Labels

Saturday, September 21, 2013

Israel's soldiers confront EU diplomats and confiscate aid


A child in the unrecognized Bedouin villages, the Negev Desert, Israel

Israel’s soldiers confront EU diplomats and confiscate aid

 
September 20, 2013 7:34 pm
 
Israeli soldiers manhandled European diplomats and confiscated an aid truck carrying tents to homeless Palestinians in the West Bank on Friday in an incident likely to test Israel’s strained relations with European countries

The incident happened on Friday afternoon in the northern Jordan Valley when Acted, a French humanitarian aid organisation funded by the EU’s humanitarian arm, was stopped by Israel Defence Forces soldiers near the hamlet of Kirbet Makhoul, home to about 100 Bedouin Palestinians, which Israel's army bulldozed early last Monday ...READ MORE

 [AS ALWAYS PLEASE GO TO THE LINK TO READ GOOD ARTICLES IN FULL: HELP SHAPE ALGORITHMS (and conversations) THAT EMPOWER DECENCY, DIGNITY, JUSTICE & PEACE... and hopefully Palestine]

My letters to Washington Post & NYTimes RE Israeli mayor wants to keep his city Jewish ‘now and forever’ & Israel Should Annul the Oslo Accords By Danny Danon a member of the Knesset and the deputy defense minister of Israel


RE High above Nazareth, an Israeli mayor wants to keep his city Jewish ‘now and forever’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/high-above-nazareth-an-israeli-mayor-wants-to-keep-his-city-jewish-now-and-forever/2013/09/19/1a3fd172-2157-11e3-ad1a-1a919f2ed890_story.html

Dear Editor,

Thank you for publishing a probing food for thought story on the Israeli quest to make Nazareth Jewish.  I don't think tax payers here or there should be forced to fund and empower an official state religion, no matter what that religion might be.

Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security as two sovereign separate secular nation states is a starting point for a just and lasting peace: That peace will not be just, or lasting, if everyone is bullied into endorsing Israel's supposed Jewishness. 

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab

************

RE Israel Should Annul the Oslo Accords By Danny Danon a member of the Knesset and the deputy defense minister of Israel
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/21/opinion/israel-should-annul-the-oslo-accords.html?ref=global&_r=0

Dear Editor,

Israelis and Palestinians living side by side in peace and prosperity is indeed a very worthy goal, but dismissing the Oslo Accords will not help make that happen. Reach back further- deeper into the conflict itself:

In 1948, at a time when segregation and institutionalized bigotry were common here in America, and Jim Crow laws ( enacted between 1876 and 1965) had yet to be dismantled, few knew to object to the specific word choice of "Jewish State" when Israel was founded... Rethinking existing paradigms, for everyone's sake Israel should annul its misguided quest to be formally defined as Jewish.

Tax payers here and there should not be forced to subsidize Israel's religious fantasies... nor should Islamist militants be sent the message that the international community approves of arming one favored religion with lethal weaponry plus sovereign powers.  What is good for the goose- is good for the gander.

Negotiations for a just and lasting peace need to be based on firm respect for international law, universal basic human rights and a fully secular two state end to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

As Martin Luther King Jr wisely pointed out in 1967: "Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal."

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab

NOTES
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Article 1
  • All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
September 21st the International Day of Peace, a.k.a. "Peace Day" provides an opportunity for individuals, organizations and nations to create practical acts of peace on a shared date.

The Promised Land: In Celebration of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights & Peace Day...Ibrahim's Estate... a poem by Anne Selden Annab

Israel and Palestine Vs. ‘Blood and Magic’ by Hussein Ibish, Saliba Sarsar Sep 17, 2013 "The occupation is an emergency, not a macro- or trans-historical problem, particularly for the millions of Palestinians living under its oppressive rule. They, especially—but we too—do not have the luxury of waiting to see what the next hundred years of history will bring us, good or bad. On the contrary, we must have the courage to act now, and with urgency, within the existing realities, however difficult, to try to create a working solution to a situation that is both intolerably unjust and regionally (and to some extent even globally) destabilizing." 


20 years of Oslo: Maybe the best thing to happen to Palestinians by Suhail Khalilieh ... "The construction of settlements as it exists today is an inevitable consequence of the occupation. In fact, it might have been increased by much more if it was not for Oslo. Even the settler population might have been the same or more, because movement would have been easier and roads would have been better facilitated for the settlers."

CSM: Bedouins slam Israel's desert development as 'Nakba in the Negev' ... An Israeli development plan for the Negev desert would evict 40,000 semi-nomadic Arab Bedouins, who compare it to the Palestinian expulsion after Israel's founding.

Israel displaces dozens of Palestinian families for military exercises

Farah Chamma- I Am No Palestinian

Twenty Years After Oslo, Trying it Again

CNN: World-renowned chef, best-selling author and Emmy-winning television personality Anthony Bourdain... 10 things to know before visiting Israel, the West Bank and Gaza

Anthony Bourdain, Will You Marry Me?

From handshake of peace to handcuffs of subjugation

U.S. Foreign Policy

NSA scandal: “Israel which discriminates continuously against US citizens of Arab and Muslim origins should not be rewarded with information that encourages and enhances its ability to discriminate against them leading to their deportations at Israeli airports, banning them from entry, and even jailing them,”

On Yom Kippur, Remember My Palestinian Mother: "The lesson, I think, is this: the Holy Land holds histories that, with time, can be taught to coexist. My mother’s is one of them. As she navigates her own, inner peace process, I hope that one day, in her lifetime, it leads home."

