Thursday, January 3, 2013
Palestinians don't accept Israel
Before the Oslo Accords, all the Palestinian factions shared a common goal: to wipe Israel off the map and replace it with Palestinian Arab Muslim state. Then in 1993, on behalf of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Yassir Arafat officially recognized Israel's right to live in peace and security and renounced the use of violence and terrorism.
As everyone now knows, Arafat was crossing his fingers. He didn't give up terrorism. On the contrary, after signing the Oslo Accords, Palestinian terrorism increased. Nor did Arafat's political party, Fatah, give up on its aspiration to replace Israel with a Palestinian state.
The Palestinians still haven't given up on this goal. The latest concrete manifestation of Fatah's ambition to remove Israel from the map comes in the shape of Fatah's recently remodeled logo, which includes a map of "Palestine" represented as a checkered keffiyeh that happens to include all of Israel.
Nor has Fatah truly repudiated violence. The new logo was issued to mark the 48th anniversary of Fatah's first terrorist attack against Israel in 1964.
The Fatah flag - which has been around for a while - also features a map of Palestine which replaces all of Israel. The graphics aren't as clean as in the new logo, but you can see "Palestine" represented as the green shape behind the crossed rifles here:
In fact it's standard for Palestinians to create maps that replace Israel with Palestine. Here's a photo of President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority accepting a framed map of "Palestine," covering the entire area of Israel from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. This photo appeared on the front pages of both official newspapers of the Palestinian Authority:
Israel accepts the Palestinian right to a state of their own, but the Palestinians will not reciprocate. Before accepting this framed map, Abbas stated: "I say this clearly: I do not accept the Jewish State, call it what you will."
Why don't we have peace between Israel and the Palestinians? Because the Palestinians want to wipe Israel off the map. The silver lining is that they can't.
Friday, December 28, 2012
Two stories from Saudi Arabia: Police arrest dozens for "plotting to celebrate Christmas" & Saudi liberal faces death penalty
Saudi religious police stormed a house in the Saudi Arabian province of al-Jouf, detaining more than 41 guests for “plotting to celebrate Christmas,” a statement from the police branch released Wednesday night said.
The raid is the latest in a string of religious crackdowns against residents perceived to threaten the country's strict religious code.
The host of the alleged Christmas gathering is reported to be an Asian diplomat whose guests included 41 Christians, as well as two Saudi Arabian and Egyptian Muslims. The host and the two Muslims were said to be “severely intoxicated.”
The guests were said to have been referred to the "respective authorities." It is unclear whether or not they have been released since.
The kingdom, which only recognizes Islamic faith and practice, has in the past banned public Christmas celebrations, but is ambiguous about festivities staged in private quarters.
Saudi religious police are known to detain residents of the kingdom at whim, citing loose interpretations of Sharia and public statements by hardline religious leaders to justify crackdowns.
Saudi Arabia's head mufti Sheikh Abdel Aziz bin Abdullah had previously condemned “invitations to Christmas or wedding celebrations.”
A member of the Higher Council of Islamic scholars in Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Mohammed al-Othaimin recently prohibited sending holiday wishes to "heretics" on Christmas or other religious Christian holidays.
'Apostate' at risk of execution
On Thursday, the Beirut-based Gulf Center for Human Rights reported that Saudi human rights defender Raef Badawi is at risk of execution on apostasy charges.
Badawi is co-founder and editor of the Liberal Saudi Network. When he first appeared before the district court in Jeddah, he was charged with “insulting Islam through electronic channels” and “going beyond the realm of obedience.” The Judge then referred the case to the higher Public Court on an apostasy charge, which carries the penalty of death.
The General Court in Jeddah proceeded with apostasy charges on December 22.
Badawi was arrested this June after the Liberal Saudi Network called for “a day of liberalism” in Saudi Arabia, which included a conference that was later canceled after a warning from authorities.
Earlier this week, controversial Saudi novelist and political analyst Turki al-Hamad was arrested for criticizing Islam and the royal family in a series of tweets.
Al-Hamad is an outspoken liberal who writes about sexuality issues, underground political movements and religious freedom. The offending tweets suggested that Islam be rectified in the same way that the Prophet Muhammad is said to have revised earlier Abrahamic religions.
