The hundreds facets of evil

While checking the news, the first thing my eyes saw was the face of a young Palestinian man hit and beaten by Israelis right- wing extremists in front of the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem. For those of you who are following the news, this might not seem an exceptional event, but rather the ordinary life in Jerusalem. And still, even if we are getting used to read of Palestinians harassed both in Jerusalem and the West Bank, I cannot accept it. I have to condemn this blind and unjustified violence. What I feel is despair. We are taking a perilous path and it seems to me that we are reaching, slowly but steadily, a point of non- return.
The situation in Jerusalem is inflamed, a violent act every day follows another from both sides. Gazans are slowly receiving the humanitarian aid they need for the reconstruction, but this does not mean the aid is enough and it does not mean that the population is relieved. A woman from Gaza told me that they live with 6 hours of electricity per day, which is not even enough to make the destroyed water infrastructures work, that school has begun and, therefore, families are living in tents because students are going back to classes and that there is no will to return to normal life. To what purpose, then, reconstruct a house that will be likely destroyed in few years? To what purpose sow seeds, when it is likely your trees will not have the time to grow because they will be erased before flourishing? In the West Bank, the situation is not that dramatic, but it’s not a safe haven either. And my thought goes in particular to the Palestinians living in the Jericho Valley, where the living conditions are even harsher than in the rest of Palestinian towns.
What outrages and disgusts me is the silence surrounding those sufferings. And I’m not talking about the media. I’m talking about the institutions that could make the difference but would rather prefer to immerge their hands in Palestinian blood instead of denouncing criminals and defying lobbies and the economic power in general. Because, in the end, everything turns around money. And we, Palestinians, got the message clear and sound. Our lives are not worthy one euro.
According to an article of Aljazeera (http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/11/where-are-eu-sanctions-israel-20141123111629393982.html), Haaretz had published an article few days ago announcing a EU draft proposal on sanctions against Israel. Though, Federica Morgherini, the EU foreign policy chief during the Italian semester, denied that by saying that the EU has not in mind of sanctioning anyone (of course not Israel, unsurprisingly one of the main European commercial partners!). The EU was rather discussing how to broker peace in the Palestinian- Israeli conflict.
But please, let’s be serious. Negotiations? Again? We have been negotiating for the past 30 years and the only results we achieved were humiliation, land grab, settlements, violence and an untrustworthy neighbor. Not only the negotiations have been difficult because of the disparity in power (diplomatic, economic and, above all, military), but also because everyone has tried to meddle into the Middle Eastern affairs, further complicating the situation. It’s true that Palestinians alone, unfortunately, can’t challenge the fourth most powerful army in the world, but then, those who proclaimed to be even-handed peace- brokers, indeed weren’t (see United States).
Additionally, and here I’ll take Edward Said’s point of view, there is one unescapable pre- condition to enter the negotiations: the end of the occupation. This is not a negotiable solution. Unconditional withdrawal of the Israeli army from Palestinian territory, end of the blockade of the Gaza Strip, end of the validity of military rules and respect of the internationally recognized borders. Then, it might have sense to enter into negotiations. Not before, dear Miss Morgherini&Co.
As for the internal politics, the Israeli society and government are probably racing to show who’s more right. Civilians harass the Palestinian population, settlers take over Palestinian homes and the Israeli government demolishes Palestinian homes, issues a law punishing stone throwners (of course of Palestinian nationality. The settlers throwing stones at Palestinians will not be convicted), discusses a bill defining Israel as the “Jewish nation- state” (that’s not new, a similar bill was discussed earlier this year, when Israel asked the Palestinian government to recognize Israel as a Jewish State in order to continue the negotiations) and insults the intelligence of everyone at the United Nations, by saying that an independent Palestinian States will be a “terror-cracy”. Not only this later statement wants to play with the dumb conscience of Westerners obsessed by the terrorist Arab world, but wants to make Palestinians enemies of the entire world.
