinians drivers "give right
of way to settlers’ cars". After one day and following a stormy
demonstration by the Beit El settlers, the army announced that “the experiment failed”,
and military bulldozers were sent to pile rocks and once again block
Palestinian access to this road.
All
this happened on the day that Prime Minister Netanyahu met in his bureau with
the European Union’s Federica Mogherini. The distinguished guest asked the PM to manifest “a positive attitude conductive to
the reopening of negotiations”. Netanyahu responded with the surprise announcement
that he would be prepared to discuss the demarcation of the "settlement
blocs" in which the State of Israel would be allowed to build and extend
settlements. Until now, Netanyahu (like his predecessors) rejected out of hand any demand to
define the boundaries of these "blocks" - because any attempt to demarcate
them drew howls and outcries of protest from settlers who were left out.
Had Netanyahu
really changed tack? Or is it convenient for him to make proposals regarding
hypothetical negotiations with the Palestinians, knowing that there is
virtually no chance of such negotiations taking place? One of the key conditions
which Palestinians put for resuming negotiations with Israel is a complete freeze
of construction in all settlements, blocks or no blocks. In such negotiations the
idea of a territorial exchange might come
on the agenda. The Palestinians might consent to the annexation by Israel of
some portions of West Bank territory, containing some settlements - provided
that Israel cede in exchange some land within its pre-’67 territory, equal in
its size and quality. Following such an agreement, an understanding might be
reached that Israel will build legitimately on land which it would retain, and
that the Palestinians could also start building on land earmarked to be passed
over to them... All of this does not seem a very realistic vision under the current
Netanyahu government, whose very narrow parliamentary majority depends on several
extreme right-wing nationalists.
Indeed,
Agriculture Minister Uri Ariel of the Jewish Home Party rushed to protest: “If
indeed the Prime Minister told the EU representative what the media reported,
this offer creates a dangerous precedent and is clearly contrary to the first
clause of the Cabinet Program – stating that the Jewish People have an
unquestionable right to a sovereign state in Eretz Israel, our national and
historical homeland ". Netanyahu did not seem really disturbed by the criticism
of Ariel. Indeed, it might have even given him a greater credibility towards the
Europeans. Will this be enough to halt European projects which Netanyahu does
not like, such as marking settlement products entering the European market or
even blocking them altogether? And how would it affect the French intention to
submit the famous draft resolution to the Security Council? The French Foreign Minister
is next in line among the distinguished visitors expected to call on Netanyahu next
month.
Meanwhile, the Palestinians continue
what has been dubbed "The Diplomatic Intifada", and this week the
headlines were taken by their effort to get Israel excluded from the International
Soccer Association, FIFA. Jibril Rajoub, head of the Palestinian Soccer Federation
and a prominent candidate to eventually replace President Mahmoud Abbas, has
brought up a series of charges: the blocking of Palestinians players moving between
the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or to the outside world; manifestations of anti-Arab
racism in Israeli football; and most especially – the participation in the
Israeli soccer league of five clubs based in West Bank settlements. "Doomsday
for Israeli football?" cried the morning papers’ headlines.
"Suspension from FIFA would be a tsunami, we would not be able to play in the
World Cup qualifier, nor compete in any international soccer enterprise, Israeli players will not be able
to play in foreign clubs and foreign players will not be able to come here,"
warned the veteran sports Ya’acov Er’el.
But
suddenly a storm came up from a different direction. Coincidentally or not, the
rumors which circulated for years about corruption and large-scale bribery in
the International Soccer Association
ripened to an open police investigation, just on the eve of the vote on the Palestinian
motion to suspend Israel. The Swiss police conducted a raid on the offices of
FIFA, confiscated documents and placed several senior officials in custody.
"The US is not a soccer power football, but there is a high-profile FBI involvement with the FIFA investigation, the Americans
demanding that the suspects be extradited from Switzerland and be tried in US
courts.”
Nevertheless,
the tense debate of the Palestinian proposal continued throughout the day, with
pro-Palestinian protesters besieging the Zurich FIFA headquarters and
occasionally trying to break in, and rumors circulating about the struggles
behind the scenes. The 75% majority needed to resolve on the suspension of
Israel alternately seeming closer or further away from the Palestinians’ grasp.