(Al-Akhbar)
Thursday, December 27, 2012
An Open Letter to Toronto District School Board Chair Bolton and Director Spence regarding the Board's Strategy Consultations
I've re-posted the open letter below from the Eye on a Crazy Planet blog:
Dear Trustee Bolton and Director
Spence:
I am the Co-Chair of the
Parents’/School Council at Central Technical School in Toronto, which as you
know is one of the largest high schools in the city with a student population
of over 1900.
Regarding the current consultations
conducted by the TDSB for the K-12 Strategy for the coming years, there is an
issue of very serious concern about which I would like to offer my comments.
The so-called social justice aspects
of the curriculum frequently reflect a subjective and highly politicized
interpretation of the word “justice”. As such, the way it is approached needs a
very serious review, and in my opinion a complete overhaul.
There are inappropriate attempts in
the TDSB to integrate so-called social justice aspects into subjects like Math,
where questions such as “Calculate how 5 global social issues could be
solved if the US military budget were applied to them” are posed to
children in their mid-teens. The obvious implication is that military budgets
and the military in democratic countries like the US and Canada somehow detract
from the resolution of social problems.
What are not addressed are the
catastrophic results that would occur if democracies did not have the means to
protect themselves. Anyone who is familiar with European history between the
World Wars understands the horrendous consequences of Britain and France’s
decision to decommission most of its naval capabilities after WW1.
One can have reasonable debates about
such matters, but the clear purpose of questions of the nature in the example
provided is to indoctrinate to a particular type of thinking. And frankly, the
people at OISE (The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education) who have designed
such questions have nowhere near the knowledge in geo-political affairs or
history required to understand them thoroughly.
That is reflected further in the way
the TDSB teaches about such issues as the internment of Japanese-Canadians
during World War 2. It is right and proper this be taught. But it is
taught in middle school to students who are not instructed about the causes and
history of the Second World War. Nor are they yet provided with reasonable
context, such as the treatment of minorities by Imperial Japan prior to and
during the war. The result is an implication that Canada is and was a
particularly and unusually racist country for its time when that is
historically untrue.
In fact, the TDSB’s providing
politicized indoctrination under the guise of social justice is becoming
pervasive through the system. I was at the TDSB Futures conference earlier this
year where Director Spence delivered an address. One of the keynote speakers
was Tim Wise, who blamed the inequities in the education system on “white
privilege.” (More on Tim Wise here.)
That fatuous reasoning left absent
the fact that inequities in education in Canada transcend racial divisions and
far more often than not are independent of them. More alarming, Mr. Wise, with
the apparent approbation of the TDSB, said that education needs to focus less
on the individual and more on the collective, including collective racial
identities.
This flouts everything opponents of
racism have been fighting for many years. As a society, we have been working
towards achieving a color-blind world that deals with individuals as individuals
and not as part of collectives differentiated by ‘race’ or ‘color.’
It is deeply disturbing that, while
with the best of motives, the TDSB, has been working to counter such progress
through its use of ill-advised trends put forward by politicized activists in
the education system and in politicized programs in institutions like OISE.
These are but a very few of many examples
currently occurring within the TDSB.
These questions are designed through
programs at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, which has programs
that specifically teach teachers to be activists against neo-liberalism (i.e.
free-market, liberal democracies) in schools. These same people frequently
advocate for solidarity with Communist Cuba.
It should not be necessary to point
out how disturbing it is that our children’s’ curriculum are in many instances
designed by people who advocate against a system that has produced the
freest, most prosperous societies in the world’s history in favor of a
repressive, totalitarian society that imprisons dissenters. Yet because of its
recurrence in the TDSB, such admonitions are regrettably necessary and will be
for the foreseeable future.
Honest people can disagree about
ideas and we should always strive for improvement. People have a right to hold
different opinions on how to approach the matters discussed above.
Unfortunately, the term “critical thinking” which is so often used by TDSB
personnel in describing the approach they want to instil actually means trying
to create a “group think.” Specifically, “critical thinking” is a doctrine that
criticizes of our democratic foundations while promoting ideologies that are
antithetical to them.
Social justice for someone who admires Che Guevara has a very different meaning
for those of us who believe in free speech and parliamentary democracy.
People have the right to share their views with their children on their own
time, but not to attempt to indoctrinate the children in Toronto’s public
school system with them.