As if the situation wasn’t complicated enough, many want to make us thinking that here we’re dealing with a religious conflict, therefore transforming it in a zero- sum game, where each party has everything to lose and everything to win. Besides, this shifts the discourse from rights and law to a supposed universal “moral” where there are a good and a bad party. The only problem with such a vision of the conflict is that it is not true, it is dangerous and misbehaving. Here, we are dealing with a colonizer and a colonized population. Nothing less and nothing more. Jerusalem is not claimed by the parties because of religion, but because it reflects the national aspirations of both. Of course the religious symbol of Jerusalem matters, but religion has nothing to do with the current Israeli policy.
On the Palestinian side, nothing much can be said. I don’t see any clear direction or policy or leadership. On the one hand, there are the constraints of the occupation and the military rule which hamper the Palestinian Authority to rule its territories independently; on the other hand, though, governmental responsibilities must be taken into consideration. Unfortunately, we can wonder whether the corrupt political elite of Palestine really represents the Palestinian population and its interests or if it’s rather preserving itself for survival.
On the 29th of this month, the Resolution of the General Assembly which recognized Palestine as a State will have two years. In this period of time no progress has been done. This shows us that the means we have tried up to now are fruitless and helpless. We should find other and more innovative and creative solutions to the conflict before it is too late. The solution is from within. The solution is in the two peoples. When will they start to dialogue without the interference of politicians?

Propaganda: Extending Israeli Laws to Palestinians to End Human Rights Abuses

Some time has passed since my last post, where I made the point of the situation on the last decisions on the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip and on the latest news in the international community with regards to Palestine. Today, I will give you some information on the current situation in Palestine, but I would rather prefer to talk about a personal experience.
I would to begin with the recent vote of Sweden, which officially recognized Palestine as a State, making Sweden the first (and biggest) European State to do so. Amid harsh reactions from the Israeli side, Wallstrom wrote in the Dagens Nyheter newspaper: “Some will state this decision comes too soon. I am afraid, rather, that it is too late”. The government’s decision doesn’t come unexpected, given that the new elected government had announced that it would have done that one month ago. British Parliament has voted a similar motion, though non- binding for the moment and France announced that it is considering to do the same. In the short-term, this won’t lead to any change whatsoever, though it reflects a change in western people’s mind.
Another important event of this week is that Sodastream closed its factory based in the illegal settlement of Mishor Adumim. This is a good news, given the illegality of its activities in the OPT and, even if neglected by the company, the closure might be seen as a victory of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, that contributed to the withdrawal of Sodastream products from retailers such as Macy’s in the US and John Lewis in the UK. A good news, though, is always followed by a bad news: Sodastream, indeed, will open a factory in the Naqab desert, which will entail massive Bedouin communities displacements. It can be predicted that Sodastream will still remain the target of the BDS movement.
Last but not least, Jerusalem. Trying to follow and understand what’s happening in Jerusalem is difficult, frustrating, humiliating and not understandable. It seems that we’re assisting to a war and, indeed, what we get are war news. Arrests (of Palestinians), killings (on both sides), clashes in the Al-Aqsa mosque, closure of the Al-Aqsa mosque, protests ending up in arrests, injured and killed, proposal of a law in order to divide the Al-Aqsa mosque in a Jewish and Muslim part (as happened for the Ibrahim mosque in Al Khalil, i.e. Hebron), proposal of a law condemning to 20 year imprisonment sentences stone-throwing people (now they are 2), adoption of a law imposing the videotaping of children interviews by the police (excluded the case of children arrested and convicted for security threats, so basically no videotaping will be done, because this clause will be evocated all times), homes demolitions as a collective punishment and call from the Israeli government to increase the cruelty of its measures against the Palestinians, Hamas retaliating against the closure of the mosque and so on. I can’t go in detail on all those issues and I don’t have the space to comment them, though, those who are interested in deepening these subjects can find all the relevant information on the major newspapers.
