Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Saturday, July 9, 2016
Wednesday, July 6, 2016
SILENT EXODUS BY PIERRE REHOV
www.MiddleEastStudio.com
"They were more than a million Jews. Between 1946 and 1974, this million is the number of forgotten fugitives, expelled from the Arab world, and whom history would like to forget, while the victims themselves have hidden their fate under a veil of modesty. The Jews have been living in Arabic lands for thousands of years and seemed to accept their fate forever, some even considering their survival as a miracle.
But 1948, the beginning of their exodus, was also the birth of the State of Israel.
And, while the Arab armies were preparing to invade the young refugee-country, while the survivors of the Shoah were piling up in dangerous boats to fulfill at last the return to the land of their dreams and their prayers, a few hundred thousand Arabs from Palestine were getting ready to flee their home, convinced that they would return as winners and conquerors.
They were soon going to fill up the refugee camps built on their brothers’ land, and – because of their refusal to integrate – pass on their refugee status to the next generations.
The Jews did not get any special status. They had just returned to the Land of their fathers
And if they came from Aden, Yemen, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Morocco, Tunisia or Libya, if they had lost everything and sometimes even relatives, memories and cemeteries, it is in Israel and the west that they were ready to rebuild their lives. Without ever asking for any compensation, any right to return, or even wishing that their story be told…"1
FOOTNOTE
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFyDU62W4Rk
"They were more than a million Jews. Between 1946 and 1974, this million is the number of forgotten fugitives, expelled from the Arab world, and whom history would like to forget, while the victims themselves have hidden their fate under a veil of modesty. The Jews have been living in Arabic lands for thousands of years and seemed to accept their fate forever, some even considering their survival as a miracle.
But 1948, the beginning of their exodus, was also the birth of the State of Israel.
And, while the Arab armies were preparing to invade the young refugee-country, while the survivors of the Shoah were piling up in dangerous boats to fulfill at last the return to the land of their dreams and their prayers, a few hundred thousand Arabs from Palestine were getting ready to flee their home, convinced that they would return as winners and conquerors.
They were soon going to fill up the refugee camps built on their brothers’ land, and – because of their refusal to integrate – pass on their refugee status to the next generations.
The Jews did not get any special status. They had just returned to the Land of their fathers
And if they came from Aden, Yemen, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Morocco, Tunisia or Libya, if they had lost everything and sometimes even relatives, memories and cemeteries, it is in Israel and the west that they were ready to rebuild their lives. Without ever asking for any compensation, any right to return, or even wishing that their story be told…"1
FOOTNOTE
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFyDU62W4Rk
THE TROJAN HORSE - ISRAEL AND THE IMAGES OF WAR: PIERRE REHOV
"This compelling documentary about Palestinian propaganda and hatred
shows actual footage of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat
denying the Holocaust and pronouncing the peace process the first step
toward the destruction of Israel.
Who is to blame for the plight of the so called Palestinians? A Pierre Rehov documentary."1
PART 1 PART 2 PART 3 PART 4 FOOTNOTE
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4cYKCizQCs
Who is to blame for the plight of the so called Palestinians? A Pierre Rehov documentary."1
PART 1 PART 2 PART 3 PART 4 FOOTNOTE
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4cYKCizQCs
Monday, February 1, 2016
WHAT DOES THE UN TEACH PALESTINIAN CHILDREN AT UNRWA SCHOOLS?
 |
| A United Nations agency set up specifically for Palestinians |
One of the methods of maintaining conflict in the Middle East is via educating the Palestinian children to believe that there is no peace with Israel, no 'two state solution'.
United Nations agency, United Nations Relief and Works Agency, prints and distributes the educational texts used in Palestinian schools.
Why is the United Nations supporting the programming of lies into the minds and hearts of Palestinian children?
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
99% OF AMERICANS CONSIDER IRANIAN NUKES A THREAT
North Korean nuclear program also widely preceived as ‘critical’ danger, poll finds; Republicans fear Islamism more than do Democrats
February 20, 2013,
In
this photo released by the semi-official Iranian Students News Agency
(ISNA), an Iranian Shahab-3 missile is launched during military
maneuvers outside the city of Qom, Iran, Tuesday, June 28, 2011 (photo
credit: AP/ISNA, Ruhollah Vahdati)
NEW
YORK — A huge majority of Americans view Iran’s nuclear program as a
“critical threat,” alongside the North Korean nuclear program and
“international terrorism,” according to a poll released Monday.
The Gallup poll found that 99 percent of
Americans believe the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program is a threat “to
the vital interests of the United States in the next 10 years,” with
83% saying it was a “critical threat” and another 16% saying it was an
“important, [but] not critical” one. Just 1% declined to say it was at
least an important threat.