Palestine and Israel in the New Regional Context

Witnesses: Israeli forces bulldoze land south of Qalqiliya

Israelis uproot over 40 Palestinian olive trees in south Hebron hills late Sunday

The politicization of religion contributes to discrimination and persecution of religious minorities around the world....  “The politicization of religion and use of religion in politics has often added to polarization, social divides and conflicts in traditionally tolerant communities around the globe”

More Times Than I Can Remember ... a poem by Saliba Sarsar (born and raised in Jerusalem)

Palestine Festival of Literature 2013

Negotiations are a way to get our rights

point by point ...a poem

Live by the Golden Rule

Palestinian Refugees (1948-NOW) refused their right to return... and their right to live in peace free from religious bigotry and injustice.

Dear President Obama... Let Freedom Ring

194

Help Build A Golden Rule Peace for the Holy Land

Globalizing Martin Luther King, Jr.


 *********
The Arab Peace Initiative
1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.
2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:
I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.
II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194.
III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
3. Consequently, the Arab countries affirm the following:
I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.

II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.
The Office of International Religious Freedom ( http://www.state.gov/j/drl/irf/)   Given the U.S. commitment to religious freedom, and to the international covenants that guarantee it as the inalienable right of every human being, the United States seeks to:

Promote freedom of religion and conscience throughout the world as a fundamental human right and as a source of stability for all countries


"Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world." Eleanor Roosevelt

Live by the Golden Rule
Words to Honor: The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 1.
    All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

".... it being clearly understood that nothing
          shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious
          rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine....

"In 1949, the international community accepted Israel's UN membership upon two conditions: That they respect resolutions 181 (two states) and 194 (refugee rights). Neither has been honored. In fact, 65 years later, Israel has not even acknowledged what it did in 1948." Saeb Erekat
 
11 December 1948 UN Resolution 194:"Refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible"


The Golden Rule... Do unto others as you would have them do unto you

Friday, September 20, 2013

September 21st the International Day of Peace, a.k.a. "Peace Day" provides an opportunity for individuals, organizations and nations to create practical acts of peace on a shared date.






This year, 2013, the International Day of Peace is on a Saturday, September 21st, and special activities and celebrations will take place all across the world over the 2013 Peace Day Weekend, including festivals, concerts, a global Peace Wave with moments of silence at noon in every time zone, and much more.

The International Day of Peace, a.k.a. "Peace Day" provides an opportunity for individuals, organizations and nations to create practical acts of peace on a shared date.

In 1981, the United Nations General Assembly, by unanimous vote, adopted Resolution 36/67 establishing the International Day of Peace (IDP) which stated in part, “…to devote a specific time to concentrate the efforts of the United Nations and its Member States, as well as the whole of mankind, to promoting the ideals of peace and to giving positive evidence of their commitment to peace in all viable ways.” The first Peace Day was celebrated in September 1982 on the opening day of the General Assembly.

In 2002 the UN General Assembly officially declared September 21 as the permanent annual date for the International Day of Peace.

By creating the International Day of Peace, the UN devoted a specific day and collaborative focus on worldwide peace and encouraged all of humanity to work in cooperation for this goal. During the discussion of the U.N. Resolution that established the International Day of Peace, it was suggested that:

Peace Day should be devoted to commemorating and strengthening the ideals of peace both within and among all nations and peoples…This day will serve as a reminder to all peoples that our organization, with all its limitations, is a living instrument in the service of peace and should serve all of us here within the organization as a constantly pealing bell reminding us that our permanent commitment, above all interests or differences of any kind, is to peace.

Since its inception, Peace Day has marked our personal and planetary progress toward peace. It has grown to include millions of people in all parts of the world, and each year events are organized to commemorate and celebrate this day. Events range in scale from private gatherings to public concerts and forums where hundreds of thousands of people participate.

Anyone, anywhere can celebrate Peace Day. It can be as simple as lighting a candle at noon, sitting in silent meditation, or doing a good deed for someone you do not know. Or it can involve getting your co-workers, organization, community or government engaged in a large event. The impact if millions of people in all parts of the world, coming together for one day of peace, is immense, and does make a difference.

International Day of Peace is also a Day of Ceasefire – personal or political. Take this opportunity to make peace in your own relationships as well as impact the larger conflicts of our time. Imagine what a whole Day of Ceasefire would mean to humankind.

To view the Peace Day Global Broadcast, click here.

General Assembly Resolutions on the International Day of Peace

A/RES/36/67 (30 November 1981)
A/RES/55/282 (7 September 2001)
Declaration on a Culture of Peace (1999)


Ibrahim's Estate... a poem by Anne Selden Annab

The Promised Land: In Celebration of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 
& Peace Day

      Ibrahim's Estate

Recognizing rights
basic human rights
the People of the Book-
the Christians and Muslims and Jews
and the People of Outside the Box
looked... They
looked to homelands
looked to citizenship
looked to fair and just laws
to compassion
and empathy
and the Golden Rule...


looked for ways
to make peace
and diplomacy
a daily practice.


Some went astray.
Some waged war
instead of waging peace.


Some grew ugly thoughts
instead of gardens with flowers
to delight the soul and fruit to feed
the hungry.


Some grew selfish and paranoid.
Some grew angry and cruel
Some grew violent.


Bigots & bullies tried to own the story-
to tell it in ways to diminish
and alienate "others"...
to tell it in ways
to spark rage
and arguments...


But the People of the Book-
the Christians and Muslims and Jews
and the People of Outside the Box
taught their children to read
and to think...  to stop look and listen...
and to invest wisely
so that country by country
community by community
we all might be free
as one epic nation
free to flourish
enjoying
Ibrahim's Estate...