Some of the fault for the concerns I
have delineated rests squarely with the Ontario Ministry of Education, which is
responsible for the Province’s curriculum. But much of it also rests with the
TDSB.
With the challenges facing our
children, who will grow up in a world undergoing a technological revolution,
the limited time they spend in schools should focus on giving them the tools
they need for success in such a world. This is the focus on which I hope the
TDSB will concentrate going forward.
Sincerely,
Richard Klagsbrun
Read another excellent piece on the meaning of "social justice" in our kids' schools here.
Monday, December 24, 2012
Christianity 'close to extinction' in Middle East
Christianity 'close to extinction' in Middle East
The Telegraph (Britain)
Christianity faces being wiped out of the "biblical heartlands" in the Middle East because of mounting persecution of worshippers, according to a new report.
The study warns that Christians
suffer greater hostility across the world than any other religious group.
And it claims politicians have been
“blind” to the extent of violence faced by Christians in Africa, Asia and the
Middle East.
The most common threat to Christians
abroad is militant Islam, it says, claiming that oppression in Muslim countries
is often ignored because of a fear that criticism will be seen as “racism”.
It warns that converts from Islam
face being killed in Saudi Arabia, Mauritania and Iran and risk severe legal
penalties in other countries across the Middle East.
The report, by the think tank
Civitas, says: “It is generally accepted that many faith-based groups face
discrimination or persecution to some degree.
"A far less widely grasped fact
is that Christians are targeted more than any other body of believers.”
It cites estimates that 200 million
Christians, or 10 per cent of Christians worldwide, are “socially
disadvantaged, harassed or actively oppressed for their beliefs.”
“Exposing and combating the problem
ought in my view to be political priorities across large areas of the world.
That this is not the case tells us much about a questionable hierarchy of
victimhood,” says the author, Rupert Shortt, a journalist and visiting fellow
of Blackfriars Hall, Oxford.
He adds: “The blind spot displayed by
governments and other influential players is causing them to squander a broader
opportunity. Religious freedom is the canary in the mine for human rights
generally.”
The report, entitled
Christianophobia, highlights a fear among oppressive regimes that Christianity
is a “Western creed” which can be used to undermine them.
State hostility towards Christianity
is particularly rife in China, where more Christians are imprisoned than in any
other country in the world, according to the report.
It quotes Ma Hucheng, an advisor to
the Chinese government, who claimed in an article last year that the US has backed
the growth of the Protestant Church in China as a vehicle for political
dissidence.
“Western powers, with America at
their head, deliberately export Christianity to China and carry out all kinds
of illegal evangelistic activities,” he wrote in the China Social
Sciences Press.
“Their basic aim is to use
Christianity to change the character of the regime...in China and overturn it,”
he added.
The “lion’s share” of persecution
faced by Christians arises in countries where Islam is the dominant faith, the
report says, quoting estimates that between a half and two-thirds of Christians
in the Middle East have left the region or been killed in the past century.
“There is now a serious risk that
Christianity will disappear from its biblical heartlands,” it claims.
The report shows that
“Muslim-majority” states make up 12 of the 20 countries judged to be “unfree”
on the grounds of religious tolerance by Freedom House, the human rights think
tank.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
UN Human Rights Council elects two more human rights abusers to vice-president: the Maldives and Ecuador
![]() |
The Maldives are a great place to honeymoon... |
![]() |
... but you wouldn't want to live there. |
Besides rewarding Mauritania for being the worst country on earth for slavery (more here), the UN Human Rights Council also elected the Maldives and Ecuador as vice-presidents of the council, both of which go to prove that abusing human rights is the best route to high office in the UN Human Rights Council.
It's an especially bad year to reward the Maldives with a vice-presidency. In February, the Maldives first democratically elected president in 2,000 years was overthrown and the new regime reversed the president's attempts to reform the Maldives brutal history of repression. Even before this year's coup, the U.S. Department of State reported that:
The most significant human rights problems include restrictions on religious rights, abuse and unequal treatment of women, and corruption of government officials. The constitution requires all citizens to be Muslim, and the government’s Ministry of Islamic Affairs actively polices and enforces compliance with Islamic practices. There were reports of religion-related self-censorship in the press and among civil society contacts.
Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) condemned the performance of the judiciary and executive branch for their inadequate treatment of criminal cases, especially rape. Corruption existed within the judiciary, members of parliament, and among officials of the executive and state institutions.
Other human rights problems reported included flogging, arbitrary arrests, harassment of journalists, and discrimination against expatriate laborers. Migrant laborers were subjected to labor abuses and were the primary victims of human trafficking. Many laborers migrated illegally into the country, making them particularly vulnerable to forced labor and debt bondage.
As for Ecuador, the State Department reports that:
The following human rights problems continued: isolated unlawful killings and use of excessive force by security forces, sometimes with impunity; poor prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; corruption and other abuses by security forces; a high number of pretrial detainees; and corruption and denial of due process within the judicial system.
President Correa and his administration continued verbal and legal attacks against the independent media. Societal problems continued, including physical aggression against journalists; violence against women; discrimination against women, indigenous persons, Afro-Ecuadorians, and lesbians and gay men; trafficking in persons and sexual exploitation of minors; and child labor.
The next time you hear about the UN Human Rights Council, remember its purpose is not to protect human rights, but to protect human rights abusers.
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Th UN Human Rights Council rewards Mauritania, where slavery still thrives
![]() |
Read CNN's special report on Mauritania: Slavery's Last Stronghold here. |
It’s hard to believe but slavery still exists in today’s world. One of
the world’s worst offenders is Mauritania, where a fifth of the people
– as many as 800,000 out of a population of 3.5 million – are slaves.
The United Nations has reacted to this awful situation, but not by
condemning it. Instead, the UN has elected Mauritania to the position of Vice-President and Rapporteur for the
UN Human Rights Council. Thus Mauritania
now has boasting rights as a UN recognized champion of Human Rights.
Mauritania
will also be able to report on human rights conditions in other countries. Canada, for example, might receive condemnation from Mauritania, just as
earlier this year, the UN Human Rights Council sent a special rapporteur to
check up on whether Canadians were starving and condemned our government for
not making sure we’re properly fed. You couldn't make this stuff up.
Next time
you hear anything about the UN Human Rights Council, remember Mauritania, and understand that the purpose
of the UN Human Rights Council is not to protect human rights, but
rather to protect human rights abusers.
Here’s the full
release from UN Watch…
Human Rights Day Marred by Election of
Slave-holding
Mauritania as VP of UN Human Rights Council
Mauritania as VP of UN Human Rights Council
Syria
remains on UNESCO human rights committee
GENEVA, Dec. 10 – UN Watch condemned today's election
of Mauritania, a country that allows 800,000 of its citizens to live as slaves,
as Vice-President of the UN Human Rights Council.
In addition, the Geneva-based group
also announced the failure of its yearlong campaign, with 55 MPs and NGOs, to
get UNESCO to remove Syria from its human rights committee.
1. Mauritania Elected Today as VP of UN
Human Rights Council
The UN Human Rights Council met today
in Geneva and elected Mauritania as its Vice-President and Rapporteur for the
next year, the second highest position at the world's top human rights body.
"It is obscene for the U.N. to use
the occasion of Human Rights Day, when we commemorate the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, to elect the world's worst enabler of slavery to this
prestigious post," said Hillel Neuer, UN Watch executive director.
"The U.N. is making an arsonist
head of the fire department. It defies both morality and common sense."
According to a recent report by the Guardian, "up to
800,000 people in a nation of 3.5 million remain chattels," with power
and wealth overwhelmingly concentrated among lighter-skinned Moors,
"leaving slave-descended darker-skinned Moors and black Africans on the
edges of society."
In today's session, Poland was elected
president, while Ecuador, Maldives, and Switzerland were also elected
as vice-presidents.
Neuer also objected to Ecuador's
election, citing its "notorious record of censoring independent
journalists and shutting down newspapers."
UN Watch expressed regret that while
the dictatorship of Belarus took the floor in today's meeting to criticize the
election of Poland, none of the democracies said a word about the election of
Mauritania or Ecuador.
2. One Year Later, Despite Appeals,
Syria Still on UNESCO Human Rights Committee
Despite having murdered tens of thousands
of its own people, the Bashar al-Assad regime remains a full member of UNESCO's
human rights committee, "and no one at UNESCO seems to care the slighest
bit," said UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer.