The poll was conducted February 7-10 among 1,015 respondents aged 18 and older. It has a margin of error of 4%.
The poll asked respondents to comment on nine
possible threats. Iranian nuclear weapons generated the most concern,
though only by the slimmest of margins.
North Korean nuclear weapons garnered nearly
identical levels of concern, with 83% calling them a “critical threat”
and 14% an “important” one, though these answers came before last week’s nuclear test by the communist regime.
“International terrorism” rounded out the
three leading threats perceived by the American public, with 81% and 17%
calling it a “critical” and “important” threat, respectively. The
remaining threats included Islamic fundamentalism (53%-28%), China’s
economic and military power (52%-39%), the military power of Russia
(29%-53%) and the conflict between India and Pakistan (25%-55%).
The widest gap by party affiliation related to
the perception of the threat from Islamic fundamentalism, with 70% of
Republicans saying it was a critical threat, compared to 46% of
Democrats.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has continued
to decline as a perceived threat, with 44% of those polled saying it
was a “critical threat” to US interests, a drop from 58% in a 2004 poll.
Forty-four percent said the conflict was an “important” threat, and 9%
said it was not important.
Islamic fundamentalism and the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict both ranked lower as threats among the
young compared with older Americans. Among Americans under 34 years old,
just 35% said Islamic fundamentalism was a critical threat, compared
with 64% among those 55 and older. When it came to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, 32% of the young saw it as a critical
threat, compared to 54% of those over 55.
According to Gallup, “this year’s poll marked
the first time Gallup asked about North Korean and Iranian nuclear
weapons specifically. In 2010 Gallup asked about the two countries’
‘military power,’ and found 61% rating each as a critical threat to the
United States, second only to international terrorism. In 2004, the
‘spread of weapons of mass destruction to unfriendly powers’ ranked
second only to terrorism. Thus, Americans have previously seen North
Korea and Iran, and nuclear weapons in general, as serious threats to
the US.”
The findings on American perception of Iran correspond to other polling in recent years. A Gallup poll
conducted in early February 2012 asked Americans whom they considered
to be the United States’ “greatest enemy today.” The question was
open-ended. Nearly one-third, or 32%, named Iran — more than any other
country.
“The high level of concern Americans give to
North Korea, as well as to Iran and to international terrorism, suggest
these are areas on which the public would like the Obama administration
and its new foreign policy team to focus its efforts,” Gallup noted.
Sunday, August 26, 2012
NON-INTERVENTION POLICY: HUNDREDS WATCH AS DOZENS OF JEWISH YOUTHS ATTACK PALESTINIANS
Published: 20 August, 2012
Reuters / Suhaib Salem
Four Palestinian youths were badly beaten in the incident in central Jerusalem on Friday. The attack was short and the gang fled after knocking one victim to the ground and kicking him unconscious before police arrived.
There were several dozen attackers, according to witnesses, who say that the Jewish youths were shouting “death to the Arabs” and seemed to be on the hunt for Palestinian victims.
Some witnesses described the attack as a “lynch,” while Israeli authorities claimed the attack was a typical brawl between Israeli and Palestinian young people. However, on Sunday, police called the event a “lynching,” Haaretz reports.
Hundreds of people watched the assault but did not try to help the victims, a police representative said on Sunday.
“The victim lost his consciousness and was thought to be dead until [an emergency paramedic crew] arrived and resuscitated him,” Haaretz cites Sergeant First Class Shmuel Shenhav as saying. “For several days he was anesthetized and artificially ventilated in the hospital.”
“This was an extremely severe crime,” he added. “Only a miracle saved him from death.”
Jamal Julani, a 17-year old Palestinian, still remains in serious condition in the intensive care unit at the Hadassah University Hospital. He regained consciousness but does not remember details of the event.
His two cousins, who suffered medium injuries, explained that the incident was extremely brief, as police arrived quickly and the perpetrators did not have much time to beat them or the unconscious Jamal.
Four teenagers between the ages of 13 and 15 were arrested Sunday in connection with the attack. Another suspect was arrested shortly after the attack on Friday.
A special investigation team has been set up in an effort to find all the perpetrators, and police believe further arrests will follow.
http://rt.com/news/israel-youths-lynch-palestinians-078/
Monday, August 20, 2012
ISRAELI MINISTER WARNS OF 30-DAY WAR WITH IRAN
A strike on Iran’s nuclear sites would spark a 30-day war with missile attacks on Israel's cities and as many as 500 dead, according to the Israeli minister responsible for preparing home defences.