This then is the nation
the promised land-
the real estate
agents of Good
keep safe for all to inherit...


No border, no book, no line, no letter
no brick or stone can contain it. No passport
can define it. No one sect
can own it... it is ours
in the largest sense 


It is ours for all
eternity.


Growing Gardens for Palestine

 

My comment RE 20 years of Oslo: Maybe the best thing to happen to Palestinians by Suhail Khalilieh

RE 20 years of Oslo: Maybe the best thing to happen to Palestinians by Suhail Khalilieh
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=631016

Dear Editor,

Good article! As far as negotiations go I am not so sure Palestinians are weak negotiators. Looking at the larger picture a vibrant information age frees the conversation in ways never possible before. Every artist, every thinker, every monitor, every remembrance, every Facebook page, every compassionate voice weighing in for Palestine, calmly pointing out basic truths and trends as well as historic facts- and UN Resolutions, has the capacity to help empower more respect and concern for Palestine

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab

NOTES
"The occupation is an emergency, not a macro- or trans-historical problem, particularly for the millions of Palestinians living under its oppressive rule. They, especially—but we too—do not have the luxury of waiting to see what the next hundred years of history will bring us, good or bad. On the contrary, we must have the courage to act now, and with urgency, within the existing realities, however difficult, to try to create a working solution to a situation that is both intolerably unjust and regionally (and to some extent even globally) destabilizing."  Israel and Palestine Vs. ‘Blood and Magic’ by Hussein Ibish, Saliba Sarsar Sep 17, 2013

Farah Chamma- I Am No Palestinian

Twenty Years After Oslo, Trying it Again

CNN: World-renowned chef, best-selling author and Emmy-winning television personality Anthony Bourdain... 10 things to know before visiting Israel, the West Bank and Gaza

Anthony Bourdain, Will You Marry Me?

From handshake of peace to handcuffs of subjugation

U.S. Foreign Policy

NSA scandal: “Israel which discriminates continuously against US citizens of Arab and Muslim origins should not be rewarded with information that encourages and enhances its ability to discriminate against them leading to their deportations at Israeli airports, banning them from entry, and even jailing them,”

On Yom Kippur, Remember My Palestinian Mother: "The lesson, I think, is this: the Holy Land holds histories that, with time, can be taught to coexist. My mother’s is one of them. As she navigates her own, inner peace process, I hope that one day, in her lifetime, it leads home."


Palestine and Israel in the New Regional Context

Witnesses: Israeli forces bulldoze land south of Qalqiliya

Israelis uproot over 40 Palestinian olive trees in south Hebron hills late Sunday

The politicization of religion contributes to discrimination and persecution of religious minorities around the world....  “The politicization of religion and use of religion in politics has often added to polarization, social divides and conflicts in traditionally tolerant communities around the globe”

More Times Than I Can Remember ... a poem by Saliba Sarsar (born and raised in Jerusalem)

Palestine Festival of Literature 2013

Negotiations are a way to get our rights

point by point ...a poem

Live by the Golden Rule

Palestinian Refugees (1948-NOW) refused their right to return... and their right to live in peace free from religious bigotry and injustice.

Dear President Obama... Let Freedom Ring

194

Help Build A Golden Rule Peace for the Holy Land

Globalizing Martin Luther King, Jr.


 *********
The Arab Peace Initiative
1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.
2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:
I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.
II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194.
III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
3. Consequently, the Arab countries affirm the following:
I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.

II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.
The Office of International Religious Freedom ( http://www.state.gov/j/drl/irf/)   Given the U.S. commitment to religious freedom, and to the international covenants that guarantee it as the inalienable right of every human being, the United States seeks to:

Promote freedom of religion and conscience throughout the world as a fundamental human right and as a source of stability for all countries


"Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world." Eleanor Roosevelt

Live by the Golden Rule
Words to Honor: The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 1.
    All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

".... it being clearly understood that nothing
          shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious
          rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine....

"In 1949, the international community accepted Israel's UN membership upon two conditions: That they respect resolutions 181 (two states) and 194 (refugee rights). Neither has been honored. In fact, 65 years later, Israel has not even acknowledged what it did in 1948." Saeb Erekat
 
11 December 1948 UN Resolution 194:"Refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible"


The Golden Rule... Do unto others as you would have them do unto you



Thursday, September 19, 2013

CSM: Bedouins slam Israel's desert development as 'Nakba in the Negev' ... An Israeli development plan for the Negev desert would evict 40,000 semi-nomadic Arab Bedouins, who compare it to the Palestinian expulsion after Israel's founding.

 [AS ALWAYS PLEASE GO TO THE LINK TO READ GOOD ARTICLES IN FULL: HELP SHAPE ALGORITHMS (and conversations) THAT EMPOWER DECENCY, DIGNITY, JUSTICE & PEACE... and hopefully Palestine]

Refusing to be relocated

The Bedouin village of Al Araqib has steadfastly refused to be relocated. Since 2010, Israeli forces have razed homes and uprooted olive groves here 57 times, claiming that residents are illegal trespassers, according to long-standing land disputes.  The village’s only surviving structure is a century-old Islamic cemetery.

Hakmeh Abu Medeighim lives in a shoddy wooden tent next door. She and a handful of other families have refused to leave their ancestral lands, strewn with rubble from their homes that were razed, rebuilt, and razed again. Though pine trees stand where their olive trees once were, they pledge that they will die in this harsh desert “even if mourners will have no water for the ritual prayer,” says Al Araqib’s elder, Sheikh Sayyah al-Turi.

