After a well-publicized visit to Oman, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu addressed the Likud faction in the Knesset saying: “The occupation is nonsense.” This is not a slip of the tongue or a jab at the Left. On the surface, it is a reasonable statement backed by facts. First, the three Jewish wise men responsible for American policy vis-à-vis the Palestinians – Kushner, Greenblatt, and Friedman – are acting on the assumption that the occupation is nonsense. Their puppet master in Washington, Donald Trump, believes he took the occupation off the table when he transferred the American embassy to Jerusalem. He also concocted the “deal of the century” aimed at “recognizing reality,” that is, allowing West Bank settlements to remain intact. According to Trump’s plan, the Palestinian Authority will become an extended autonomy, a state-minus.

Anyone who thinks the “deal of the century” is another of Trump’s sleights-of-hand to satisfy his evangelical voters will be surprised to hear that this inchoate plan receives the full backing of the Gulf states, led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (a.k.a. MBS), the de facto leader of Saudi Arabia. MBS’s backing for Trump’s deal stems from a change in America’s Middle Eastern policy, namely, ditching the nuclear agreement with Iran and full-throated support for the crown prince’s quiet and violent revolution against his opponents at home. Senior Saudi journalist Abdulrahman Al-Rasheed, a columnist for Asharq al-Awsat, backs Saudi support for Trump and accuses the Palestinians of being unrealistic: “With the passage of time, and because of their constant rejectionist stance and inflammatory rhetoric, their rights have been eroded.” (Asharq al-Awsat, Sept. 18, 2018).

Netanyahu explained to members of Likud that “power is the key” and that “power changes everything in our policy toward Arab countries.” During rare visits, public and clandestine, to the Gulf States, Israeli politicians hear encouraging words from the region’s leaders that reinforce the feeling that indeed “the occupation is nonsense.” The reason is clear. Iran is a strategic threat to Arab regimes, and Netanyahu is a main player in the war to curb Iranian influence. Thus, the Trump-Netanyahu duo is the best guarantee to prolong the stability of those regimes after the tsunami created by the Arab Spring.

The same Abdulrahman al-Rasheed praised Sultan Qaboos of Oman and stated that the days of boycotting Israel have passed. He attributed this to Israel’s role in Syria: “Israel was once considered a poisonous bulge that everyone feared, but now a new balance of military power has been created, and Israel is an important factor in the region’s security” (Asharq al-Awsat, October 28). The new Arab doctrine can be defined as follows: We, the Arab regimes, are undergoing a turbulent period that threatens our very existence. The disappearance of Libya, Yemen, Syria, and Iraq as political entities has created fertile ground for the spread of Iran. Our existential danger trumps the woes of Palestinians, who for the 25 years since the Oslo Accords have not been able to solve their problem. Israel’s military and technological power is extremely important to us as a counterweight to the Iranian threat.

In other words, the Palestinian problem may be off the table, no longer an Arab problem, and Netanyahu may be encouraged by Trump’s support plus the strategic shift in the Arab world, but turning the Palestinian question into an internal Israeli problem does not make it disappear. On the contrary, the Palestinian question falls squarely on Israel’s shoulders, since five million Palestinians have not disappeared.

The occupation may have become nonsense, but the recent downpour of 500 missiles on Israel’s southern cities is not nonsensical. The same goes for the weekly Gazan protests at the fence, not to mention the humanitarian disaster in the Strip. These are serious problems for Israel, and Netanyahu has no solution. He defended his agreement to allow an injection of Qatari cash into Gaza to pay the salaries of Hamas officials in exchange for stopping the demonstrations. “There is no diplomatic solution for Gaza just as there is no diplomatic solution for ISIS,” Netanyahu said, adding that he is willing to pay a political price for an arrangement with Hamas whereby the blockade on Gaza is eased and the border quiets down.

Even if the occupation is nonsense, Netanyahu will carry on paying for his lack of policy and his reliance on dubious friends from the Gulf. The absurdity of his position was revealed in full force this week. He negotiates with Hamas, with whom he admits it is impossible to reach a political arrangement, and he refuses to negotiate with Abu Mazen, who is willing to reach one. Negotiating with Abu Mazen would force Netanyahu to make concessions, which is a red line for him.

Considering the intra-Palestinian conflict, as evidenced in the disconnect between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, an “arrangement” between Hamas and Israel is impossible. The PA objects to any such, including the financial backing by Qatar. An arrangement is seen as lending a hand to the Trump “deal” and abandoning the idea of a Palestinian state. This forces Hamas to declare that it is not deserting the path of armed resistance which negates any settlement with the occupier.