Israeli school children wear gas masks
during a drill organized by the Israeli Home Front Command simulating a
chemical missile attack Photo: AP
Matan Vilnai, who is stepping down as home front defence minister to become
ambassador to China, said the country was “ready as never before”.
“The assessments are for a war that will last 30 days on a number of fronts,”
he told the Maariv newspaper.
“It could be that there will be less fatalities, but it could be there will be
more, that is the scenario that we are preparing for according to the best
experts.”
Speculation is growing that Israel
is planning a unilateral attack on Iran’s
nuclear programme - or that it is using the question to increase pressure on
Barack Obama to launch an American strike.
Israel is convinced that archenemy Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons,
dismissing Tehran's claims that its nuclear programme is for civilian
purposes. Israel considers nuclear-armed Iran to be a mortal danger. Iran
backs anti-Israel militants with funds and weapons, and its leaders often
call for Israel's destruction.
In his latest pronouncement, Iranian Supreme leader Ali Khamenei said Israel
will disappear from "the scene of geography." Addressing war
veterans in Tehran on Wednesday, he said Iran considers it its "religious
duty to save this Islamic country (Palestine) from the clutches of the
Zionist occupiers."
Israel's leaders have indicated an attack is a possibility if they conclude the international community has failed to halt the Iranian nuclear program.
Mr Vilnai did not elaborate on how he reached his assessments, but his office relies on intelligence and other assessments about Iranian weapons capabilities and Israeli susceptibility. Defense Minister Ehud Barak has also said the Israeli death toll could be in the range of 500 in such a conflict.
"Just as the citizens of Japan have to realise that they can have earthquakes, so the citizens of Israel have to realise that if they live here, they have to be prepared to expect missiles on the home front," Vilnai said. "It's not pleasant for the home front, but decisions have to be made, and we have to be ready."
At a news briefing in Washington on Tuesday, Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, reaffirmed the US assessment that Israel has not yet decided whether to strike, while the US military chief, Gen. Martin Dempsey, echoed a widely held assessment that an Israeli operation would only set back, not destroy, Iran's nuclear project.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/9478044/Israeli-minister-warns-of-30-day-war-with-Iran.htmlhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/9478044/Israeli-minister-warns-of-30-day-war-with-Iran.html
Israel's leaders have indicated an attack is a possibility if they conclude the international community has failed to halt the Iranian nuclear program.
Mr Vilnai did not elaborate on how he reached his assessments, but his office relies on intelligence and other assessments about Iranian weapons capabilities and Israeli susceptibility. Defense Minister Ehud Barak has also said the Israeli death toll could be in the range of 500 in such a conflict.
"Just as the citizens of Japan have to realise that they can have earthquakes, so the citizens of Israel have to realise that if they live here, they have to be prepared to expect missiles on the home front," Vilnai said. "It's not pleasant for the home front, but decisions have to be made, and we have to be ready."
At a news briefing in Washington on Tuesday, Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, reaffirmed the US assessment that Israel has not yet decided whether to strike, while the US military chief, Gen. Martin Dempsey, echoed a widely held assessment that an Israeli operation would only set back, not destroy, Iran's nuclear project.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/9478044/Israeli-minister-warns-of-30-day-war-with-Iran.htmlhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/9478044/Israeli-minister-warns-of-30-day-war-with-Iran.html
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
FESTIVAL THREATENED OVER ISRAEL LINK
REPOST. Originally posted within The Mikiverse, August 4, 2010.
Karl Quinn
August 4, 2010 - 3:00AM
THE Melbourne International Film Festival has been threatened with legal action for refusing to withdraw a film at the request of its makers, who objected to the festival receiving funding from Israel. Feature film Son of Babylon, which is set in Iraq, screened on July 26 and July 28 as scheduled, despite demands it be withdrawn in protest at funding from the Israeli government. The funding amounted to a return economy-class airfare for an Israeli director.
''The festival was informed in enough time to stop the screening … therefore if you have knowingly disregarded our wishes and screened the film, we will of course be left with little alternative than to take appropriate action against the festival,'' producer Isabelle Stead wrote to festival executive director Richard Moore last week in an email exchange leaked to crikey.com.au.
''You should not underestimate our resolve to ensure that our film is not associated with the state of Israel as long as it continues its illegal crimes against humanity,'' she wrote.
There is, in the filmmakers' stance, a distinct echo of Ken Loach's decision to withdraw his film Looking For Eric from last year's festival on the same grounds. On July 18 last year, The Age broke the story that the veteran English filmmaker had said ''if it did not reconsider the sponsorship, he would not allow the festival to screen his film''. Mr Loach cited ''illegal occupation of Palestinian land, destruction of homes and livelihoods'' and ''the massacres in Gaza'' as reasons for the boycott.