He has been waging a losing battle in municipal courts to prove land ownership, using pre-1948 land deeds – rejected by Israel – as his only legal documents.

He didn’t always have to fight, but growing racism in the government has eroded respect for the Bedouin community, allowing things like the Prawar plan to come about...

Ground which has been prepared for the construction of new homes is seen in front of the Bedouin town of Segev Shalom, near the southern Israeli city of Beersheba, August 25. Ronen Zvulun/Reuters
By Shira RubinCorrespondent / September 17, 2013  
 Al Araqib, Israel

The Bedouins of the southern Negev desert have volunteered for the Israeli military, worked as trackers along the Lebanese and Egyptian borders, and gone along with various Israeli development projects that have required them to give up their nomadic way of life and relocate. 

But they feel betrayed now by the latest Israeli government project, a $5.6 billion initiative called the Begin-Prawar plan that will free up space for Israeli development of the Negev by relocating Bedouins in the area if it is approved by the Knesset after it returns from recess next month.

The Israeli government has slated for eviction 40,000 Bedouins in “unrecognized” villages throughout the southern Negev...READ MORE

Israel displaces dozens of Palestinian families for military exercises

 [AS ALWAYS PLEASE GO TO THE LINK TO READ GOOD ARTICLES IN FULL: HELP SHAPE ALGORITHMS (and conversations) THAT EMPOWER DECENCY, DIGNITY, JUSTICE & PEACE... and hopefully Palestine]
 Published Tuesday 17/09/2013 (updated) 18/09/2013
JERICHO (Ma'an) -- Israel's army forcibly displaced dozens of Palestinian families in the northern Jordan Valley on Tuesday to make way for a military training exercise.

Aref Daraghmeh, chairman of the village council of Wadi Maleh and al-Madareb, told Ma'an that Israeli forces evacuated dozens of people from the areas of al-Burj and al-Maita in Tubas because of Israeli training drills.

Israeli forces closed the Tayasir checkpoint and prevented school children, university students and workers from using the road.

On Saturday, Israeli military forces evacuated over 100 people from their homes in the Jordan Valley to make way for military training exercises.

Over 44 percent of the Jordan Valley is classified by Israel as a closed military zone or nature reserve.

An additional 50 percent of the valley is controlled by Israeli settlements, leaving around six percent for Palestinians, according to figures from Save the Children.

Israeli forces seize tents in demolished village

 [AS ALWAYS PLEASE GO TO THE LINK TO READ GOOD ARTICLES IN FULL: HELP SHAPE ALGORITHMS (and conversations) THAT EMPOWER DECENCY, DIGNITY, JUSTICE & PEACE... and hopefully Palestine]
Published yesterday (updated) 18/09/2013
JENIN (Ma'an) -- Israeli forces on Wednesday seized tents used by the stranded people of Khirbet Makhool village which was destroyed by Israeli forces on Monday, a local official said.

Aref Daraghmeh, the mayor of al-Malih and al-Madarib villages, told Ma'an that Red Cross workers were still distributing tents to people when a large Israeli military force raided the site, knocked down tents and confiscated them.

Daraghmeh added that Israeli soldiers were “brutal and barbaric” in dealing with Palestinians, which led to clashes between soldiers and those who refused to abide to Israeli orders and stayed in their tents.

The Israeli army declared Khirbet Makhool a closed military zone and isolated it from nearby communities.

Daraghmeh added that evicting people was part of Israeli plans to empty the Jordan Valley and build settlements. He called on international rights organizations to intervene and stop human rights and international law violations.

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Israel and Palestine Vs. ‘Blood and Magic’ by Hussein Ibish, Saliba Sarsar Sep 17, 2013

 [AS ALWAYS PLEASE GO TO THE LINK TO READ GOOD ARTICLES IN FULL: HELP SHAPE ALGORITHMS (and conversations) THAT EMPOWER DECENCY, DIGNITY, JUSTICE & PEACE... and hopefully Palestine]
Jerusalem

Ian S. Lustick’s commentary, "Two-State Illusion,” in this weekend's New York Times dismisses not only the present round of U.S.-brokered Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, but the whole concept of a negotiated two-state Israeli-Palestinian agreement. He describes it as a fantasy that “blinds us and impedes progress,” as if Israelis and Palestinians faced a smorgasbord of interesting and attractive options for resolving the conflict.

However, as the latter part of his article makes clear, his "new ideas" are mainly an incoherent jumble of imaginary scenarios, all of which require an alternative reality to emerge at some point in the future. Nothing he suggests can be built on under present circumstances. None of it holds together as a coherent or even semi-coherent counterproposal.

Worse still, most of what he envisages requires by his own admission decades, if not centuries, to become possibilities, and further Israeli-Palestinian conflict is inevitable.

So not only would we have to wait scores of decades, if not centuries, for any of these "alternatives" to begin to emerge, they could only be the product of further wide-scale bloodshed.

Despite Prof. Lustick's passionate dismissal, the two-state solution remains the only viable option for ending the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. His counterfactual musings don't provide any practicable, coherent or implementable alternatives. It's an interesting thought experiment to dismiss the global consensus, stated position of all relevant parties, logical implementation of international law, and only practicable means of achieving the minimum goals of each party in favor of flights of fancy. But it has no political value whatsoever. Indeed undermining the only plausible conflict-ending scenario, while not suggesting any serious, practicable alternatives, is actually harmful.

Although realizing a two-state solution faces serious and growing obstacles, it alone allows both Palestinians and Israelis to avoid an ongoing struggle with no end in sight. Yes, “Time can do things that politicians cannot,” as Prof. Lustick writes, but the goal must be to achieve a solution in our lifetime—not in 120 years as with Irish independence, or 132 years as with Algerian independence, two of the key examples he cites.

The occupation is an emergency, not a macro- or trans-historical problem, particularly for the millions of Palestinians living under its oppressive rule. They, especially—but we too—do not have the luxury of waiting to see what the next hundred years of history will bring us, good or bad. On the contrary, we must have the courage to act now, and with urgency, within the existing realities, however difficult, to try to create a working solution to a situation that is both intolerably unjust and regionally (and to some extent even globally) destabilizing.

Other than a two-state solution, other scenarios may have constituencies but they cannot end the conflict. There are three main extant "alternative" visions.

First is the continuation of the status quo of Israeli occupation and unilateralism. Israel rules millions of Palestinians who, uniquely in the world, are not citizens of Israel or any other state. Israel also controls large amounts of Palestinian territory beyond its internationally recognized boundaries. This situation is completely untenable, and, over time, can only lead to further confrontations. It is a relationship of dominance and subordination that makes further conflict inevitable.

Moreover, it can only defer a resolution of the essential issues between the two peoples and deepen and entrench divisions, thus further raising the stakes and making a conflict-ending agreement more difficult at every stage. Israeli exclusivity in Jerusalem is a recipe for continued conflict with the Palestinians, since a Palestinian state without a sovereign role in occupied East Jerusalem would not be viable. More dangerous still, exclusive Israeli control of Jerusalem creates the circumstances through which the conflict could easily morph from being a difficult but resolvable political struggle between two ethno-national communities over land and power, into a far more intractable, and possibly irreconcilable, religious confrontation between Israel and the Muslim world in general over holy places and the will of God.

Second, among both Israelis and Palestinians, minority discourses are demanding complete Israeli/Jewish (as expressed by the Jewish Israeli settler and annexation movements) or Palestinian/Muslim (as reflected in the positions of Hamas and Islamic Jihad) rule over the whole of historical Palestine. These maximalist visions offer nothing but ongoing and, in all likelihood, catastrophic conflict without apparent resolution, since neither side can seriously hope for any sort of comprehensive military solution. Neither Israelis nor Palestinians, both of whom exist in roughly equivalent numbers between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, are going to vanish from the land. And neither people shows the least interest in either accepting subjugation at the hands of the other or abandoning its own national identity.

Third, especially in the Palestinian diaspora and in Western universities, a utopian vision of a single, democratic state in which Israelis and Palestinians both set aside their national identities in favor of an as-yet-undefined umbrella identity in some sort of joint or bi-national state may be appealing in theory, but does not constitute a practical path to ending the conflict. No political movement of any significance among either Palestinians or Israelis has adopted it as a policy goal, because both sides are still clinging to their national projects and self-determination. Moreover, no version of this has yet explained what could make it attractive to Jewish Israelis who would have to be convinced to abandon their national project. Indeed, this idea remains entirely mired in sloganeering aimed at Palestinian and pro-Palestinian sentiments and, thus far, hasn't even attempted to address the basic interests of Jewish Israelis and their national sentiments or narratives.

All of these "alternatives" represent unworkable fantasies and, in practice, the demand for them abandons the goal of resolving the conflict and ending the occupation in favor of an open-ended struggle in pursuit of impossible goals. In short, these "solutions" represent neither principles nor pragmatism, and instead reflect dangerous phantasms and fanaticism.

Prof. Lustick has provided a very good illustration of how far fantasies about alternative scenarios can be taken when they proliferate on the page in what appears to be an unstructured stream of consciousness.

By contrast, one of the most compelling aspects of the two-state solution is that a solid majority of both Palestinians and Israelis alike have shown, in virtually every poll taken in the past twenty years and more, that they are in favor of peace based on two states. Moreover, the international community, the U.N. Security Council, and the international legal framework are all very clear in their support for a Palestinian state that would live alongside Israel in peace and security.

Nevertheless, radical minorities on both sides and in the U.S. have thus far been allowed to thwart the mutual wishes of the large majority of both Israelis and Palestinians. Moreover, they have been allowed to impede the realization of a crucial American national security interest.


Prof. Lustick looks forward to future transformations beyond a two-state framework based on a combination of "blood and magic," which he argues are the key to avoiding "truly catastrophic change." In our view, it's hard to imagine a political perspective that more certainly invites "truly catastrophic change" than a reliance on "blood and magic." We prefer to rely on the national interests, political common sense, and the basic humanity of all the parties to recognize that, under current circumstances, only a two-state solution offers a conflict-ending scenario.


Moreover, we strongly feel that we do not have the luxury of centuries to let "blood and magic" do their work, assuming that Prof. Lustick is right that these are indeed the factors that avoid catastrophe. Prof. Lustick says that in the early 1980s, when working for the U.S. government, he was asked outright if he was "willing to destroy the only available chance for peace between Israelis and Palestinians?” He says he responded in the affirmative.
We are no less aware of the challenges facing the realization of a two-state solution, and there's nothing in Prof. Lustick's commentary with which either of us was unfamiliar. The big difference is that we are not willing to destroy the only available chance for peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, or to dismiss or denigrate it. Instead, we strongly advocate that all people of goodwill join together to find a way to make it work because Prof. Lustick's alternative—centuries of conflict and a reliance on "blood and magic" as a solution—appears to us to be inexcusably reckless.

My letter to the NYTimes RE Letters- A Two-State Critic, and His Critics

Palestinian Refugees (1948-NOW) refused their right to return... and their right to live in peace free from religious bigotry and injustice
RE: Letters- A Two-State Critic, and His Critics
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/opinion/a-two-state-critic-and-his-critics.html?ref=global&_r=0

Dear Editor,

Israel's supposed Jewishness is (and has been) a dangerous and increasingly cruel delusion shared by both crazed extremists and some very reasonable, likable (albeit naive and/or myopic) thinkers and writers and peace makers who firmly believe that their favored religion should be empowered with tax payers' money and international support.

Israel's supposed Jewishness depends on refusing to respect universal basic human rights, including but not limited to the Palestinian refugees inalienable, legal, moral and natural right to return to original homes and lands.

Israel's supposed Jewishness has been motivating a multitude of Jewish Israelis to systemically oppress, persecute, impoverish, and displace the native non-Jewish population of the Holy Land... and Israel's supposed Jewishness impels Israel's supporters and propagandists worldwide to actively harass, distract, demoralize, silence and destroy anyone who dares object to such blatant injustice and bigotry.

This is not a healthy situation.... nor is it fair.

One state or two religion should be a personal private choice, not a state funded project.

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab

NOTES
Farah Chamma- I Am No Palestinian

Twenty Years After Oslo, Trying it Again

CNN: World-renowned chef, best-selling author and Emmy-winning television personality Anthony Bourdain... 10 things to know before visiting Israel, the West Bank and Gaza

Anthony Bourdain, Will You Marry Me?

From handshake of peace to handcuffs of subjugation

U.S. Foreign Policy

NSA scandal: “Israel which discriminates continuously against US citizens of Arab and Muslim origins should not be rewarded with information that encourages and enhances its ability to discriminate against them leading to their deportations at Israeli airports, banning them from entry, and even jailing them,”

On Yom Kippur, Remember My Palestinian Mother: "The lesson, I think, is this: the Holy Land holds histories that, with time, can be taught to coexist. My mother’s is one of them. As she navigates her own, inner peace process, I hope that one day, in her lifetime, it leads home."

Palestine and Israel in the New Regional Context

Witnesses: Israeli forces bulldoze land south of Qalqiliya

Israelis uproot over 40 Palestinian olive trees in south Hebron hills late Sunday

The politicization of religion contributes to discrimination and persecution of religious minorities around the world....  “The politicization of religion and use of religion in politics has often added to polarization, social divides and conflicts in traditionally tolerant communities around the globe”

More Times Than I Can Remember ... a poem by Saliba Sarsar (born and raised in Jerusalem)

Palestine Festival of Literature 2013

Negotiations are a way to get our rights

point by point ...a poem

Live by the Golden Rule

Palestinian Refugees (1948-NOW) refused their right to return... and their right to live in peace free from religious bigotry and injustice.

Dear President Obama... Let Freedom Ring

194

Help Build A Golden Rule Peace for the Holy Land

Globalizing Martin Luther King, Jr.


 *********
The Arab Peace Initiative
1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.
2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:
I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.
II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194.
III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
3. Consequently, the Arab countries affirm the following:
I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.

II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.
The Office of International Religious Freedom ( http://www.state.gov/j/drl/irf/)   Given the U.S. commitment to religious freedom, and to the international covenants that guarantee it as the inalienable right of every human being, the United States seeks to:

Promote freedom of religion and conscience throughout the world as a fundamental human right and as a source of stability for all countries


"Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world." Eleanor Roosevelt

Live by the Golden Rule
Words to Honor: The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 1.
    All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

".... it being clearly understood that nothing
          shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious
          rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine....

"In 1949, the international community accepted Israel's UN membership upon two conditions: That they respect resolutions 181 (two states) and 194 (refugee rights). Neither has been honored. In fact, 65 years later, Israel has not even acknowledged what it did in 1948." Saeb Erekat
 
11 December 1948 UN Resolution 194:"Refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible"


The Golden Rule... Do unto others as you would have them do unto you

Farah Chamma- I Am No Palestinian




You can also watch her video of the poem “How Must I believe” here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVodbIi798w

19yr old Farah Chamma gets political with power of spoken word and kicks off the season debut of the new poetry show, Word Play! Poem entitled: How must I Believe. Word Play airs every 2nd Monday! (Arabic Poem w/Subtitles) - Translated by: Laith Aqel

***
Farah Chamma evolving through poetry arab news interview

Twenty Years After Oslo, Trying it Again

The White House South Lawn on September 13, 1993 as a crowd of 3,000 gathers for the signing of the Oslo accords.
 [AS ALWAYS PLEASE GO TO THE LINK TO READ GOOD ARTICLES IN FULL: HELP SHAPE ALGORITHMS (and conversations) THAT EMPOWER DECENCY, DIGNITY, JUSTICE & PEACE... and hopefully Palestine]

 Monday September 16, 2013
by Dr. James Zogby of AAI

Twenty years have passed since Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman Yasser Arafat signed the Oslo Accords in Washington, DC on September 13th, 1993.

On the White House lawn, where the signing took place, there was a sense of euphoria. When Arafat and Rabin shook hands, Arab Americans and American Jews, who had long been combatants in the public sphere, turned to each other to embrace and celebrate the moment. Two days later, in an effort to build on this positive sentiment, President Bill Clinton invited 150 leaders of both communities to the White House urging them to work together as a "constituency for peace."

