It's Almost Supernatural

Conditions for Palestinians in Lebanon Improve...Slightly

It is rarely reported that Palestinian refugees living in Lebanon have been barred from more than 70 professions. Things now seem to be improving ever so slightly: Palestinian Refugees Permitted ‘Some’ Work In Lebanon. 

Hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon welcomed as a "first step" a Lebanese government decision on Monday allowing Palestinians born in Lebanon to practice a limited number of professions they were excluded from for 57 years. There are 400,000 registered Palestinian refugees living in Lebanon, 90% of whom were born there. Anyone aged 57 or younger will benefit from the work permit. The move brings Lebanon more in line with other Arab countries who long ago granted Palestinian refugees the right to work, and in some cases have offered them citizenship. However, despite the new measure, Palestinian workers in Lebanon will be restricted to manual and clerical work. "They can work in a company or as a guard but not as doctors or engineers, for example; it is not really fair," said DFLP member Suhail al-Natour.

The strategy of the Arab world has always been to persist the plight of the Palestinian people. By ensuring that their conditions did not improve the Arab world has used them as a pawn around which a rallying point for Israeli hatred was created.

Is Zim Preparing for Something?

Reader Trevor forwarded me the this link about Zimbabwe asking all people to surrender their automatic weapons to their nearest police station.

Strange.

Israeli Soldier Found Guilty of Manslaughter

Wahid Taysir, the Israeli Arab soldier who shot and killed British pro-Palestinian activist Tom Hundall, has been convicted by an Israeli court and faces up to 20 years in prison.

Hopefully the Palestinians are watching not in glee, but in awe. Hopefully they too, will one day be able to rule in favour of the side they are at war with, in an open and transparent court.

CASTINA MILITARY BASE, Israel - A military court convicted an Israeli soldier of manslaughter Monday in the killing of a pro-Palestinian British activist in 2003. The defendant, Wahid Taysir, who no longer is in the army, was accused of shooting Tom Hurndall in the head during an army operation in the Gaza Strip in April 2003.

Drew Forrest from the Mail & Guardian recently wrote that Jewish readers react angrily and play on the anti-Semitism canard when his newspaper claims that Israeli soldiers deliberately target children and innocents.

Faced with persistent allegations of war crimes, conservative Zionists resort to evasions, many of them strongly reminiscent of Nationalist propaganda under apartheid. One response is simply to block out the unpalatable - like the M&G letter-writer who angrily dismissed a Guardian report that Israeli army snipers were targetting children in Gaza, without evidence or, apparently, independent knowledge.

Side note: The burden of proof in making such claims lies with the accuser. I don't think that I need to go to the hassle of proving that targeting civilians is not IDF policy.

I expect the MSM to use this incident with gloating relish, proving in their eyes that soldiers do indeed target innocent bystanders. They will no doubt overlook the fact that this man was tried and convicted precisley because the army has rules of engagement aimed at preventing the death of bystanders.

A summary of the ruling can be found here.

You Can, But We Can't

Townhall.com makes a point that needs to be considered.

Only a radical would argue that Israel should not have such Arab citizens. And yet what passes for the moderate view holds that a future Palestinian state must be Judenrein – ethnically cleansed of Jews. Indeed, even “moderate” Jordan has a constitutional provision specifically prohibiting Jews from becoming citizens.

For me the battle is on the right of return, Jerusalem, the major settlement blocs, and scurity. The right of Jews to live in Palestine is something we will have to deal with in the future. In the meantime we are forced to accept the situation as it is. We know what would happen to the Jewish residents of Gaza if we left them there and just pulled the IDF out.

Read the whole article for an account of the 900 000 Jews that were forced to flee from their Arab homes after the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.

From the Good News Files

Israeli doctors have performed a miracle: Chemotherapy-induced infertility no longer an obstacle.

Sagit Hechler, a 31-year-old woman who was rendered infertile by chemotherapy for cancer treatment, gave birth to a healthy, three-kilo baby girl at Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer on Monday. It was reportedly the first time in the world that a woman gave birth after undergoing a transplant of ovarian tissue that had been taken from her body and preserved by freezing.

That's not the only good news, as relations between Israeli and Arab physicians warm up: Videoconferencing boosts Israeli-Arab medical contacts.

The Right Way To Protest

Although I support the disengagement plan I must praise Monday's anti-disengagement protest. Citizens living in a democracy have the right to voice their opposition to policies of the State, but they need to do it in a way that does not harm the better interests of the state.

In a country as small as Israel, blocking traffic could have horrific consequences. Just imagine ambulances trying to respond to terror attacks only to be blocked in traffic by protestors.