Mr Moore said acceding to Mr Loach's demand would be ''like submitting to blackmail''. That put him and the festival at odds with the Edinburgh Film Festival, which had done precisely that. In acknowledgment of its stand and its response to pressure by the Chinese government over the documentary, The 10 Conditions of Love, about Uighur independence leader Rebiya Kadeer, Victorian civil liberties group Liberty last month gave this year's Voltaire award to the Melbourne festival.
This year's flare-up is a little more complicated, however.
Mohamed Al-Daradji, director and co-producer of Son of Babylon, wrote to the festival about 14 hours before his film's first festival screening, requesting that the festival cancel it and the second scheduled screening.
Within two hours, Mr Moore replied. ''To request a withdrawal of the film on the day of the screening is simply not acceptable and shows a lack of respect for our organisation,'' he wrote. ''We are not able to replace the film at short notice and we will screen it today. I am prepared to consider other options for the second screening but I will also need to consider the financial ramifications.''
However, the July 28 screening went ahead, prompting an angry email from Ms Stead, who did not return calls or emails from The Age.
''When we grant a festival permission to screen a film that took us years to make along with danger, blood, sweat and tears we do so with trust. I would have thought a festival would morally recognise the need to tell a Palestinian co-production that it was funded by the state of Israel,'' Ms Stead wrote.
This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/movies/festival-threatened-over-israel-link-20100803-115ed.html
Monday, June 27, 2011
Monday, May 2, 2011
AYALON INSTITUTE SEGMENT-THE HISTORY CHANNEL-ISRAEL
Interesting video depicting how pre-Israel Israelites treated her 'friends' during WW2.
lWednesday, October 27, 2010
ISRAEL TORTURE PALESTINIAN CHILDREN BY ELECTRIC-SHOCKING
Defence for Children International (DCI) Palestine Section (DCI/Palestine) "is a national section of the international non-government child rights organisation and movement (dedicated) to promoting and protecting the rights of Palestinian children," according to international law principles.
Two earlier articles addressed their work, "Israeli Soldiers Sexually Abuse Palestinian Children" and "Imprisoning Palestinian Children."
Both covered Israel's systematic, institutionalized use of torture of Palestinian children as brutally as against adults. DCI/Palestine's latest September Bulletin adds more, saying:
"For the first time….three (documented) cases of children reporting being given electric shocks by Israeli interrogators (occurred) in Ari'el Settlement." Each was accused of stone throwing. Electric shocking extracted confessions although the boys maintain their innocence.
DCI and PACTI (the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel) demanded Israel investigate reports that a Gush Etzion settlement interrogator "attached car battery jump leads to the genitals of a 14-year old boy in order to obtain a confession to stone throwing."
The August 5 incident involved four boys walking near a road used by settlers when an Israeli jeep approached. "Just for fun," one boy waved. The jeep turned, was joined by others, and chased the boys. They were seized, blindfolded, painfully shackled, detained, and taken to the Zufin settlement, then to the Ari'el settlement where one boy, Raed, was interrogated.
Though innocent, "Threat of electrocution" made him confess to stone throwing, after which his head was slammed against a cupboard. He was also punched in the stomach, and a second interrogator shocked him with a handheld device, making him dizzy and shiver. He then signed a confession in Hebrew he couldn't understand, was transferred to Salem Interrogation and Detention Center, after which he was taken to Megiddo Prison, in violation of Fourth Geneva's Article 76, pertaining to the rights assured protected persons detained under occupation.
A second incident involved a 17-year old boy, Malek, falsely accused of throwing stones and Molotov cocktails. About 30 soldiers arrested and brutalized him like Raed before transferring him to Ofer Prison. On arrival, he was painfully struck on the head, then interrogated and threatened with physical violence and rape if he didn't confess. "He denied both accusations" during a two hour interrogation.
On September 15, 13-year old Khalil was arrested and accused of throwing a Molotov cocktail. At 1AM, Israeli soldiers smashed windows of his family's home, searched it, and took him to Ma'ale Adumin settlement. Though innocent, he was threatened with rape and intimidated to confess. He signed a six page document in Hebrew he didn't understand and has been detained at Ofer prison.
An earlier incident involved 16 year old Moatasem, arrested on March 20. He remains in administrative detention without charge or trial, at best hoping for a December release. Like the others, from arrest to detention, he was brutalized. During interrogation, he was asked about a plot involving a riot, bullets and weapons with no further explanation, something he knew nothing about and said so. On March 25, he was ordered administratively held for six months, then extended three more on September 26.