This week marks one year since UN Watch
launched its campaign of 55 parliamentarians, human
rights and religious groups calling for Syria's expulsion, following UNESCO's
inexplicable election of the regime to a committee that rules on invividual
human rights complaints worldwide.
"It's time for UNESCO to stop
legitimizing a government that mercilessly murders its own people," said
Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch.
"UNESCO is allowing the Assad
regime to strut in Paris as a U.N. human rights arbiter -- it's indefensible
and an insult to Syria's victims."
After UNESCO elected Syria to its human
rights committee in November 2011, UN Watch launched a campaign to reverse the
decision, prompting the US and Britain to initiate a March 2012 debate at
UNESCO.
However, while a resolution was adopted
censuring Syria's violations -- a welcome first for UNESCO -- the promised call
to oust the regime from UNESCO's human rights panel was excised.
U.S. ambassador David Killion had urged
UNESCO to revisit the decision. The watered-down text included language
suggesting UNESCO chief Irina Bokova could raise the issue again, but she has
failed to do so.(See links at bottom.)
Earlier this year, UN Watch had
received notice from the British Foreign Office that
it would seek to cancel Syria’s “abhorrent” membership.
In an email to
UN Watch, the UK said it “deplores the continuing membership of Syria
on this committee and does not believe that Syria’s presence is conducive to
the work of the body or UNESCO’s reputation. We have therefore joined with
other countries in putting forward an item for the first meeting of the
Executive Board at which we will seek to explicitly address Syria’s membership
of the body.”
The UK also expressed hope that other
members of the executive board will join London in ending what it called “this
abhorrent [and] anomalous situation.”
Paris insiders say that UNESCO
diplomats from non-democratic regimes are afraid to create a precedent of
ousting repressive governments.
Monday, December 3, 2012
"UN: Palestine is now a non-member state; Reality: Palestine will continue to be a non-existent state" by Barry Rubin
I think Barry Rubin has the best assessment of the
recent vote at the UN General Assembly in favour of declaring Palestine a state…
Twenty-four years ago, almost to the day, in 1988, I stood in a large hall in Algeria and saw Yasir Arafat declare the independence of a Palestinian state. And that was forty-one years, almost to the day, after the UN offered a Palestinian state in 1947. Twelve years ago Israel and the United States officially offered a Palestinian state as part of a compromise at deal in the Camp David summit of 2000.
Arguably, despite all their errors, the Palestinian movement has made
progress since those events, though it is not very impressive progress. Yet in
real terms there is no real Palestinian state; the movement is more deeply
divided than at any time in its history; and the people aren't doing very
well.
Now the UN will probably give Palestine the status of a non-member
state. The only thing that will change is to convince people even more that
they are following a clever and successful strategy. They aren't.
Perhaps in 24 or 41 years there will actually be a Palestinian state.
There are two ways to respond to the General Assembly’s likely vote to
so designate a state of Palestine. One of them is outrage at the absurdity of
how the international system behaves. The other would be to dismiss the gesture
as meaningless, even more than that, as something that will even further delay
the day that a real, functioning state comes into existence.
Certainly, there are threats and dangers, for example the use by
Palestine of the International Court. Or one could look at this as another step
on the road to a final, I mean comprehensive, solution to the issue. Yet over
all, I’ll go for disgusted and cynical as the most accurate responses.
Let’s start with disgusted. In 1993, the PLO made an agreement whose
very basis was that a Palestinian state would only come into existence as a
result of a deal made with Israel. Instead, the Palestinian side refused to
make such a compromise and broke its commitments repeatedly. The ultimate
result was Yasir Arafat’s refusal to accept a Palestinian state with its
capital in the eastern part of Jerusalem both at the 2000 Camp David meeting
and a few months later when President Bill Clinton made a better, and final,
offer.
I have just this minute come from an interview with a very nice
journalist who asked me, “But doesn’t Israel want everything and offer nothing
in return.” What was most impressive is the fact that he had no personal
hostility or any political agenda. (You’d understand if I identified the
person and his newspaper but I’m not going to do that.) This conclusion was
simply taken as fact. He was astonished to hear that another perspective even
existed.