In Israel and the Occupied Territories there were also celebrations with leaders on both sides expressing optimism about the way forward. Appearing on my live call-in TV show just days after the signing, Nabil Sha'ath the chief Palestinian negotiator was questioned about whether the fledgling Palestinian government would be able to restrain perpetrators of acts of violence against Israelis. He responded, “if the agreement works, and I believe that it will, two years from now our farmers will be cultivating the land that has been liberated, our young men will be working at jobs that have been created, and we will be building the infrastructure of our new state. If, in the midst of all of this, someone were to commit an act of violence, the people would turn to us and say, ‘stop them, because they are threatening everything we've won.’”

There were also Israelis who looked confidently to the future. Israel’s deputy Foreign Minister Yossi Beilin said, “Israel is another Israel, we are ready to change many of our ideas from the past to adapt ourselves to a new reality. The PLO is no longer the same PLO. Things can be done in the Middle East.”

But not everyone was pleased. Israeli critics accused Rabin of surrendering to and giving legitimacy to Palestinian terrorists, while Palestinian critics charged that the Oslo documents had too many loopholes and would only prolong the Israeli occupation.

By any measure, the Accords were incomplete. They were full of ambiguities, areas where the parties fudged over differences because they could not find agreement. And resolution of the most critical issues of Jerusalem, borders, settlements, refugees, and security arrangements were put off until after a five-year transitional period. One observer, at the time, described the Accords, more like "a cry for help" than a peace agreement. It was as if Israelis and Palestinians were saying "this is a start—as far as we can go. We need help to get to the finish line".

But even with the flaws and the ambiguities, what was undeniable was that Israel and the PLO had taken unprecedented steps, breaking taboos and shattering myths.

In the first place, Israelis and Palestinians formally recognized each other as national communities. While Palestinians had committed themselves to a two-state solution in 1988, signing an agreement with the Israelis that recognized the legitimacy of an independent Israeli state represented a dramatic breakthrough. Israel also had an issue with recognition. Until Oslo they had refused to acknowledge the existence of a Palestinian people. And they refused not only to talk to the PLO but had insisted that others shun the group, as well. In 1985, speaking at a Washington event, Rabin was quoted as saying "whoever agrees to talk to the PLO means he accepts in principle the creation of an independent Palestinian state" and this he said, was "unacceptable". In acknowledging the PLO, Israel not only opened the door to the inevitability of a Palestinian state, it also shattered the anti-PLO taboo (that it had established). For years, the heavy-handed political clout of American supporters of Israel had tormented Arab Americans and others, punishing them for "contact" with the "forbidden" group.

The Oslo Accords also shattered the myth that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was insoluble, the result of an "age-old" conflict that was "in the genes" of both communities. Oslo did not provide a solution, but it demonstrated a willingness of both sides to finding one.

There were other breakthroughs resulting from Oslo. While no Palestinian state came into being, the locus of Palestinian authority and decision-making would move for the first time to the Palestinian territories. And while the occupation remained an oppressive fact of life for most Palestinians, even the limited pullback of Israeli forces from most West Bank cities and towns, gave Palestinians welcome respite.

The Oslo Accords provided for an initial Israeli limited deployment that would lead to a five-year transitional phase, during which negotiations would continue.  It was at the end of this five year period that the parties would begin work in earnest to resolve the so-called "final status" issues. The operative assumption behind this approach was that with five years of peaceful relations sufficient trust would have developed giving the negotiators the space to tackle the thorniest issues.
For the process to play out, as it was envisioned, several things had to occur:
  • The role of the US had to shift from being an observer, with an inclination to support one side, to a fully engaged balanced participant. As the Accord made clear, Israelis and Palestinians could go no further on their own. They needed someone to heed their cry for help and shepherd them through to the end;
  • The parties had to move quickly. In drawing up their timetables, the architects of Oslo did not factor in the ability of a suicide bomber, settlers on a rampage, or excessive force by Israeli occupation forces to unravel the process. Violence from Palestinians and Israeli settlers who opposed Oslo eroded public confidence in the peace process, making it politically difficult for the negotiators to complete their work; and
  • Provisions had to be made to bring the benefits of peace to both sides in order to sustain their confidence in a five year process. The problem was that while Israel's economy grew quite quickly after Oslo, the Palestinian economy contracted. Because of unrestrained Israeli behaviors, in the first two years after Oslo: settlements grew at an unprecedented rate; and because of restrictive Israeli policies, Palestinian unemployment doubled, income fell, and businesses closed because they could not freely import or export. 
In the end, the flaws of Oslo proved fatal. Today, the number of Israeli settlers has tripled; the Palestinian economy remains dependent on Israeli good-will and international largess; and thousands have died, victims of acts of terror, disproportionate military assaults, and settler violence. As a result, confidence and trust is at a low point.