On average, from January 2008 – September 2010, Israel held over 300 Palestinian children captive, about 10% of them aged 12 – 15. Usually when complaints or requests for investigations into child arrests and mistreatment are submitted to the Judge Advocate General's Office (JAG), responses aren't forthcoming or issued raised are denied.
Shooting Children Collecting Building Gravel
Separately, DCI/Palestine reported on 12 incidents from May 22 – October 14, 2010, involving children aged 13 – 17, collecting gravel near Gaza's border fence with Israel. Under siege, Israel banned construction materials, forcing hundreds of men and boys to scavenge for what they can find, collecting gravel, placing it in sacks, loading it on donkeys, then selling it to builders for concrete.
In border watch towers, Israeli soldiers at times shoot and kill donkeys. They also target workers, usually shooting at their legs. In recent DCI/Palestine-documented cases, children reported being shot while working from 50 – 800 meters from the border.
In addition, a UN January 2009 – August 2010 study reported at least 22 Gazan civilians killed and 146 injured by live fire adjacent to Israel's border, including 27 children.
Of DCI's 12 documented cases, nine "were on, or outside the 300 metre exclusion zone unilaterally imposed by the Israeli army when they were shot." Under all circumstances with no exceptions, international law prohibits targeting noncombatant civilians. Israel, of course, flouts all international laws with impunity.
On November 10 and 11, DCI/Palestine in cooperation with DCI's International Executive Council and DCI International Secretariat, Geneva, will conduct an International Children's Conference titled, "Protective Environment – Active Participation," under the motto – "Together We Build and Change."
DCI explains that "Child participation is one of the four basic principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child." Under occupation, involving them is especially important to address their collective needs, interests, and concerns. The upcoming conference thus encourages children to participate and facilitates it "by finding the spaces for them to carry it out."
Some Final Comments
On October 19, palestinethinktank.com published a wide-ranging interview with Khaled Mesh'al, since 1996, Chairman of Hamas' Political Bureau. Exiled in Damascus, he became the movement's overall leader after Israel assassinated Abdul 'Aziz Rantisi in 2004. His comments below are based on a July published interview in Jordan's Arabic language Al-Sabeel newspaper.
(1) Negotiating with Israel
Calling it a thorny and sensitive issue, he stressed that it's "not absolutely prohibited….from a legal or political perspective," but must be subject to "equations, regulations, calculations, circumstances, contexts and proper management…." Otherwise, "it becomes a negative and destructive tool."
Currently, he calls it the wrong choice, given the imbalance of power favoring Israel, saying it "refuses to withdraw from the (seized) land, and does not recognise Palestinian rights." Negotiations under such conditions are fruitless. Israel demands but won't give. On equal fair terms, negotiations are very acceptable.
(2) Recognizing Israel
As things now stand, he believes recognition means legitimizing occupation, "aggression, settlement(s), Judaization, murders, arrests, and other crimes and atrocities against our people and our land." Recognition must be earned, not demanded or given, based on equity for both sides. Israel shows no sign of agreeing.
(3) Suggesting Israel and international insistence on recognition a sign of weakness, not stength
"Without a doubt, the enemy is concerned about (its) future….no matter" its regional strength. "The demand for recognition is certainly a sign of weakness, an expression of….inferiority, (and) a feeling that it is illegitimate and still rejected" by regional states "as alien" intruders.
However, superiority feelings also come into play, or in other words, the way "Western nations deal with third world countries," believing they alone dictate terms from a position of strength, including negotiating preconditions.
(4) Why Israel and the international community reject Hamas' proposed long-term truce
First, "the logic of power." Second, "they see Arab and Palestinian parties making (better) offers." Third, Israeli and Western experience suggests pressure works best, forcing adversaries or counterparties to succumb.
(5) Hamas' resistance model
It's "a natural and authentic part of the experience of the Palestinian struggle" for liberation and ending the occupation.
(6) Hamas and international relations
First, the "conviction that the Palestine battle (is for) humanity against Israeli injustice and oppression. Second, "the necessity of promoting (the) legitimate right to resist occupation and aggression." Third, the importance of using the world stage to address injustice. Fourth, concern for developing relations at all levels. Fifth, doing it begins in the region, "the plant (to) harvest (in) the West."
(7) Hamas and Jews
"We do not fight the Zionists because they are Jews; we fight them because they are occupiers," and commit crimes against the Palestinian people. The struggle isn't about religion.