My first response was to point down the street two corners to the place
where a bus was blown up in 1995 and right next to it where a suicide bomber
had killed about a dozen pedestrians around the same time. This was the result
of risks and concessions that Israel had voluntarily undertaken in trying to
achieve peace. And, I added, it was possible to supply a long list of other
examples.
So despite Israel taking risks and making concessions, the Palestinian
Authority rejected peace. Today the same group is going to be recognized by the
UN as a regime governing a state. Moreover, this is a body that is relentlessly
begging Hamas, a group that openly calls for genocide against both Israel and
Jews, to join it.
Hamas, of course, ran for office without accepting the Oslo agreement (a
violation of it) and then seized power in a coup. Since then it has rained
rockets and missiles on Israel. In other words, although it is unlikely to
happen, in a few months Hamas might become part of the official government of
this non-member state of the UN.
Yet complaining about the unfairness of international behavior or the
treatment of Israel, like complaining about one’s personal fate, doesn’t get
you anywhere. It is cathartic to do so but then one must move on to more
productive responses.
The second issue is whether it will really matter. Yes it entails
symbolism, yes it will convince the Palestinians they are getting something
when the course they have followed ensures they get pretty close to nothing.
But, to use a Biblical phrase, it availeth them not. On the contrary, to coin a
phrase, this move “counter-matters,” that is it is a substitute for productive
action that actually detracts from the real goal.
To the extent that “President” Mahmoud Abbas convinced West Bank
Palestinians that they have achieved some great victory it takes off the
pressure for violent action or support for Hamas there. Of course, there is no
popular pressure for a negotiated solution. Indeed, I’m not aware of a single
Palestinian Authority official who has even claimed for cosmetic purposes that
the reason for this move at the UN move is to press Israel to compromise or a
deal. Its purpose is to make Abbas’s regime look good and be a step forward
toward total victory, a Palestinian state unbound by commitments that could be
used as a base for wiping out Israel.
But that doesn’t mean it will work. The next morning, the residents of
the Palestinian Authority will still be exactly where they are now. Hangovers
wear off even after non-alcoholic celebrations.
You should also understand that in Israel there are no illusions about
this whole charade. Few think that a real deal is possible with either of the
current Palestinian leaderships—those who do have already all written op-ed
pieces in the New York Times—and the UN action will make the public
even more opposed to concessions.
Incidentally, people on both sides in other countries make a serious
mistake in assessing Israel. Its enemies think it evil; many of its friends
think it stupid. Both are wrong. There are real constraints in the
international system, including the current government of the United States.
The solution is not to rail against this fate verbally but to assess the
best course in the context of these conditions. There are many who don’t
comprehend the implications of this situation. They either think Israel should
endlessly make concessions or that it should win total victory by ignoring the
surrounding reality. It’s amusing to see those of various political hues who
are thousands of miles away pulling theories from their heads that have nothing
to do with the actual events.
At any rate, the UN General Assembly’s action neither contributes to
peace nor is a just decision. Nevertheless, once again we have a case of
symbolism over substance. This is the same General Assembly that received
Yasir Arafat as a man of peace in 1974 at the very moment he was masterminding
terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians and the following year voted for a
resolution that Zionism was racism. Can one really say things have gotten
worse?
During the period since then, Israel has survived and prospered. Its
enemies in the Middle East have undergone constant instability and economic
stagnation (except for those small in population and large in oilfields). The
supposed springtime of democracy has quickly turned into just another authoritarian
era of repression and disastrous policies that ultimately weaken those
countries and make their people poor and miserable. What else is new?
Ignoring that history and the contemporary reality, some Western
countries are voting for this resolution or abstaining for a variety of
reasons: cheap public relations’ gain among Arabs and Muslims; a belief that
this will shore up the Palestinian “moderates” against the radicals, or that it
will encourage the non-existent peace process.
What it will do, however, is to sink the Palestinian leadership even
deeper into an obsession with intransigence in practice and paper victories
that mean nothing in the real world. And, yes, that’s what the result of this
UN vote will be. And of course no matter what is said publicly about unity
between the Fatah-ruled Palestinian Authority and the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip
there will be no change on that front either.