That said, Monday's rally took the interests of everyone into account. The demonstration was huge, it was peaceful, it did not block the flow of traffic, there were no Nazi slurs, and there was no confrontation with police officers.

Only at Jerusalem's Bar Ilan Junction did things get out of hand. 7 protestors were arrested after throwing rocks at police. I hope these repellent idiots get what they deserve.

As opposed to the fiery road blockades set up by far right settler splinter groups over the past few months, none of Yesha's protestors even J-walked. Fifteen minutes into the protest a man jumped into the middle of Jerusalem's Route 1 and sat on his haunches. No one followed and he let police shoo him away. Some of the passing drivers honked in solidarity. Others honked in annoyance at the delays. Often it was hard to tell the difference. But to some, the honking cacophony that was the protest seemed an act of mourning for the inevitable. Rabbi Shaul Moshe Elituv, head of Chabbad's "Oz Meir," Yeshiva, pensively stroked his beard amid a blur of orange-clad activists. Once approached, he said he had arrived because "that's what our rabbis told us to do." He put a fatalists' touch on the disengagement, slated for this summer, saying: "we just need to pray. If we [the Jewish people] managed to live through the Holocaust, then we'll get through the disengagement." And while he considered it imperative to "continue the struggle, along with prayer. Pragmatically, I see that Sharon will not be stopped."

Amazing! Don't these people see how much support they lose when they make comparisons between the concession of land for strategic reasons and the Holocaust?

Update
A commentor points out that my above comment was unfair. As the commentor says, the whole point of the statement "was not to compare the two [Holocaust and Disengagement], but to show that we managed to survive worse than we are about to go through".

Of Occupation and Corruption

Does the occupation make Israelis corrupt?

At Wednesday's debate I agreed with much of what Benjamin Pogrund had to say (not everything mind you), but his linking of corruption with the occupation is something that I have to question. You could sum up that part of his talk by saying that the Israelis are corrupt because of the occupation. So if the occupation ended there would be no corruption. I disagree with this.

I think that the corruption would persist and results from the large majority of Israel's population coming from North Africa and Eastern Europe (based on the corruption figures from those parts of the world).

The 2004 Corruption Perceptions Index can be found here. (Thanks Commentary.)

If you look at the corruption figures for the North African and Eastern European countries you will see that they fare very badly. The Russians fare very badly, and a large number of Israel's population comes from Russia so there may be a stronger link between corruption and the sources of a population than between corruption and the occupation.

Israel is rated 6.4 – with 0 being highly corrupt and 10 being least corrupt. Israel is in 27th place (being 27th least corrupt) out of 147 possible places. There are many more countries than places – i.e. 5 countries are tied in 57th place. So there are really over 200 countries and Israel is in 27th place. Unfortunately they are near the bottom of the list when considering first world countries.

South Africa is rated 4.6
Italy is 4.8
Palestinian Authority is 2.5
Russia is 2.8

There is also a link between corruption and the wealth of a country. Only the wealthy countries fare well, and Israel has spent much money on the occupation, but the main reason for their lack of wealth would be necessary military spending. If that causes corruption then instead of only citing the occupation as a cause, Pogrund should also have called it inevitable due to the excessive money that Israel needs to be spend on defending her existence.

That said I do believe that the occupation harms Israel in numerous other ways. But it was unfair of Benjamin to use corruption as an example.

Waiting for Godot

On Wednesday the South African Zionist Federation hosted a riveting debate on peace in the Middle East entitled “Waiting for Godot”.

The title itself is particularly interesting. It is taken from the renowned Samuel Beckett play in which two protagonists endlessly wait for someone that will never arrive. You sense that they realise that Godot will never come, yet you feel their futility for they can do nothing else but wait.

I attended this illuminating debate. It was mediated by Radio 702’s David O’ Sullivan. The panel allowed for a diverse array of views. Representing the “right of centre” view was Rabbi Goldman from Sydenham Shul and Freda Keet – a popular Israeli newscaster and reporter. Representing the “left of centre” viewpoint was Benjamin Pogrund – anti apartheid activist and former deputy editor of the Rand Daily Mail in South Africa, and Prof. Hussein Solomon. Prof Hussein Solomon is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Sciences, the Director of the Centre for International Political Studies, and Head of the Unit for African Studies, Centre for International Political Studies at the University of Pretoria. Prof Solomon is an expert in religious fundamentalism and conflict resolution in Africa.

The event was well supported with over 300 people in attendance. Jews getting together to discuss sensitive and emotional issues in a forum where diverse opinions are shared is a positive sign. It's a sign which renders the Mail & Guardian's constant criticism of the "reactionary South African Zionist Jews" baseless. I can only hope that the same sort of balanced, open, and honest discussions are taking place in the South African Muslim community.