I want to now turn to a conference I personally attended, held by Calev Meyers (Founder of the Jerusalem Institute of Justice, Former Executive Director of the Knesset Caucus for Combatting Anti-Semitism, Former Legal Counsel to the Chairman of the Knesset Social Welfare Lobby), Christy Anastas (I won’t spend a word on her beliefs, theories and lies) and Eli Hazan (historian , journalist, Vice President of Advocacy of the Jerusalem Institute of Justice). The conference was about human rights abuses in the West Bank and Gaza, committed not by Israel but by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas. The speakers wanted to tell us facts and the Truth (as if truth with capital letters exists). I didn’t attend the conference because I support those people, but because I was curious about what they were going to say and because I thought that someone must have replied to them and who, if not the persons who know something about Palestine, Israel and international law? Given that the conference was held in my university, I went there and surprisingly (or maybe not!?), the class was almost empty, except for the speakers, an Israeli cameraman and an Israeli journalist and some Israelis and Jews. I must admit that I’m quite relieved that those persons don’t enjoy much credibility in my university. Anyway, the conference started and I want to share with you some of the arguments raised by Mr. Meyers and Mr. Hazan.
Mr. Meyers, the founder of the Jerusalem Institute of Justice, began the talk by saying that back in the ‘40s, before the establishment of the State of Israel, the Arab States refused the idea of a two- state solution and that, nowadays, instead of focusing on land and national aspirations, Palestinians and the international community should rather focus on the very essence of human beings and human rights, as the only possible outcome for peace. Seventy years have passed since the UN partition plan, the Arab League refusal for a two- state solution and the creation of the State of Israel, with all the bad consequences and violations of international law (and I mean the international law of that time) it entailed, so it has little if not any sense to go back to those days to claim who is good and who is wrong. Going back to those days should be rather the basis to analyze the frenetic events that took place, establish responsibilities and build the bases for justice. I agree that the human dimension of each one of us is fundamental and it’s because of this consideration that the occupation must end, the Israeli army must withdraw, Palestinians should be granted their rights to self-determination and independence and the ICC should clearly state the crimes committed by Israel from 2002 and onwards. There can’t be peace without justice, when there has been ethnic cleansing, as was the case of the Former Yugoslavia.
Then, he said that his organization is helping Palestinians to reach their national aspirations (he didn’t explain how) and that the main human rights abuses Palestinians suffer occur in the neighboring Arab countries, where they are denied citizenship and access to many public professions (which is by the way sadly true). Therefore, as the situation of Palestinian refugees is worst than that of those living in the West Bank, Gaza and the so-called Arab Israelis, we should focus on Palestinian refugees first, by abandoning the notion and the implementation of the right of return and inventing a highly arguable new right, which he called the “right of absorption”. By that, he was meaning that Palestinians should become citizens of the State in which they’re living, be it Jordan, Syria, Lebanon or whatsoever, and therefore losing their status as refugees. I could agree on the fact that Palestinians should be granted the citizenship in the Arab States where they live, since they’re living there since 1948. Though, I don’t agree on the fact that they should lose their status as refugees, which entails the right of return, never recognized by Israel (while, at the same time, Israel recognizes the right to all the Jews world-wide to return to Israel, their natural and safe homeland). Indeed, being a national of one country is not incompatible with being a refugee or with holding a dual citizenship, which is often the case in mixed couples for example. This is clearly propaganda, aimed at getting rid of the refugees on political grounds, rather than on human rights considerations.
Subsequently, this gentlemen turned to the issue of human rights violations committed by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, that, in his opinion, use the money and funding of the international community to maintain the political elite and sponsor terrorism. He asked himself why, given that the PA receives 26 billion dollars a year, this money is not spent on infrastructures, jobs and industry. I thought he must be kidding, given that Palestinians are prevented to build any kind of infrastructure without the consent of Israel and that the industrial sector is hampered by the Israeli occupation. The PA can’t even build or repair a water pipeline without the authorization of the Israeli Civil Administration, so how could he expect Palestinians to build other infrastructures or even an industrial sector? Another example of propaganda. As for the human rights violations committed by both Hamas and the PA, I must admit that I don’t have data on hand or field experience, though I know that some Palestinian and international NGOs, such as the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, are monitoring the situation, conducting research and issuing reports. Violations have been committed and are still committed and those reports show that, without being politically biased and without the intent to delegitimize anyone.
I would like to add also another consideration, which is related to the (non)respect of human rights by Israel towards the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza and Israel proper. First, as Israel has de facto control over the West Bank and Gaza, exercises its authority over those two territories and it is a party to the 1989 Convention on the Rights if the Child and the two 1966 International Covenants on Human Rights (ICESCR and ICCPR), it has the obligation to respect and implement the rights of the Palestinians. This means that Israel can’t arrest them without a fair trial, it can’t build settlements, it can’t demolish homes, it can’t reduce their freedom of expression and movement and so on. And yet, these violations occur every single day since 1967 and when I asked the speaker why his association doesn’t focus primarily on the violations his state is committing he didn’t want to answer me. Additionally, even if Arab Israelis (never identified as Israelis solely, but always called Arab Israelis, which highlights the racial bases of the Israeli State) are granted the right to vote and have some representatives in the Knesset, even if they can go to public Israeli universities (but not other schools), even if they are granted some access to the health system, etc. (which sounds obvious, given that they work and pay taxes and are citizens of the State of Israel), they’re still discriminated on an immense number of other rights: no equal access to land purchase, no equal right in freedom of association, of speech and so on. So, what is the purpose of focusing on human rights abuses on Palestinians occurring on the other side of the border by the hand of an external actor, rather than on human rights violations of Israeli citizens?
I must assume, then, that the reasons are political and not humanitarian.
The other speaker, the journalist and (highly questionable) historian, Mr. Hazan talked extensively about Hamas (the evil of all evils) and the democratic deficit both in Gaza and in the West Bank. Additionally, he went on delegitimizing and criminalizing Hamas, whose aim, in his opinion, is not to build a State but to destroy one (referring to Israel). He did go further, by saying that the international community should have condemned the coalition government between Hamas and Fatah. But, if this reconciliation would have driven Hamas on a different political line, based on the recognition of Israel and negotiations as a viable means to solve the conflict, which is the main line of Fatah and that Hamas had to accept, why to exclude it from the talks? Hamas has been elected by Palestinians and we can’t support democracy only when it fits and suits our own interests and values. I’d rather think that Israel and Israeli hardliners have rejected this reunification because it would have changed Hamas mindset, would have reunited the Palestinian society and would have made more difficult for Israel to refuse to talk with Hamas and reach an agreement with the Palestinians.
Moreover, what about the fact that Israel has funded and created Hamas to get rid of Arafat? What about the democratic deficit in Israel, where one is jailed if refuses to serve in the army? What about the Israeli discrimination against Arab Israelis? What about the disproportionate reaction of Israel during the assault on Gaza? Given that he was saying that Israel had the right to defend itself and that it must continue the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip because if not “Arabs will throw Jews into the sea”, these seemed legitimate questions to ask. And though, the answers either didn’t come or were inconsistent and mere propaganda.
If the Israeli society is so scared of an autonomous, free and independent Palestine, why during the negotiations (both with the PA and, later, with Hamas) Israel didn’t accept the Palestinian proposal to have international coalition forces to monitor the borders and the situation?
The talk, which has appeared to be much more into propaganda of the moral superiority of the State of Israel than on human rights violations committed by Palestinians themselves, ended with the only solution to the problem, according the two Israeli speakers: that is, Israeli laws should be extended to all the Palestinian population (in Israel, the West Bank –called by them Judea and Samaria by the way- and Gaza) on the bases that Israel can protect their human rights and that 76% of Palestinians would rather prefer to live under Israeli rule than under the Palestinian one. From where they got that figure we don’t know, given that they didn’t tell us. That Israel might better protect the human rights of Palestinians has proved to not be the case.