In 1939, the British offered the Arab states and Palestinian leadership
a deal in which they would be handed all of the Palestine mandate as an Arab
state if they accepted a few simple conditions, including a ten year transition
period. Despite the pleas of some Arab rulers, the Palestinians said no,
believing a German victory would give them everything soon. Almost precisely 65
years ago the UN endorsed the creation of a Palestinian Arab state. The
Palestinians said no believing that the military efforts of themselves and
their allies would give them everything soon.
The Palestinians’ leaders have long believed that an intransigent
strategy coupled with some outside force—Nazi Germany, the USSR, weaning the
West away from Israel—will miraculously grant them total victory. They aren’t
going to change course now but that route leads not forward but in circles.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs
(GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs
(MERIA) Journal. His latest book, Israel: An Introduction, has just been
published by Yale University Press. Other recent books
include The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The
Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley),
and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the
GLORIA Center and of his blog, Rubin
Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.
Saturday, December 1, 2012
What I Saw During Operation Pillar of Defense
from the American Thinker
Four years ago, watching the coverage of Operation Cast Lead from the
comfort of my dorm in Arizona, I was a conflicted college student. As
supportive as I was of Israel, I still found it painful any time I heard about
civilian casualties in Gaza.
But what I saw portrayed in the media didn't add up: on the one hand I knew that the IDF was engaged in careful efforts to prevent civilian casualties, despite Hamas's strategy of fighting from amongst its own civilian population. Yet the media made it seem like the IDF was actively targeting civilians.
But what I saw portrayed in the media didn't add up: on the one hand I knew that the IDF was engaged in careful efforts to prevent civilian casualties, despite Hamas's strategy of fighting from amongst its own civilian population. Yet the media made it seem like the IDF was actively targeting civilians.
Back then, I understood Israel's efforts at protecting civilians as a
something akin to a talking point -- I had no personal involvement in the
conflict. Yet I had no idea how true it is until
I myself participated in last week's Operation "Pillar of Defense" as
an officer in the IDF.
When I moved to Israel and enlisted, I joined a unit called the
Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), which is
devoted to civilian and humanitarian issues.
As an International Liaison Officer in the Gaza office, my job primarily
entails coordinating transfers of goods, aid, and delegations into Gaza. I work
closely with representatives of the international community, and
although our perspectives may differ, we maintain relationships of mutual
respect born of a common goal; I am here to help them succeed in their work
improving the quality of life in Gaza.
While the day-to-day work is challenging in Gaza, I learned over the
past ten days that the true test comes with crisis. At exactly the point where
most militaries would use the heat of war to throw out the rulebook, we worked harder
than ever to provide assistance wherever and whenever possible.
The eight days of Operation "Pillar of Defense" have been some
of the hardest I have ever known physically and emotionally. The college
student from Arizona would never have thought it possible to work 20 hours a
day, fueled only by adrenaline and longing for just an hour of sleep on a
shelter floor – wearing the same filthy uniform because changing, much less
showering, wouldn't allow me to get to a shelter in time when the next
rocket barrage hit. And no, wearing the green uniform does not mean that
you aren't afraid when the sirens sound.
Had you told me four years ago that there were IDF officers who stayed
up all night under a hail of rockets, brainstorming ways to import medical
supplies and food to the people of Gaza, I am not sure I would have believed
you. But I can tell you it is true because I did it every night.
What amazed me the most was the singular sense of purpose that drove
everyone from the base commander to the lowest ranking soldier. We were all
focused completely on our mission: to help our forces accomplish their goals
without causing unnecessary harm to civilian lives or infrastructure.
It is harder to explain the emotional roller-coaster – how proud and
relieved I felt every time a truck I coordinated entered Gaza, and how
enraging it was when we had to shut down the crossing into Gaza after
Hamas repeatedly targeted it. Or how invigorating it was help evacuate two
injured Palestinians from the border area, only to be informed minutes later
that a terrorist had detonated a bomb on a bus near my apartment in Tel Aviv.
So after all that I see and do, nothing frustrates me more than the
numbers game that is played in the media. The world talks about
"disproportionate" numbers of casualties as the measure of what is
right and wrong – as if not enough Israelis were killed by Hamas for the IDF to
have the right to protect its own civilians from endless rocket attacks.
In my position, I see the surgical airstrikes, and spend many hours with
the UN, ICRC, and NGO officers reviewing maps to help identify, and avoid,
striking civilian sites. One of our pilots who saw a rocket aimed at Israel
aborted his mission when he saw children nearby – putting his own civilians at
risk to save Gazans.