The following is what I took from the debate. It’s not meant to be an exact summary of the essence of what each speaker said, just the points that caught my attention.

Benjamin Pogrund
Pogrund, who founded the Yakar centre for social concern in Jerusalem, described the rational left wing Israeli take on the prospects for peace. Pogrund affirmed the necessity of Israel remaining a Jewish state, and advocated the two state solution as the only workable approach. The Israelis need to end the occupation, and must hurdle forward with the diplomatic process irrespective of any acts of terror. The cessation of all terror must not be a necessary condition imposed by the Israelis for further progress.

Pogrund spoke of the damaging effect the occupation has had on Israeli society, linking the level of corruption in Israel to the occupation. I considered this link very unfair (see here for why).

Pogrund is heavily involved in cross communication efforts between Israelis and Palestinians and bemoaned how extremely difficult it has become since the second Intifada for Israelis to enter the West Bank for these discussions. The IDF prevents Israelis from entering the West Bank due to the frequent attacks perpetrated against Israelis in that area.

Few people are better placed than Pogrund to discuss possible similarities between Israel and Apartheid South Africa – Pogrund categorically refutes any comparison between the two. Calling Israel an apartheid state minimises what took place in South Africa, reducing apartheid to just another swear word.

One of the key differences highlighted between the ANC and the terrorist Palestinian groups was that the 1961 ANC decision to take up armed resistance did not include attacks against civilians as part of the doctrine. This allowed for an atmosphere where whites did not have to fear being driven into the sea. Conversely the Palestinians have deliberately targeted unarmed Israeli civilians instilling a permanent psychological fear in Israelis. This makes it much more difficult for Israel to accept territorial concessions without receiving something in return – hence the opposition to the Gaza disengagement plan.

Freda Keet
Keet spoke powerfully and eloquently about life in middle Israel. I don’t consider Keet to be right wing, but her opposition to the disengagement plan (she didn’t actually state this but alluded to it) means that she could represent the views of those right of centre. Keet does not believe that the time is right for territorial concessions or negotiations with the Palestinians. Her opinion stems from the continued incitement within the Palestinian education system coupled with the reprehensible incitement in Palestinian media. Imams still preach for the destruction of the Jews and this prevents an environment of tolerance and compromise.

Keet spoke proudly about the success that Israel is today. Keet countered Pogrunds analysis - at this point in time Keet does not view the PA, an organisation with a history of utilising violence and terror to achieve its goals, as a suitable negotiation partner. The appointment of many leading terrorists from the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades into the PA police force reinforces this viewpoint. She opined that though acting aggressively in self defence, we must remember that Israel is not the aggressor.

Keet thinks it is too soon for negotiations, advocating an extended period of quiet as the next goal to seek. To this end, Keet believes that the Israelis and Palestinians eventually need to negotiate a just divorce.

Keet pressed for us to understand that the conflict is vastly complex and complicated – there are vast chasms that must be crossed and both sides need time out from each other. Both sides are bruised and bleeding and need a break. The Palestinian society has been mauled by the violence from the past years and needs time out to rebuild. Israel needs a time out to recover from the past years of violence.

Keet acknowledged the suffering that the occupation causes –“They live terrible lives and we are partly responsible, but we know why we are responsible.” She also expressed a yearning for Israel to be paid the credit it deserves for initiating the Oslo peace process in 1993.

Hussein Solomon
Hussein Solomon spoke about the unnecessary polarisation of discourse. Solomon spoke out against stereotyping and the unnecessary existence of the enmity between the two communities. Solomon said that it is not just the Jews that are guilty of this – he has met numerous Muslims who are rational on all issues except when it comes to Jews and Israel.

Solomon’s 20 minutes were the most thought provoking. He stressed the importance of discovering creative "lateral thinking style" solutions. An example of this is the packaging of demands – the dismantling of the militant (his word not mine) organisations must not be viewed by the Palestinians as an external diktat imposed upon the Palestinians by Israel; rather it must be viewed as a founding principle of a Palestinian state.

Speaking about the problems in the conflict Solomon highlighted the disturbances caused from too many third parties and external agendas. I would have liked to ask him if he considers the involvement of the Europeans as one of these unnecessary third parties – something I would tend to agree with. Another problem highlighted is the infighting within the Palestinian ranks, caused by Arafat’s strategy of maintaining power by facing the various security factions off against one another.

Solomon gave open support to the two state solution but disagrees with Freda Keet on the need for a time out. He wants Israel to come to the table and believes that territorial concessions by Israel are necessary to ignite change.