Israel’s strength tempts the Arab dictatorships, but Israel does not address its internal Palestinian problem. Worse, the past week has revealed how fragile Netanyahu’s coalition is. First, the midterm election results in the US were very irritating to Trump, who ignored the political upheaval and hoarsely claimed a “tremendous victory.” However, in reality, women and young people, driven by loathing for him and all he represents, flipped the House of Representatives to the Democrats. Explosive envelopes targeting Democrats, and the carnage in the Pittsburgh synagogue, show where Trump’s incitement leads. Netanyahu should be concerned that the results in the US do not bode well for him and his Gulf cronies.

Second, the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, under MBS’s command, shows how much the position of the Saudi leader has been undermined. The fact that Netanyahu invested much of his political capital in dubious figures like Trump and MBS points to his nearsightedness. Just as Netanyahu claims the occupation to be nonsense, Trump boasts about winning the midterms. The reality is different in both cases. Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s resignation foreshadows how much the events in Gaza will cost Netanyahu. The eventual disappearance of Trump and MBS will leave Israel facing an even more difficult political scene. The American democratic establishment is disgusted with Netanyahu, while the Arab regimes on which he relies are weak, corrupt and alienated from their peoples.

Netanyahu is flying solo into a gloomy night. He is responsible for the fate of the 5 million Palestinians under Israeli occupation, even if in his stupidity he calls it “nonsense,” while the future of his cheerleaders in the White House and in the courts of the Gulf is shrouded in doubt.

 * Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post Netanyahu’s nonsensical occupation first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

One hundred and seven Palestinians have been killed and more than 10,000 wounded by Israeli troops over the past seven weeks along the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Israel. The Palestinians stormed the fence and Israeli soldiers responded with live fire. On the bloodiest day, May 14, when the new American embassy in Jerusalem was inaugurated, 61 demonstrators were slain. This massacre was not necessary: the IDF did not need to employ snipers to cut down young people who galloped toward the bullets, and Hamas could have prevented those youngsters from approaching the fence. A quiet protest would have been no less effective.

The protest was not quiet because both sides – the Israeli right-wing government and the Hamas government in Gaza – provided an identical, although uncoordinated, script. Israel supplied the snipers and Hamas, the victims. There is no doubt that those who squeezed the trigger are responsible for the massacre, and they must be held to account. But once again, the massacre could have been prevented! After all, when it ends, each side will claim victory. However, Israel lost the public relations battle. However, with Trump calling the shots, public opinion is a negligible factor. Hamas, for its part, did not manage to achieve what it most needed, that is to lift the siege of Gaza.

The fence that separates Israel from Gaza is not a border. It is a fence that encircles the world’s largest open-air prison, where 2 million Palestinians live in worse conditions than those in Israeli prisons, who at least receive three meals a day. Gaza is not a state. It is controlled by Israel, who is the sole sovereign in Gaza, even after having withdrawn its army and settlers.

Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza did not change Gaza’s legal status. In 2005, Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip without any agreement. The area remained for a short period under the control of the PA (Palestinian Authority) and, after a bloody military coup in June 2007, the territory fell to Hamas control. The PA in Ramallah does not recognize Hamas’ rule, and thanks to Ariel Sharon’s “wise” policy of leaving unilaterally, Gaza became a No Man’s Land. Israel has an interest in maintaining the Hamas regime in order to preserve the political and geographic divide between Gaza and the West Bank. For this reason, responsibility for Gaza’s humanitarian disaster can be placed at Israel’s door. All the above pertains to the ‘here and now’, and not to the Nakba which took place 70 years ago.

Despite the fact that Israel is directly responsible for what is happening in Gaza, it is secondary to the ongoing struggle between Hamas and Fatah over control of the Palestinian Authority. While Israel imposes a siege on Gaza, Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas) makes sure to tighten the noose. While Hamas exploits the struggle against Israel to attack Abu Mazen and undermine PA legitimacy in Ramallah, Abu Mazen is using the humanitarian crisis in Gaza to subdue Hamas and make life difficult for Israel.

As Israel turns a cold shoulder to Abu Mazen and basks in Trump’s support, Abu Mazen is turning the screws and creating conditions that will ultimately force Hamas into a conflict with Israel. He keeps fuel from reaching power stations in Gaza, prevents drugs from reaching Gaza hospitals, and avoids paying salaries to PA officials employed in Gaza. He is bringing Gaza to the brink of starvation, poverty and darkness. Life in Gaza is impossible. The Israeli government and army are opposed to Abu Mazen’s policy, but they are not taking action to change the situation. Thus, when Hamas orchestrates the “March of Return,” Abu Mazen condemns Hamas for encouraging children to be killed at the fence.