At the end of the day, what these "disproportionate
numbers" show is how we in Israel protect our children with elaborate shelters
and missile defense systems, whereas the terror groups in Gaza hide behind
their children, using them as human shields in order to win a cynical media
war.
What's really behind the headlines and that picture on the front page?
Every day, I coordinate goods with a young Gazan woman who works for an international aid
organization. Last month we forged a bond when we had to run for cover together
when Hamas targeted Kerem Shalom Border Crossing – attacking the very aid
provided to its own people.
During the eight days of Operation "Pillar of Defense," not
one day passed without me phoning my Palestinian colleague, just to check in.
"Are you okay?" I would ask.
"I heard they fired at your base. Please stay safe," she would
reply.
And every night I made her promise to call me if she needed anything.
These are the things that the media fails to show the world, just as they
underplay how Hamas deliberately endangers civilians on both sides of the
border – by firing indiscriminately at Israel from Gaza neighborhoods.
Maybe stories such as these make for less exciting headlines, but if
they received more attention there would perhaps be more moral clarity, and
thus more peace in the Middle East.
Friday, November 30, 2012
A gold Porsche and luxury hotels in the world's largest "open air prison"
Anti-Israel activists
like to accuse Israel of making Gaza into an “open-air prison.” They don't
mention – or maybe don't even know – that Gaza also has a border with Egypt.
So to the extent that Gazans are hemmed in, it's thanks to the Egyptians as
much as to the Israelis.
But while Egypt does control what travels into Gaza above ground, below ground there's an extensive network of smuggling tunnels through which smugglers move anything you can imagine. These smuggling tunnels have made many Gazans rich, not least the leaders of Hamas, who heavily tax the tunnel trade.
But while Egypt does control what travels into Gaza above ground, below ground there's an extensive network of smuggling tunnels through which smugglers move anything you can imagine. These smuggling tunnels have made many Gazans rich, not least the leaders of Hamas, who heavily tax the tunnel trade.
The
Economist reports:
Hamas
leaders seem increasingly content to enjoy the fruits of splendid isolation.
The parliamentary car park, full of rickety bangers when Hamas first took
office, now gleams with flash new models hauled through the tunnels under the
Egyptian border. Two Hummer H3s and a golden Porsche were recently spotted
cruising the streets.
Ministers
and members of parliament seem unbothered by the lack of accountability as well
as reports of money-laundering. “We're hunted and targeted,” explains a
self-pitying MP on Hamas's parliamentary ethics committee, who recently spent
$28,000 on a new car with the help of a $12,000 loan from the movement.
Besides
smuggling Hummers and gold Porsches through the tunnels, the enterprising
smugglers of Gaza have also brought in enough materials to support a building
boom in the “open-air prison” of Gaza – including the construction of several
luxury hotels. Journalists reporting on the dire living conditions in Gaza favour
the Gaza Grand
Palace Hotel.
![]() |
The Grand Palace Hotel in Gaza |
They can also stay in the al Deira, “an architectural and artistic gem located on the sands of
the Gaza coast. Built in a traditional style featuring graceful arches,
vaulted and domed ceilings, hand crafted furniture and open interior spaces,
the Al Deira brings to mind a contemporary palace overlooking blue
Mediterranean waters." Take a photo tour here.
![]() |
The restaurant patio at Al Deira |
But the most luxurious hotel in Gaza is probably the al-Mashtal
Hotel, where one night in the Royal Suite
will put you back $880 – in U.S. dollars, of course. The jihadists may hate
Americans, but they love their dollars.
![]() |
Terrorist chilling by the pool at al-Mashtal |
During a war with Israel, these hotels are among the safest
places in Gaza – after all Israel won't bomb a hotel that’s full
of journalist and officials from well-financed NGOs. Still, the luxury hotel
market isn’t doing well in Gaza. The 222-room al-Mashtal was recently
reported to have only ten rooms occupied. Apparently, starting wars with Israel
hasn’t been good for attracting upscale tourists.
On the other hand, when Israel freed hundreds of terrorists in exchange for kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, Hamas put 105 of them up at the al-Mashtal as a reward for their crimes against humanity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)