In ending Solomon spoke of the great irony that it is Sharon, the father of the settlement movement, and Abbas, the man who wrote a thesis denying the Holocaust, that people today look toward for peace. This is a source of great pride to me – the way many Israelis have moved from warrior, to statesmen, to seeker of peace… or at least separation.

Rabbi Goldman
Rabbi Goldman began by describing himself as pro peace and pro Israel. He continued that there is no reason for us to apologise for the existence of Israel – we have every right to live in Israel, to live there in safety and security.

Rabbi Goldman opposes the Gaza disengagement plan but does not oppose the notion of land for peace. Goldman would accept territorial concessions if there were guarantees of peace. Goldman wants the Palestinians to fulfil their obligations (cessation of violence) before Israel makes territorial compromises.

Goldman cited Moshe Yaalon’s (the immediate past IDF Chief of Staff) opinion on disengagement. Yaalon believes that the disengagement will jeopardise the security of Israel and will provide the platform for a future war. Yaalon has warned of an immediate increase in terrorist attacks following the disengagement. Goldman used this to show that these are not just the tirades of religious Rabbis.

Benjamin Pogrund countered this by giving some background on Moshe Yaalon. Most IDF Chief’s of Staff are offered an extra year of service, but Yaalon was not offered this extra year. He may therefore resent the current government and this may have coloured his negative views on disengagement.

Whilst supporting the work of people of moderation on both sides Goldman said that he sees a reality in which the percentage of moderate Palestinians, willing to accept the existence and legitimacy of Israel as a neighbour on the block, is a very small minority.

Goldman prays for a day when the two neighbours will live together side by side in peace, but until then Israel must adopt a policy of peace through strength.

Ending on a sombre and somewhat depressing note, Goldman described the battle in Israel today as a battle between those who have lost hope and those who have not lost hope.

…

For me the “man of the match” was Hussein Solomon, simply for the creative and neutral approach he adopted. He seems to understand the psychology of both sides of the conflict and realises the need for creative lateral thinking to break the current impasse. I didn’t necessarily agree with everything he had to say, but the point of a debate is to listen to and at least consider alternative opinions. That said, all speakers showed great respect for one another and truly understand the unbearable complexity of the conflict.

Update
My assumption that Freda Keet opposes the disengagment plan was incorrect. After personally asking her whether she supports the plan, I learned that she is firmly behind Sharon's disengagement plan. Apologies for misrepresenting Freda.

Self Destruction Watch

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas declared yesterdays talks with Sharon a failure.

Calling Tuesday's summit meeting between Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas a failure, Palestinian leaders expressed frustration over Israel's insistence on linking major concessions to the cessation of violence.

Abbas complains that he is powerless to stop the violence - yesterdays events in the wild wild West Bank suggest that he may be correct.

Gunmen Disrupt Lecture by Palestinian PM

BALATA REFUGEE CAMP, West Bank - Gunmen in a refugee camp opened fire Wednesday, disrupting a lecture from the Palestinian prime minister about the need to end violence. The brazen shooting highlighted the difficulty of his task. "This country needs order, needs quiet," Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia shouted, repeating a theme he has pressed for weeks. But even as he spoke, gunfire rang out, startling Qureia and putting his bodyguards on high alert. Associated Press Television News footage showed militants angrily waving their weapons as Qureia's security guards — their rifles trained on the gunmen — stood at the windows of the building where the prime minister was speaking in the Balata camp next to the city of Nablus. After Qureia's speech, gunmen opened fire again and set off an explosive device about 300 yards from his convoy. No one was injured. Qureia was whisked away.

Last week the Palestinian Center for Human Rights released a report listing violent incidents between June 9 and June 14 that killed 7 people and injured 20 others.

There are also signs of trouble amongst the youth independent of any religious or Israel related political divisions.

In the southern city of Hebron, about 100 high school students who complained their final exam in physics was too difficult attacked the education department, throwing stones and burning tires. The youths hurled rocks at 70 Palestinian police officers in riot gear and damaged a fire truck trying to extinguish the burning tires. Police fired in the air to disperse the crowd. No one was hurt.

All they have are rocks and yet the Palestinian education system has the sheer gall to set difficult examinations.

Suffer the Little Children

A Palestinian youth Mosaab Hallageyah, 14 years, holds a machine gun as he stands with Zakaria Zubeidi, right, the leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Jenin, and other militants at a rally demanding the release of Palestinian prisoners being held in Israeli jails, in the West Bank town of Jenin, Monday, June 20, 2005. Hallageyah's father, a militant from Hamas , was killed in the fighting with Israel around four years ago. (AP Photo/Mohammed Ballas)