Israel, the PA, and Hamas are the main actors in the tragedy playing out before our eyes. But there are others who are no less important: the Muslim Brotherhood headed by Turkish President Erdogan and, as expected, Qatar. There’s also Egypt and Saudi Arabia, both being led by Donald Trump, whose commitment to his evangelical base brings him to a one-sided support of Israel.

In this tragedy there is no good and bad, there’s only bad.And following the massacre in Gaza, it is difficult to determine who is worse: Erdogan joined forces with Putin and allowed Iran and the Russians to commit atrocities and occupy the city of Aleppo; Sisi massacred 2,600 Muslim Brotherhood demonstrators in Cairo’s Rabaa al-Adawiya Square during the military coup; Hamas maintains a cruel and dictatorial regime that suppresses any opposition, and Abu Mazen reached a new low by expressing anti-Semitic positions while maintaining close security coordination with Israel in order to ensure his autocratic rule. It is impossible to separate what is happening in Gaza from what is happening in the Arab world and in the internal Palestinian arena. The Israeli Right is alive and kicking, fuelled by the Fascist crusade now sweeping the world – from Washington, through Europe, Russia, and Turkey to the Middle East.

The humanitarian situation in Gaza cannot be resolved when the Right rules in Israel without serious opposition. It cannot be settled with Abu Mazen as head of the PA, it cannot be solved when Sisi controls the Rafah crossing, and it will not be solved when Hamas subordinates the situation of Gaza to its narrow interests – first and foremost to consolidate its rule and defeat Fatah.

In light of the danger of humanitarian collapse, various “solutions” are floating around which, until now, have produced nothing. The Israeli army is interested in giving Hamas a floating port off the coast of Gaza, and Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz supports it. Many demand that Israel agree to a hudna (cease-fire) with Hamas in order to ensure a temporary quiet. Some demand that Abu Mazen end the security coordination in order to pressure Israel to ease the military blockade of Gaza. And there are those who demand an end to the siege without preconditions. Nonetheless, all these solutions have many opponents with conflicting interests.

In Abu Mazen’s view, if Israel were to lift the siege on Gaza and normalize life there, this would perpetuate the division between Gaza under Hamas and the West Bank under Fatah, burying the idea of a Palestinian state. Egypt opposes a Hamas entity affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood bordering Sinai. The Israeli Right wants to tame Hamas, as is evident from the words of Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman “rehabilitation in exchange for demilitarization”, while Hamas argues that its weapons of resistance are sacred and are not negotiable.

Therefore, in the current political situation, there is no one to save Gaza. As long as the Right controls Israel, and the Palestinian people are at the mercy of Fatah and Hamas, there is no hope on the horizon. The policy of “sit and do nothing”—of managing rather than solving the crisis—is not an Israeli invention. It is dictated by the White House. It is not just employed here, but also in Syria, Libya, Yemen and Iraq. It is no accident that Netanyahu shuttles between Putin and Trump, dancing to their tune. He is facing Hamas in Gaza and Iran in Syria without having much in his tool box other than planes and snipers.

The solution in Gaza is connected to a solution in the West Bank, in Syria and in Egypt. There are those who are looking for a quick fix, floating ideas about lifting the siege and the two-state solution without examining an alternative economic and political vision. On the other hand, there are those who think that it is possible to stand up for human rights in Gaza while at the same time supporting the massive uprooting and murder of Syrians by Assad. They have lost their moral compass. The solution is to create an Israeli-Palestinian political movement that will demand democracy and equality for all. This is the only counter-balance to the Israeli Right, Fatah and Hamas – those who have brought us to this precipice.

* Translated from the Hebrew by Robert Goldman

The post One Massacre, Many Partners in Crime first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

It seems every option has been tried and the results are still the same – Bibi, like Putin and Assad, is still here and we can’t get rid of him. We must qualify that comparison: Putin has absolute control of the media and liquidates the opposition, and Assad liquidates the Syrian people with bombs and starvation.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, on the other hand, has to contend with a hostile press, but he still succeeds in charming his voters. The forces needed to defeat him simply do not exist in Israeli society. He enjoys the loyalty of the repressed, true, but the reason for his success is mostly the lack of an alternative. Bibi versus “Boujie” (Isaac Herzog) is really not a fair fight – that was clear enough even before they stepped into the ring.