(8) Hamas and women
"Women in the Islamic concept of thought, jurisprudence, mandate and role are – indeed – one half of society, and (have) been given (their) prestige and respect. However, there is a huge difference between respect and appreciation for women and (their) rightful role (on the one hand), and abusing (them) and presenting (them) as cheap commodit(ies) as is done in the Western civilization (on the other)." In Palestine's struggle for liberation, women play a distinctive role,"not only as mothers, wives and sisters," but as activists, teachers, fighters, and providers of logistical assistance.
(9) Zionism's future
It "has no future in the region." It's in decline, and except for attacking Beirut in 1982, Israel hasn't won a war since 1967. "This is an important indicator of the Zionist project's ability….In my estimation, the 'Greater Israel' project has come to an end, simply because the Zionist enemy is no longer able to accomplish it, and because Israel continues (self-destructively) on the same path as did apartheid South Africa."
(10) Israel's role as a regional strategic asset
It's no longer so, especially after the Goldstone Report and Gaza Flotilla massacre. As a result, "Israel is falling morally, and its true ugly face is being exposed. This is a very important development." It signifies "premature aging of this enterprise….In short, the Zionist project, like all other" forms of occupation, colonizations, and aggression, "has no legitimacy because it is alien to our region and lacks the elements of survival." It will end like all the others.
(11) The region's future
It's very much in flux with years before better resolution. However, we're "confiden(t) and hop(eful) that the future will be to the benefit of the nation and the Palestinian resistance and cause….Our reading is not fanciful, and is certainly not defeatist." It's realistic and achievable.
"We are a great nation, proud of ourselves, our religion, our land, our history, our culture and identity." Palestine and Jerusalem as one is "our beating heart and an indicator of our life and survival."
* Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
ISRAELIS AND PALESTINIANS TO RESUME TALKS, OFFICIALS SAY
August 20, 2010 By MARK LANDLER
WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is expected to announce Friday that Israel and the Palestinians will return to direct negotiations for the first time in 20 months, delivering the Obama administration a small victory in its protracted effort to revive the Middle East peace process, two officials briefed on the situation said Thursday evening.
The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, have agreed to place a one-year time limit on the talks, these officials said.
President Obama is expected to invite both leaders to Washington in early September to start the negotiations, which will cover thorny issues like the borders of a new Palestinian state, the political status of Jerusalem, security guarantees for Israel and right of return for Palestinian refugees.
The Obama administration declined to confirm the announcement, which was first reported by Reuters, with an official cautioning that final details were still being worked out and that the timing could slip by a day or so.
But after months of grueling diplomacy by the administration’s special envoy to the region, George J. Mitchell, officials sounded a more optimistic note on Thursday.
“We think we are very, very close to a decision by the parties to enter into direct negotiations,” Philip J. Crowley, the State Department spokesman, said to reporters. “We think we’re well positioned to get there.”
Mrs. Clinton has been working the phone in recent days to clear the final hurdles, speaking Thursday with Jordan’s foreign minister, Nasser Judeh, and with Tony Blair, the special representative of the Quartet, the group of Middle East peacemakers comprising the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia.
Late on Wednesday, she spoke with the prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, Salam Fayyad. The official Palestinian news agency Wafa reported that on Thursday night President Abbas called a meeting of the Fatah Central Committee, the party’s main decision-making body, at which "developments in the peace process" were discussed.
While the details of the talks are not yet public, the one-year time limit is viewed as crucial because the Palestinians are leery of being drawn into an open-ended negotiation with Israel. Mr. Netanyahu has long said he is open to talks, but the Palestinians have been resistant, seeking assurances from the United States about the terms and conditions.
Israel has eschewed any pre-conditions to negotiations, officials said, including an extension of the government’s 10-month, partial moratorium on settlement construction in the West Bank, set to expire on Sept. 26. The Obama administration has pushed to restart direct talks so that the two sides would be at the negotiating table when that date arrives.
Mr. Obama held separate meetings with Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas in recent weeks, which officials said helped reassure the Palestinians and began to heal a rift between Israel and the United States over American demands that Israel halt settlement construction.
The broad outlines of a peace agreement are well known and likely to be based on the borders of Israel before the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, with certain agreed-upon land swaps. But many analysts are skeptical that Israel and the Palestinians will be able to reach a deal, given the hardened political realities on each side.
Mr. Netanyahu is trying to hold together a right-wing coalition that will view concessions, like an extension of the settlement moratorium, with extreme suspicion. The Palestinians are deeply divided between Fatah, which controls the Palestinian Authority from its base in the West Bank, and Hamas, a militant Islamic group that rules Gaza and is shunned by the West for its terrorist attacks.
