World Video | Defence | Foreign Affairs | Natural Events | Trade | NZ in World News | NZ National News Video | NZ Regional News | Search

 


Israel/Palestine: Land grab during the conference


1) SHARON NOW - Gush ad, Ha'aretz, February 11
2) Land grab during the conference
3) “Sharm-al-Sheikh, We Have Come Back Again…” - by Uri Avnery

1) SHARON NOW - Gush ad, Ha'aretz, February 11

SHARON NOW

“The Palestinians will be judged by their actions, not by their words,” Ariel Sharon declared at Sharm-al-Sheikh.

Does this apply to him, too?

While he was speaking, the military commander distributed orders of expropriation to hundreds of Palestinian families in the South Hebron area. Under the pretext of building the wall, they are being cut off from the rest of the West Bank, in preparation for the annexation of the area to Israel.

While Sharon talks about peace, he continues to build the wall that strangulates West Bank towns and villages. He expropriates more land and cuts off more people – all this in order to change the borders of Israel and annex 58% of the West Bank.

Is this the Peace of Sharon?

Gush Shalom, Help us with donations to P.O.Box 3322, Tel-Aviv 61033. http://www.gush-shalom.org/

2) Land grab during the conference

Details on the affair mentioned in the above ad: at the very time that Palestinians as well as Israelis were listening to the ceremonious speeches broadcast live from Sharm-a-Sheik, Israeli military officers arrived at the tiny Palestinian village of Twane in the South Hebron Hills, on the southern edge of the West Bank.

The confiscation order they delivered, numbered 16/05/t and signed by the commander of Israeli forces on the West Bank, decreed that a parcel of the (far from plentiful) Twane land would henceforward become the property of the Israeli army, with all rights over this land to be vested in "The Real Estate Officer at the IDF Central Command Headquarters". This act was justified as being "needed for military needs, due to the special security circumstances prevailing in the region and the need to take unavidable steps in order to prevent terrorist attacks".

No specific details were given - the army might provide them when the matter gets to the Supreme Court, or plead a "need to keep the evidence secret" even there. Adv. Shlomo Leker of Jerusalem, who represented the people of Twane during numerous previous attempts to expell them or confiscate their land, believes that the order is aimed at extending the nearby Israeli settlement of Ma'on, whose inhabitants on numerous occasions used violence against the Palestinian villagers. In general Adv. Leker noted that, while everybody's attention is directed to the Gaza Redeployment, all over the West Bank the land grab is going on at a pace which he never experienced in his long career of confrnting land confiscations in the courts.

When asked to comment by Yossi Gurevitz of the Nana News website, the IDF Spokesman answered: "Such a village does not exist".

3) “Sharm-al-Sheikh, We Have Come Back Again…” - by Uri Avnery

“Sharm-al-Sheikh, We Have Come Back Again…”

Uri Avnery 12.2.05

Nobody called it the “Ophira Conference”. Not even the papers of the extreme right. Who today even remembers the name Ophira, which was given to Sharm-al-Sheikh during the Israeli occupation, as a first step to its annexation?

Who wants to remember the famous saying of Moshe Dayan that “Sharm-al- Sheikh is more important than peace”? A few years later, the same Dayan took part in the peace negotiations with Egypt and gave Sharm-al-Sheikh back. But in the meantime, some 2500 young Israelis and who knows how many thousands of Egyptians paid with their lives for that statement in the Yom Kippur war.

While the conference went on, I could not clear my head of a song that was haunting me: “Sharm-al-Sheikh, we have come back again…” It was sung with gusto in the days of the stupid euphoria after the Six-Day war. It reminded people at the time that we had already conquered the place during the 1956 Sinai war but were compelled by the Eisenhower-Bulganin ultimatum to withdraw. So here we were again.

I was there in 1956. A beautiful gulf (“Sharm-al-Sheikh means “the bay of the old man”), a few small houses and a distinctive mosque. Before our army withdrew, a few months later, it blew up the mosque in a fit of pique.

Now, 22 years after leaving Ophira for the last time (nobody sang then “Sharm-al-Sheikh, we have left you again…”) all of us are treating the place as an Egyptian resort, as Egyptian as Cairo and Alexandria. The past has been erased. The occupation has been wiped from our collective memory.

That is the first optimistic lesson from the conference. One can withdraw. One can put an end to occupation. One can even forget that it ever took place.

The spirits of two people who were not there hovered over the proceedings.

One of them was George W. Bush. Neither he nor any other American sat at the large round table. But all the four who were sitting there knew that they are completely dependent on him. Husni Mubarak relies on the two billion dollars he gets every year from the United States, under the auspices of a Congress dominated by the pro-Israeli lobby. King Abdallah of Jordan gets much less, but his regime, too, depends on US support.

Ariel Sharon is the Siamese twin of Bush and cannot move without him. It is barely conceivable that he would do anything, big or small, that would upset Bush. Abu-Mazen, for his part, is playing va banque in the hope that Bush will help the Palestinians to cast off the occupation and establish their state.

So why did the Americans not come to Sharm? Because they are not ready to risk taking part in a process that might fail. They will come when success is assured. And today it is not.

The second absentee was Yasser Arafat. The conference would not have taken place without his mysterious death. It deprived Sharon of the pretext to put peace in “formalin”, as described by Dov Weissglas, his closest advisor, who sat next to him throughout the conference. No Arafat, no pretext. Israeli propaganda, which worked so hard to portray Arafat as a devil, will have to toil hard to do the same to Abu Mazen.