When Netanyahu dissolved the Knesset, he aimed to neutralize two competitors within his coalition: Naftali Bennett (leader of the right-wing “Jewish Home” party) and Yair Lapid (leader of the centrist party, “There is a Future”). The operation was successful beyond all expectations, but the patient is still in ER. From the start, Bibi wanted a government whose members would not challenge his leadership – a kind of return to the unity government of 2009, which ran its full term with the Labor Party in partnership. But when you call for elections, you know only how things will begin – not how they’ll end. What began as an attempt to put Bennett and Lapid in their place led to the election’s big surprise – the partnership between Tzipi Livni and Herzog, who created a serious contender for government with their joint list, the “Zionist Camp.”

Bibi and the Likud

Netanyahu discovered another little thing: the Likud party members, whom he loathes so much that he avoids appearing in the party committees so as not to have anything to do with them, loathe him just as much. This is a deep-rooted, mutual aversion. Netanyahu’s true friends are the tycoons, while the powerful workers’ committees and the party functionaries are his foes. It was not by chance that he “let slip” the comparison between them and Hamas terrorists.

For a moment it seemed that an opportunity for change had come: the prospect of increased voter turnout among the Arabs; the squabbles in the outgoing government coalition, from Lieberman to Lapid; some generous assistance from the anti-Netanyahu Hebrew daily Yediot Aharonot and the v15 movement, and – voila! – we can stop Bibi!

But when the threat became tangible and the opinion polls showed him sliding, Bibi called “Oy! Gewalt! The Leftists are coming!” to remind the Likud tribe of their traditional hatred for the Labor Party and their primordial fear of the Arabs. At the last moment he surged ahead. For the first time in his political career, Bibi finds himself in a position he has always tried to avoid like the plague: pure Right.

Political suicide

Events have their own dynamic. The more the Zionist Camp advanced in the polls, the more the polarization increased and the bigger the gamble. This time Netanyahu left no room for uncertainty. His declaration that there would never be a Palestinian state, and the call on Likud voters to rush to the ballot because the Arabs were “voting in droves,” were suicide from a policy point of view, but bought him political breathing space. As a result of Bibi’s left-bashing, his Likud base shouted against the idea of a unity government with the Zionist Camp, leaving him no choice but to go for a pure rightist government. Without a moderate partner, Bibi will have no fig leaf – and he is not used to this.

The White House is once more fuming and at a loss. Obama is supposed to support Israel while its government goes back on its commitment to a Palestinian state, and its prime minister relates to Israel’s Arab citizens as a fifth column whose participation in the elections is viewed as a threat. It reminds Obama of the dark days in the southern US when African Americans were unable to vote. In fact, the government has openly declared that it is leading the country into the unknown, and it is willing to run up against the entire world as it does so.

But these positions were not suddenly exposed in the last stages of the election race. They were not acts of despair from a man fearful of losing his seat. The “nation-state law” which blatantly discriminates against Arab citizens was the reason the government was dissolved, and the position of the prime minister – who denies the PA as a partner for peace – has long been known. It was Bibi who consistently told the public that if the occupied territories were to be “given” to the Palestinians, they would rapidly fall into the hands of Hamas and ISIS.

The feeble mumblings of the Zionist Camp on this issue demonstrated that there are no fundamental differences of opinion between the two sides. Herzog holds to the position of endless negotiation under US auspices without reaching an agreement, while Netanyahu views this as a dangerous tactic which leads to “creeping concessions”, as he called the Oslo Accords. In this sense the elections were like a referendum on the future of the territories. The people have spoken, and there’s no point going to Bibi to complain.

But we can and must complain to the Zionist Camp, Meretz, and the Joint (Arab) List, who did not address the fundamental issues and made do with the slogan “Anyone but Bibi” – which succeeded only in bringing Bibi back. If Herzog promises to solve the housing problem as his main objective, while ignoring the Occupation, why should we blame Netanyahu?

The ball’s in the Palestinian court

Israel has no alternative to the Right – so the ball is in the Palestinian’s court. If the Palestinians thought Herzog and the Zionist Left would save them from themselves and from the need to make decisions, the elections bring them up against tough choices.

It’s true that the PLO Central Committee (yes, the PLO is still alive, though not exactly kicking) has decided to suspend security cooperation with Israel, but the threat has already been proven ineffective, because this cooperation serves Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) and Fatah as a means of securing donor money and as protection against a Hamas takeover; everyone knows it will continue as long as the PA exists. The PA’s appeal to the International Court at The Hague may be a threat to Israel, but it does nothing to bring the Occupation to an end or dismantle the settlements.

The incoming government intends to step up construction in Area C and permit the Palestinians to manage their own affairs in the lands that remain in their hands. The PA lives off the funds from donor states and the taxes transferred by Israel, and it is clear to all that its leaders are not about to give up their privileges. Meanwhile, the Gaza Strip continues to bleed: some 100,000 new refugees passed a cold winter in the flattened neighborhoods, and there can be no doubt that the situation will soon explode once more. But the only thing the new government will be willing to do is to ease the siege a little.