Some analysts believe the two sides will quickly turn to the United States to provide “bridging proposals” to help close the gap on delicate issues. Mr. Crowley stressed that the negotiation was between Israel and the Palestinians, but acknowledged the American role.
“We, the United States, have always played a special role within this effort, and we will be prepared to assist the parties going forward in moving towards a successful negotiation,” he said.
www.nytimes.com/2010/08/21/world/middleeast/21mideast.html?hp
WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is expected to announce Friday that Israel and the Palestinians will return to direct negotiations for the first time in 20 months, delivering the Obama administration a small victory in its protracted effort to revive the Middle East peace process, two officials briefed on the situation said Thursday evening.
The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, have agreed to place a one-year time limit on the talks, these officials said.
President Obama is expected to invite both leaders to Washington in early September to start the negotiations, which will cover thorny issues like the borders of a new Palestinian state, the political status of Jerusalem, security guarantees for Israel and right of return for Palestinian refugees.
The Obama administration declined to confirm the announcement, which was first reported by Reuters, with an official cautioning that final details were still being worked out and that the timing could slip by a day or so.
But after months of grueling diplomacy by the administration’s special envoy to the region, George J. Mitchell, officials sounded a more optimistic note on Thursday.
“We think we are very, very close to a decision by the parties to enter into direct negotiations,” Philip J. Crowley, the State Department spokesman, said to reporters. “We think we’re well positioned to get there.”
Mrs. Clinton has been working the phone in recent days to clear the final hurdles, speaking Thursday with Jordan’s foreign minister, Nasser Judeh, and with Tony Blair, the special representative of the Quartet, the group of Middle East peacemakers comprising the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia.
Late on Wednesday, she spoke with the prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, Salam Fayyad. The official Palestinian news agency Wafa reported that on Thursday night President Abbas called a meeting of the Fatah Central Committee, the party’s main decision-making body, at which "developments in the peace process" were discussed.
While the details of the talks are not yet public, the one-year time limit is viewed as crucial because the Palestinians are leery of being drawn into an open-ended negotiation with Israel. Mr. Netanyahu has long said he is open to talks, but the Palestinians have been resistant, seeking assurances from the United States about the terms and conditions.
Israel has eschewed any pre-conditions to negotiations, officials said, including an extension of the government’s 10-month, partial moratorium on settlement construction in the West Bank, set to expire on Sept. 26. The Obama administration has pushed to restart direct talks so that the two sides would be at the negotiating table when that date arrives.
Mr. Obama held separate meetings with Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas in recent weeks, which officials said helped reassure the Palestinians and began to heal a rift between Israel and the United States over American demands that Israel halt settlement construction.
The broad outlines of a peace agreement are well known and likely to be based on the borders of Israel before the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, with certain agreed-upon land swaps. But many analysts are skeptical that Israel and the Palestinians will be able to reach a deal, given the hardened political realities on each side.
Mr. Netanyahu is trying to hold together a right-wing coalition that will view concessions, like an extension of the settlement moratorium, with extreme suspicion. The Palestinians are deeply divided between Fatah, which controls the Palestinian Authority from its base in the West Bank, and Hamas, a militant Islamic group that rules Gaza and is shunned by the West for its terrorist attacks.
Some analysts believe the two sides will quickly turn to the United States to provide “bridging proposals” to help close the gap on delicate issues. Mr. Crowley stressed that the negotiation was between Israel and the Palestinians, but acknowledged the American role.
“We, the United States, have always played a special role within this effort, and we will be prepared to assist the parties going forward in moving towards a successful negotiation,” he said.
www.nytimes.com/2010/08/21/world/middleeast/21mideast.html?hp
U.S. IS SAID TO ASSURE ISRAEL A NUCLEAR IRAN ISN'T IMMINENT
August 19, 2010
By MARK MAZZETTI and DAVID E. SANGER
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, citing evidence of continued troubles inside Iran’s nuclear program, has persuaded Israel that it would take roughly a year — and perhaps longer — for Iran to complete what one senior official called a “dash” for a nuclear weapon, according to American officials.
White House officials said they believe the assessment has dimmed the prospect that Israel would pre-emptively strike against the country’s nuclear facilities within the next year, as Israeli officials have suggested in thinly veiled threats.
For years, Israeli and American officials have debated whether Iran is on an inexorable drive toward a nuclear bomb and, if so, how long it would take to produce one. A critical question has been the time it would take Tehran to convert existing stocks of low-enriched uranium into weapons-grade material, a process commonly known as “breakout.”