And suddenly, Rajoub mounted the podium to make a dramatic announcement:
"The representative of South Africa, whose opinion I highly appreciate, has asked me to withdraw
the motion. So did dozens of delegations from Africa, South America and Europe.
Therefore, I decided to withdraw the motion. This does not mean I give up the struggle".
Instead
of the resolution to suspend Israel, for which they evidently did not succeed
in mustering the required majority, the Palestinians managed to pass a
resolution on the establishment of a supervisory committee of FIFA to look into
fulfillment of the Palestinian demands, especially with regard to the five
settlement clubs playing in the Israeli soccer league. This vote passed with a
vast majority for the Palestinians - 165 support, compared with 18 opposed.
Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quick to declare that "the Palestinian
provocation had failed", and Sports Minister Regev called it “a great
victory". But the Foreign Ministry experts were less enthusiastic. "At
the moneytime, when you drag Israel into a confrontation on vital issues such
as the threat of suspension from FIFA, from the IFF, Israel knows how to create
international alliances to thwart the Palestinian move, even in cases where the
Palestinians seem to have an assured majority" was what senior diplomat Yuval
Rotem, who had coordinated the Israeli diplomatic struggle on the FIFA issue,
told the Y-net news website. He added, however: “Creating this deterrence comes
at a high price: it leads to an erosion of Israel's status, it forces Israel to
spend too much political credit, and puts Israel in a position where she must beg
for the help of friends. It is a bad situation that this campaign has gotten into the sphere of sports
at all. While the battle for FIFA was decided the 90th minute, it is clear that
the main battle is still ahead. Rajoub wears three hats - President of the Palestinian
Soccer Association, Sports Minister and
Chairman of the Palestinian Olympic Committee. There are Olympics in a year. It
started in football today, tomorrow it can be volleyball, handball and
basketball. We
have to stay on our toes and realize there is now a political dimension to
Israeli sports. Also in other sports there are clubs
and teams based in settlements. Once we have gotten in this kind of dynamics,
they will try to entangle us and embarrass us again and again is such
campaigns.
By
pure chance, the dramatic FIFA vote coincides with date set for the protest
march in Jerusalem initiated by Israeli peace and human rights groups to mark
the 48th anniversary of the occupation. To the slogans originally resolved upon
for this march can now be added: When you occupy and oppress, you can’t play soccer
quietly’
End the occupation! Stop the separation!
No to oppression, violence and racism!
Yes to freedom and equality!
Protest March in Jerusalem, Sat. May 30,
2015.
8.00 pm – setting out from the Zion Square
9.30 pm – conclusion of the march, rally
outside the Bew Gate in the Old City wall (Tzahal Square)
The lives and fates of
over four million men and women in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem are
shaped by occupation and separation.
Minors arrests; house
demolitions; political persecution and the suppression of the right to protest;
over 400 administrative detainees; military violence against women;
restrictions to the freedom of movement; lands theft; cutting out water supply;
sexual harassment in checkpoints; revocation of residency; collective
punishment.
Total violation of
human rights
After a year in which
our public sphere has been flooded by acts of violence, a year which seen a
brutal attack on Gaza and a gruesome and bloody war. Yet another year in which
occupation continued and racism intensified. Another year in which the security
budget and the budget for the settlements grow while the economic situation in
Israel has deteriorated
Especially now, after
a new and more racist government has been elected, we all must protest
Marking 48 year for
the 1967 occupation, we say end the occupation. We will stand together to
remind the residence of Jerusalem, who face daily threats of eviction,
demolition or arrest, that there is a different voice and a different way.
We will stand together, because there is no social justice without ending the occupation.
Participating groups:
AIC- alternative information center
coalition of women for peace
Combatants for peace
Daam- workers party
Gush Shalom
Gush Shalom
Hadash- Democratic
front for peace and equality
Israel Social TV
Israel Social TV
Maan-workers union
Machsom Watch
Movement of Democratic women in Israel
New Profile
Socialist struggle movement
Ta'ayush
Tarabut-Hithabrut
Two flags, One future
Machsom Watch
Movement of Democratic women in Israel
New Profile
Socialist struggle movement
Ta'ayush
Tarabut-Hithabrut
Two flags, One future
Peace NGO forum
Yesh Gvul movement
Maan
Women In Black
Yesh Gvul movement
Maan
Women In Black
Contact:
