But can he?

A glittering event, a magnificent photo opportunity. The President of the US, The Prime Minister of Israel, the Head of the Palestinian Authority, assorted Arab leaders, very many TV cameras. A festive launch of the negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. And a clear deadline - within a year the negotiations will be concluded, and there will be an agreement, and there will be peace.

It has happened before. In November 2007, President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice convened the leaders at Annapolis, and the speeches were delivered, and the cameras clicked and transmitted everything live all over the world. And then Bush left the parties alone, to talk to each other, and lay down for a good nap after an excellent meal prepared by the White House cooks. And the parties talked and talked and talked, and meantime the bulldozers worked full steam and the settlements grew apace and the occupation continued to trample the Palestinians to the ground. And a year after the grand conference, there was no peace to be signed. One year after Annapolis, the government of Israel launched an offensive on the Gaza Strip and killed 1300 Palestinians, including hundreds of children.

But this time it will not be like that. It will be completely different. Something has changed. The President of the United States has changed. Barack Hussein Obama is not George W. Bush. He has promised to completely change Bush's policies in all spheres, internal and external. That is why he was elected. He will not settle for an empty photo opportunity. He will take personal charge, and push and pressure with all his force - if not immediately after the conference, at least after the Congressional elections in November. He will not allow the occupation to go on and the settlements to continue growing. When Obama makes a promise he keeps it, by hook or by crook. If Obama promises a peace agreement by September 2011, that's exactly what is going to happen. "Yes, we can!".

Maybe. But Obama still has to prove that he really can.

The Hall of Culture has no smell

Bertolt Brecht was among the most prominent playwrights of the Twentieth Century. A very political and a very left-wing playwright. "The Caucasian Chalk Circle" is among the most well-known plays, which is presented again and again worldwide – and also in Israel. A very political play, a play dealing with fundamental political issues of social justice and revolution. Also with who has the right over the land, those who lived and cultivated it for generations, or those who came to settle and develop the land and erect grandiose enterprises on it. Issues which, among others, are also very relevant to us and to the Palestinians.

The Cameri Theatre in Tel Aviv recently embarked on a new production of "The Caucasian Chalk Circle", which got critical acclaim. The theatre management, like those of other major theaters in Israel, signed a contract to present the play in the "Hall of Culture" recently erected at the settlement of Ariel, in the heart of the occupied West Bank.

In the eyes of the management, the Ariel hall is no different from any other venue for presenting a theater play, and the settlers' money has no smell. But at least some of the actors have a different opinion. They raised their voices in a protest petition and declared their total refusal to perform at a settlement established in an occupied territory, and thereby become accomplices in the violation of International Law.

Ron Nachman, mayor of the settlement of Ariel, vehemently attacked the actors. "Their decision to mix political opinions with their artistic work is unacceptable and smacks of hypocrisy. If they want to be actors, let them play and not mix culture with politics. What, Brecht said that theater is political in its very essence? Brecht? Who is Brecht to teach me about the theater?"

The blog goes on vacation

This blog goes on vacation until the last week of August. Bye!

Is Israel singled out - and why?

Googling for "Israel singled out" + "anti-Semitism" would immediately get you many thousands of results. All over the world, supporters of the policies enacted by the government of Israel are busily churning out article after article, repeating with minor variations the same message - Israel is being unfairly singled out, harshly criticized for the kind of acts which others are allowed to get away with, and the motive is anti-Semitism.

In a way, this is a second line of defense. There had been a time when this kind of people took the line that Israel can do no wrong. That it is an utterly wonderful place, little short of an utopia, a vibrant democracy and the only one in the Middle East, the home of tireless and dauntless pioneers who made the desert bloom. But this way of looking at things had become increasingly difficult to sustain. There have been too many unsavory TV footages of Israeli soldiers broadcast into every home around the globe, too many nasty revelations, quite a few of them by Israel's own dissident citizens...

It is far easier to freely admit that Israel is not blameless, that some of its actions and policies do deserve criticism - but as a matter of fact... the rest of what became quite a long article you can read at: The Other Israel

Israeli culture - 1

The IDF promises – and it keeps its promise. Some weeks ago, Israel's Defence Forces promised the villagers of Al-Farsieyah in the Jordan Valley that their village will be completely destroyed and that they will be left homeless under the open sky. The army promised – and on schedule the soldiers came, the vehicles arrived, the bulldozers were there. The houses were destroyed, the huts were destroyed, the tents were destroyed, the cattle pens were destroyed. Everything, totally everything, was destroyed. It did not take much time, nor a very great effort, to destroy the entire village and wipe it off the earth. (Well, it's a pretty small place, just a bit more than a hundred people ...)

http://adam-keller2.blogspot.com/2010/06/get-out-no-matter-where-to.html

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/idf-destroys-west-bank-village-after-declaring-it-military-zone-1.303098

Not that the soldiers who came to destroy Al-Farsieyah that morning last week were necessarily very bad people. Probably they were ordinary people, ordinary Israeli citizens, soldiers of the usual type. Like most soldiers in most armies in human history, they obeyed orders and carried out the task entrusted to them, to the satisfaction of their commanders.

Israeli law clearly states that there are Manifestly Illegal Orders, orders on which the Black Flag of Illegality flies. A soldier not only can refuse to obey such an order – he must. As set down by the Supreme Court of the State of Israel after the Kafr Kassem Massacre in 1956, an order to place unarmed civilians against the wall and shoot them to death is such an order, a Manifestly Illegal Order.

But that's not what happened in Al-Farsieyah. No one was murdered, thank God. All that happened was that some houses and some structures and some amimal pens were demolished, and that a handful of people who were already very poor will now have to start from scratch. That's all. Is that, too, a manifestly illegal order? Or was it just a plain illegal order, one which is illegal but not manifestly so, in which case the soldier is legally obliged to obey first and ask questions later? Or maybe it's an order which is unpleasant but perfectly legal, according to all the rules and procedures set down in Occupation Law as formulated by the 43-year old Israeli occupation regime?

Only highly expert, experienced lawyers can try to answer such questions - and it is far from sure that even the likes of them can provide any clear and authoritative answer. As the Army Chief of Staff is fond of saying – as does the Minister of Defense – it is unacceptable that every soldier would have to consult with lawyers before going into battle. Even before going into battle against the residents of the a tiny hamlet who do not carry any arms and did not try to put up any resistance to the demolition of their homes.

Israeli culture-2

After three years of renovations the revamped Israel Museum was inaugurated in Jerusalem. The museum renovation project was one of the largest of its kind in Israel, and the cost came to 100 million dollars. In fact, the museum doubled its display space and renewed the entrance pavilion, gardens and exhibitions.

The glittering opening event was attended by President Peres, Prime Minister Netanyahu, Jerusalem Mayor Barkat, Supreme Court President Beinisch as well as ministers, Knesset Members, ambassadors, judges, dignitaries, donors, and members of the cultural elite in Israel.

"I'm so proud of this spiritual as well as artistic achievement which represents in a special way our national character," the president said.

Prime Minister Netanyahu told of his memories from the period before the museum was built: "I grew up not far from here. When we were kids we used to play on this hill. The hill was rocky with a single acorn tree. Now, in place of the acorn, you can find Modigliani, Lifscitz, Pissarro, Van Gogh, the entire culture of the world is represented here in a quiet but astonishing way. The wonderful combination between the values of our heritage and world culture actually constitute the bridge from our past to our future. "

Israeli culture-3

Shir Regev was born 20 years ago at Tuval in the Galilee. When he was born in the Israeli occupation in the West Bank had already been a fact for a whole generation, and he had never known any other reality.

When it was time for a Shir Regev join Israel's army of defense, the most moral army in the world, he did not wait until he could pass basic training, and be posted to a unit, and be ordered to demolish houses in Al-Farsieyah, and then deliberate if the order is legal or illegal. He also did not need to wait for the renovated Israel Museum to open in order to gain some knowledge of the Jewish historical heritage, and of world culture, and of how these two relate to each other. On what was supposed to be his recruitment day, Regev sent a letter to the military:

I believe it is my personal duty to refuse and defect from an army whose main purpose is to serve as an occupation police for maintaining "Israeli order" and imposing it on defenseless and disenfranchised Palestinians. (…)

Since I have the medical profile of a "combat soldier", had I joined the army, there is no doubt I would have been sent to serve this 'Mafiosi' system, which has almost nothing to do with the IDF's designated role as "Defense Forces". This is an army that serves interests in which I do not believe. Therefore, in the dilemma between doing such service and obeying the dictates of my conscience, I have no doubt about where I stand.

Shir Regev is currently serving his third consecutive period of detention. He would probably have to undergo several more prison terms until the military authorities are convinced that he is not made of the stuff of which destroyers of Palestinian homes are made.

For details on delivery letters of support to Shir Regev and protests to the military and civil authorities, click here: http://www.newprofile.org/english/?p=316

Nasty words and white phosphorus bombs

For a whole year Judge Goldstone was attacked. Ministers of the government of Israel daily abused him, and the government's official spokespersons, and its unofficial spokespersons, and its friends and agents all over the world. He was called an enemy of Israel, and a self-hating Jew, and an antisemite, and a servant of the Iranian regime, and a servant of the Apartheid regime. Even at the Bar Mitzvah of his grandson an attempt was made to prevent him from attending. The Goldstone Report was continually denounced as a collection of lies and vicious propaganda.

Still, now the Israel Defense Forces officially informed the UN that in future wars it will take greater care not to use White Phosphorus bombs in civilian areas. It is no coincidence that this was one of the main points in the much-maligned Goldstone Report.

This came too late for the residents of Gaza who got Israeli White Phosphorus burning deep into their living flesh, in a fire which cannot be extinguished. But those who will in the future get visited by the most moral army in the world can give heartfelt thanks to Judge Richard Goldstone.

More about the same

The UN Human Rights Council decided yesterday to establish an International Commission of Inquiry to look into the killings on board the Gaza Flotilla boats. The government of Israel already announced that it will not cooperate with this commission.

That's how it started with Goldstone, too.

Death in the Fire Zone

In April 2003 the British peace activist Tom Hurndall was fatally wounded at Rafah in the Gaza Strip. The city of Rafah was then the scene of daily attacks and clashes with Israeli forces stationed nearby, whose presence was then considered "vital to national security." (Two years later, it was decided to evacuate them  far too late for Hurndall as for too many others.

Raphael Cohen, a fellow peace activist from London, described what happened: "Palestinian homes in the area were under fire. Bullets flew over the heads of children, and hit the wall behind them, about the height of the second floor. The frightened children began to run, but some went exactly in the most dangerous direction. Tom saw it and ran toward them. He saved a little boy and took him to a sheltered spot and then returned to take two girls who were in the fire zone. Suddenly he was shot in the head and collapsed." Hurndall was taken unconscious to the hospital and never woke up again. He died nine months later.

Sergeant  Taysir Hayb, who killed Tom Hurndall, was a member of the Desert Patrol Battalion of the Israeli Defense Forces - the official name of the unit in which are concentrated most of the Bedouins who join the army, hoping (usually in vain) to come nearer to a situation of equality in the country of which they are citizens. (Recently we had a case where a Bedouin received on the same day a call-up order and a demolition order for his home...)

Sergeant Taysir Hayb did not know that he killed a British peace activist. He did know that there was a "red line" declared by the army at the edge of the town of Rafah, that anyone who passes this line enters into a "fire zone", becoming suspected of being a terrorist, and that a soldier needed no special permission before shooting at such a person. Hayb probably did that several times before the evening when he took a sniper rifle and fired through telescopic sight at the figure he saw in the evening darkness between the houses of Rafah. In his initial report Hayb stated that he had shot in self-defense at a man armed with a pistol, who threatened himself and his fellows. At that time, nobody asked very many questions.

Had it been a Palestinian who was shot, the story would have ended with another grieving family added to thousands of such families throughout the Gaza Strip, and another anonymous name added to the long, long list of casualties. But as the killed person was British, the case came up prominently in the media at London, the British government continued pressing the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem with ever more questions, the Foreign Ministry contacted the Ministry of Defense, and eventually the military police arrived at Sergeant Taysir Hayb's door and he arrived at the dock in the Southern Command's Court Martial.

The judges ruled that Taysir Hayb's testimony before them had been miserable, confused and full of contradictions, that he had lied in his initial deposition and that he had knowingly shot an unarmed man who did not threaten him. They found him guilty of killing Tom Randall and sent him to eight years in prison.

But the Israel Defense Forces still care for its own. This week, after the was forgotten and disappeared from the headlines, a military committee decided to shorten Hayb's sentence, and soon he will be set free.

Meanwhile, the IDF is no longer in Rafah. But it is still stationed in many other locations on the border of the Gaza Strip. And it still declares "red lines" the passing of which causes one to enter a "fire zone", to be suspected of being terrorist and to be liable to be shot on the spot. But the army has advanced, and the task is no longer given to the Bedouins of the Desert Patrol Battalion.

Nowadays, everything is electronically sophisticated. Throughout the Gaza border area, machine-gun positions are linked to TV cameras, and they can be shot by remote control from secure and protected command centers several kilometers away. As the army reported with more than a bit of pride a few weeks ago, the unit responsible for the whole complex is composed purely of women – truly the height of Feminism. The most talented of the eighteen-year old girls joining the army in every annual recruiting cycle are given long and arduous training. At the end they are ready to take charge of a TV screen showing the situation on one sector of the border and of the remote-control machine-gun trigger, ready to flood the "Fire Zone" near the border with a deadly barrage. They themselves are never in any danger, other than perhaps some bad dreams at night.

As reported by the army, the young women's supervision of the Gaza border area is highly successful, and they have already succeeded in killing several dozen terrorists who were plotting to infiltrate Israel. Were they really all terrorists? This will be probably be looked at after the next British victim.