Israeli intelligence officials had argued that Iran could complete such a race for the bomb in months, while American intelligence agencies have come to believe in the past year that the timeline is longer.
“We think that they have roughly a year dash time,” said Gary Samore, President Obama’s top adviser on nuclear issues, referring to how long it would take the Iranians to convert nuclear material into a working weapon. “A year is a very long period of time.”
Mr. Samore said the United States believed international inspectors would detect an Iranian move toward breakout within weeks, leaving a considerable amount of time for the United States and Israel to consider military strikes.
The American assessments are based on intelligence collected over the past year, as well as reports from international inspectors. It is unclear whether the problems that Iran has had enriching uranium are the result of poor centrifuge design, difficulty obtaining components or accelerated Western efforts to sabotage the nuclear program.
American officials said new intelligence information was being fed into a long-delayed National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear program.
Now, American and Israeli officials believe breakout is unlikely anytime soon, according to administration officials. For one thing, Iran, which claims it is interested in enriching uranium only for peaceful purposes, would be forced to build nuclear bombs from a limited supply of nuclear material, currently enough for two weapons. Second, such a decision would require kicking out international weapons inspectors, eliminating any ambiguity about Iran’s nuclear plans.
Even if Iran were to choose this path, American officials said it would probably take Iran some time to reconfigure its nuclear facilities to produce weapons-grade uranium and ramp up work on designing a nuclear warhead.
Israeli officials have indicated that if they saw a race for the bomb under way, they would probably take military action and encourage the United States to join the effort.
American officials said, in contrast to a year ago, that Iran’s nuclear program was not currently the central focus of discussions between top leaders in Washington and Jerusalem. During the last visit to Washington by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel in early July, the Iranian program was relatively low on the agenda, according to one senior administration official.
To block Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the United States and the European Union recently imposed harsh economic sanctions aimed at choking off Iran’s energy supplies and prohibiting foreign banks from doing business with financial institutions inside the country.
Several officials said they believed the mounting cost of the economic sanctions, especially those affecting Iran’s ability to import gasoline and develop its oil fields, has created fissures among Iran’s political elite and forced a debate about the costs of developing nuclear weapons.
“The argument is over how far to push the program, how close to a weapon they can get without paying an even higher price,” said the senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because American assessments on these debates are classified. “And we’re beginning to see a lot of divisions inside the leadership on that question.”
Nuclear experts agree that the hardest element of producing a weapon is obtaining weapons-grade material. And for Iran that quest, which stretches back more than 20 years, has not been going well, by most accounts.
For most of this year, Iran has added relatively few centrifuges — the machines that spin uranium at supersonic speed, enriching it — to its main plant at Natanz. Only about half of those installed are operating, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. That would be enough, with considerable additional enrichment, to produce roughly two weapons.
The public explanation by American officials is that the centrifuges are inefficient and subject to regular breakdowns. And while Iranian officials have talked about installing more advanced models that would be more efficient and reliable, only a few have been installed.
“Either they don’t have the machines, or they have real questions about their technical competence,” Mr. Samore said.
Some of Iran’s enrichment problems appear to have external origins. Sanctions have made it more difficult for Iran to obtain precision parts and specialty metals. Moreover, the United States, Israel and Europe have for years engaged in covert attempts to disrupt the enrichment process by sabotaging the centrifuges. Those efforts accelerated in the last years of the Bush administration and, according to several officials, have continued under Mr. Obama.
Officials concede there are potential vulnerabilities in their assessments. Chief among them is whether Iran has hidden another enrichment center somewhere in the tunnels it has dug throughout the country, including some near Natanz.
Last September, Iran acknowledged to inspectors that it had spent years building such a hidden facility near the holy city of Qum, buried in a mountain near a major military base. The admission came just days before Mr. Obama, along with Britain’s prime minister at the time, Gordon Brown, and France’s president, Nicolas Sarkozy, revealed the existence of the facility. But after detailed surveys, and interviews with defectors, officials say they have no evidence a second such facility is under construction.
The current draft of the intelligence report also describes considerable division in Iran about whether the goal of the nuclear program should be to walk right up to the threshold of building an actual bomb — which would mean having highly enriched uranium on hand, along with a workable weapons design — or simply to keep enough low-enriched uranium on hand to preserve Tehran’s options for building a weapon later.
Even as American and Israeli officials agree that the date that Iran is likely to have a nuclear weapon has been pushed into the future, that does not mean that Israel has abandoned the idea of a possible military strike.
American officials said that Israel was particularly concerned that, over time, Iran’s supreme leader could order that nuclear materials be dispersed to secret locations around the country, making it less likely that an Israeli military strike would significantly cripple the program.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)