After a long hiatus, the parties have once again reopened negotiations. One can only hope they have learned lessons from the Oslo experience:
  • An interim, phased approach won't work. The opponents of peace will take advantage of an interim period to attempt to sabotage any agreement;
  • The US can't be an observer. The Palestinians are too weak and have no leverage. Pressure must be applied on the Israelis to help level the playing field; and
  • There must be immediate signs of improvement in the daily life of both peoples. Israelis must feel more secure, and Palestinians must feel more free and they must see clear signs that their future will be prosperous and just.
Twenty years have passed since Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman Yasser Arafat signed the Oslo Accords in Washington, DC on September 13th, 1993.
 On the White House lawn, where the signing took place, there was a sense of euphoria. When Arafat and Rabin shook hands, Arab Americans and American Jews, who had long been combatants in the public sphere, turned to each other to embrace and celebrate the moment. Two days later, in an effort to build on this positive sentiment, President Bill Clinton invited 150 leaders of both communities to the White House urging them to work together as a "constituency for peace."
 In Israel and the Occupied Territories there were also celebrations with leaders on both sides expressing optimism about the way forward. Appearing on my live call-in TV show just days after the signing, Nabil Sha'ath the chief Palestinian negotiator was questioned about whether the fledgling Palestinian government would be able to restrain perpetrators of acts of violence against Israelis. He responded, “if the agreement works, and I believe that it will, two years from now our farmers will be cultivating the land that has been liberated, our young men will be working at jobs that have been created, and we will be building the infrastructure of our new state. If, in the midst of all of this, someone were to commit an act of violence, the people would turn to us and say, ‘stop them, because they are threatening everything we've won.’”
 There were also Israelis who looked confidently to the future. Israel’s deputy Foreign Minister Yossi Beilin said, “Israel is another Israel, we are ready to change many of our ideas from the past to adapt ourselves to a new reality. The PLO is no longer the same PLO. Things can be done in the Middle East.”
 But not everyone was pleased. Israeli critics accused Rabin of surrendering to and giving legitimacy to Palestinian terrorists, while Palestinian critics charged that the Oslo documents had too many loopholes and would only prolong the Israeli occupation.
 By any measure, the Accords were incomplete. They were full of ambiguities, areas where the parties fudged over differences because they could not find agreement. And resolution of the most critical issues of Jerusalem, borders, settlements, refugees, and security arrangements were put off until after a five-year transitional period. One observer, at the time, described the Accords, more like "a cry for help" than a peace agreement. It was as if Israelis and Palestinians were saying "this is a start—as far as we can go. We need help to get to the finish line".
 But even with the flaws and the ambiguities, what was undeniable was that Israel and the PLO had taken unprecedented steps, breaking taboos and shattering myths.
 In the first place, Israelis and Palestinians formally recognized each other as national communities. While Palestinians had committed themselves to a two-state solution in 1988, signing an agreement with the Israelis that recognized the legitimacy of an independent Israeli state represented a dramatic breakthrough. Israel also had an issue with recognition. Until Oslo they had refused to acknowledge the existence of a Palestinian people. And they refused not only to talk to the PLO but had insisted that others shun the group, as well. In 1985, speaking at a Washington event, Rabin was quoted as saying "whoever agrees to talk to the PLO means he accepts in principle the creation of an independent Palestinian state" and this he said, was "unacceptable". In acknowledging the PLO, Israel not only opened the door to the inevitability of a Palestinian state, it also shattered the anti-PLO taboo (that it had established). For years, the heavy-handed political clout of American supporters of Israel had tormented Arab Americans and others, punishing them for "contact" with the "forbidden" group.
 The Oslo Accords also shattered the myth that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was insoluble, the result of an "age-old" conflict that was "in the genes" of both communities. Oslo did not provide a solution, but it demonstrated a willingness of both sides to finding one.
 There were other breakthroughs resulting from Oslo. While no Palestinian state came into being, the locus of Palestinian authority and decision-making would move for the first time to the Palestinian territories. And while the occupation remained an oppressive fact of life for most Palestinians, even the limited pullback of Israeli forces from most West Bank cities and towns, gave Palestinians welcome respite.
 The Oslo Accords provided for an initial Israeli limited deployment that would lead to a five-year transitional phase, during which negotiations would continue.  It was at the end of this five year period that the parties would begin work in earnest to resolve the so-called "final status" issues. The operative assumption behind this approach was that with five years of peaceful relations sufficient trust would have developed giving the negotiators the space to tackle the thorniest issues.
 For the process to play out, as it was envisioned, several things had to occur:
       ·   The role of the US had to shift from being an observer, with an inclination to support one side, to a fully engaged balanced participant. As the Accord made clear, Israelis and Palestinians could go no further on their own. They needed someone to heed their cry for help and shepherd them through to the end;
       ·   The parties had to move quickly. In drawing up their timetables, the architects of Oslo did not factor in the ability of a suicide bomber, settlers on a rampage, or excessive force by Israeli occupation forces to unravel the process. Violence from Palestinians and Israeli settlers who opposed Oslo eroded public confidence in the peace process, making it politically difficult for the negotiators to complete their work; and
        ·   Provisions had to be made to bring the benefits of peace to both sides in order to sustain their confidence in a five year process. The problem was that while Israel's economy grew quite quickly after Oslo, the Palestinian economy contracted. Because of unrestrained Israeli behaviors, in the first two years after Oslo: settlements grew at an unprecedented rate; and because of restrictive Israeli policies, Palestinian unemployment doubled, income fell, and businesses closed because they could not freely import or export. 
In the end, the flaws of Oslo proved fatal. Today, the number of Israeli settlers has tripled; the Palestinian economy remains dependent on Israeli good-will and international largess; and thousands have died, victims of acts of terror, disproportionate military assaults, and settler violence. As a result, confidence and trust is at a low point. 
After a long hiatus, the parties have once again reopened negotiations. One can only hope they have learned lessons from the Oslo experience:
·    An interim, phased approach won't work. The opponents of peace will take advantage of an interim period to attempt to sabotage any agreement;
·   The US can't be an observer. The Palestinians are too weak and have no leverage. Pressure must be applied on the Israelis to help level the playing field; and
·   There must be immediate signs of improvement in the daily life of both peoples. Israelis must feel more secure, and Palestinians must feel more free and they must see clear signs that their future will be prosperous and just.

Washington Watch Archives »