Abu Mazen succeeded in slipping the name of Arafat into his speech, but only in an indirect way. But he – like every Palestinian – knows that it was the 45 years of Arafat’s work that laid the foundations on which Abu Mazen is now building his new strategy. Without the first intifada there would have been no Oslo, and without the second intifada there would have been no Sharm-al-Sheikh conference. Only the violent Palestinian resistance, which the Israeli army has not been able to put down, has brought Sharon to the round table.

The Israeli army knows by now that it cannot stamp out the insurgency by military means. The Palestinians have recovered their self-respect, much like the Egyptians after Yom Kippur. Many of them also believe that in his second term of office, Bush will impose withdrawal on Israel.

Incidentally, the demonization of Arafat has by no means stopped after his death. On the contrary, it goes on with great fervor. The Left and the Right in Israel, in heart-warming unity, declare in almost every article and TV talk-show that Arafat was the great obstacle to peace. Not the occupation. Not the settlements. Not the policy of Netanyahu-Barak- Sharon. Only Arafat. Fact: Arafat died and hopla – there is a conference.

The game played by Condoleezza Rice was especially amusing. She visited the Mukata’ah, where every stone shouts the name of Arafat. She did not lay a wreath on his grave – a minimal gesture of courtesy that would have won the hearts of the Palestinians. However, as a diplomatic compromise, she agreed to have her handshake with Abu Mazen photographed under the picture of Arafat.

Arafat smiled his canny smile. He surely understood. So what was achieved at this conference?

Easier to say what was not.

The Oslo agreement failed because it did not spell out the final aim which was to be achieved after the tortuous interim stages. Arafat and Abu Mazen had a clear objective: a Palestinian State in all of the occupied territories with East Jerusalem as its capital, a return to the Green Line border (with minimal adjustments), dismantling the settlements and a practical solution to the refugee problem. The Israelis did not have the courage to define this inevitable solution, and many still dreamed about a Greater Israel.

That was a recipe for failure. And the very next day the quarrelling about every single paragraph began.

At Sharm-al-Sheikh the resolution of the conflict was not mentioned at all. Abu Mazen succeeded in slipping in some words, but Sharon did not react. This omission is very significant. It must be emphasized: Sharon did not utter a single word that does not conform with his plan of annexing 58% of the West Bank and enclosing the Palestinians in small enclaves in the rest of the territories.

The same goes for the timetable. In Oslo dates were indeed fixed, but the Israeli party had no intention of keeping to them. “There are no sacred dates,” Yitzhaq Rabin famously declared after signing the timetable.

That was a fatal mistake. Quite literally – it killed Rabin. The postponement of the solution allowed the opponents of peace the time to regain their strength, to regroup and mount the counter-attack that culminated in the assassination of Rabin. In vain did we quote to Rabin the dictum of Lloyd-George: “You cannot cross an abyss in two jumps.”

Abu Mazen said at Sharm-al-Sheikh that this is the first step on a long road. A long road is a dangerous road. All along it the those who seek to sabotage peace, Israelis as well as Palestinians, are lurking.

Moreover, one of the basic conditions for a real peace process – and perhaps the most important one – is the truthful representation of reality. If one listened to all the speeches, one could get the impression that the root problem is “Palestinian terrorism”, and that if this stops, everything will be alright. In the following sequence: (a) The Palestinians end their “violence”, (b) Israel stops military actions, (c) security cooperation is established and (d) G*d and/or Allah will take care of the rest.

Pessimists will say: Nothing came from of the conference. The cease-fire is fragile. In the best case, Sharon will fulfil his promise of withdrawing from the Gaza Strip and dismantling a few settlements. Then the trouble will start anew.

Optimists will say: This is a good beginning. The cessation of “Palestinian terrorism” will create a new atmosphere in Israel. The dismantling of the first settlements will create a crucial confrontation. The settlers and the nationalist-messianic Right will be defeated. People will realize that life can be different. The dynamics of the process will carry Sharon along and he will not be able to stop it, even if he wants to.

Who is right?

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
World Headlines

 

Preliminary Results: MH17 Investigation Report

The Joint Investigation Team (JIT) is convinced of having obtained irrefutable evidence to establish that on 17 July 2014, flight MH-17 was shot down by a BUK missile from the 9M38-series. According to the JIT there is also evidence identifying the launch location that involves an agricultural field near Pervomaiskyi which, at the time, was controlled by pro-Russian fighters. More>>

ALSO:

At The UN: Paris Climate Agreement Moves Closer To Entry Into Force

The Paris Agreement on climate change moved closer toward entering into force in 2016 as 31 more countries joined the agreement today at a special event hosted by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. More>>

ALSO:

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On The End Game In Spain (And Other World News)

The coverage of international news seems almost entirely dependent on a random selection of whatever some overseas news agency happens to be carrying overnight... Here are a few interesting international stories that have largely flown beneath the radar this past week. More>>

Amnesty/Human Rights Watch: Appalling Abuse, Neglect Of Refugees On Nauru

Refugees and asylum seekers on Nauru, most of whom have been held there for three years, routinely face neglect by health workers and other service providers who have been hired by the Australian government, as well as frequent unpunished assaults by local Nauruans. More>>

ALSO:

Other Australian Detention

Gordon Campbell: On The Censorship Havoc In South Africa’s State Broadcaster

Demands have included an order to staff that there should be no further negative news about the country’s President Jacob Zuma, and SABC camera operators responsible for choosing camera angles that have allegedly made the President ‘look shorter’ were to be retrained... More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On A Bad Week For Malcolm Turnbull, And The Queen

Malcolm Turnbull’s immediate goal – mere survival – is still within his grasp... In every other respect though, this election has been a total disaster for the Liberals. More>>

ALSO:

Get More From Scoop

 
 
 
 
 
World
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news