In light of this, the PA can accuse Israel of being colonialist and racist, but this explanation for the election results is somewhat simplistic. It’s true that Israelis have learned to live with the Occupation as “shrapnel in the butt,” as Bennett put it two years ago – something that bothers us sometimes, but doesn’t prevent us leading a normal life. But the Palestinians must shoulder part of the blame for the election results, because they too have resigned themselves to their situation.

The more than twenty years in which funds have flowed to the PA and the NGOs close to it have bought Israel some quiet, while the extremism of Hamas has driven Israeli voters rightwards. Thus, between resigning themselves to the Occupation on the one hand and the empty threat of destroying Israel on the other, the Palestinians will allow Bibi to sail to victory in the future too.

Let there be no mistake: the International Court and Obama will not come to the Palestinians’ aid. Obama is willing to form an alliance with Iran at the expense of the Syrian people, who are undergoing terrors far greater than those of the Palestinians, so he will certainly resign himself to the occupation too. US-Israel relations are above any personal animosity between an Israeli prime minister and a US president. The Left in Israel has shown it is powerless, and the Israeli nation does not think of the future – it lives in the present.

Therefore a response to Bibi and the Israeli Right is up to the Palestinians. Now they must stop their de facto, tacit acceptance of the Occupation. If they manage to do this, they will force the Left and the Arab population of Israel to change their agenda and create a democratic, Jewish-Arab camp which prioritizes ending the Occupation and achieving peace. Only in this way will they succeed in challenging the Right, turning its current victory into a Pyrrhic one.

– Translated by Yonatan Preminger

The post It’s the Palestinians’ turn first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

On July 19, 2013, US Secretary of State John Kerry announced the resumption of talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The announcement did not come from Jerusalem or Ramallah, but from the Jordanian capital Amman, which has become the US State Department’s front line in the region. In the present tour, Kerry did not meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, because it was clear to all that Netanyahu was not the one who must make the decision. The ball was in the court of Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen); he’s the one being asked to accept Israel’s familiar terms – talks with no preconditions, or in other words, talks for the sake of talks, as has been the norm since the Oslo Accords were signed.

For the last three years, Abbas has been against resuming negotiations with Israel as long as Netanyahu does not commit to halting the settlement project and to recognizing the pre-1967 borders as a basis for talks. Netanyahu, as we all know, rejected the Palestinian terms. This raises the question: has something changed in Israel’s position which opened its way to negotiations? For the answer, we must look to the changes in the region, especially the revolution in Egypt.

Saudi Arabia, Abu Mazen and the Egyptian revolution

Before Abu Mazen made his decision, Kerry met with 11 Arab foreign ministers, mostly from the Gulf states, in order to receive their blessing for the move. If we look at the details of that meeting, which received scant media coverage, we see that the agenda included the situation in Egypt. If we want evidence of this, note that immediately after Kerry’s announcement Jordan’s King Abdullah visited Cairo – the first leader to do so since the coup that brought down President Morsi. What’s the link between the situation in Egypt and the resumption of talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority?

There is certainly a link, and it is very well known, but now the events in Egypt must be added to the equation, especially the defeat of the Muslim Brotherhood. Consider the following:

In recent weeks, Saudi Arabia has managed to overcome the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria by forcing its own man, Ahmad Assi Jarba, onto the Syrian National Coalition. It was Saudi Arabia, likewise, that planned and funded the overthrow of Egypt’s elected leader, Morsi, helped by its bosom friend the Salafist al-Nour Party, which ditched its alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Just as the fall of Mubarak was a blow to Abu Mazen, so the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood is a blow to Hamas. Just as Abu Mazen lost his most important regional ally in Mubarak, now Hamas has lost its major card. Hamas was banished from Syria after expressing reservations about the massacres ordered by Assad, and it is now besieged on all sides: in the south by Egypt, in the north by Israel, and now by the Palestinian Authority, which has waited long to settle accounts with it.

Hamas faces an unusual wave of incitement from the leaders of the Egyptian National Salvation Front, which supported the military coup. This group is using Hamas to undermine Morsi’s legitimacy; the Front accuses him of being too tolerant towards terror in the Sinai Peninsula, harming Egypt’s national security. The Tamaroud movement has also opened a front against the Brotherhood entitled “the war on terror,” thus endorsing the Egyptian security forces’ suppression of Brotherhood activists and leaders. At the same time, the Egyptian army is annihilating the “smuggling tunnels” between the Gaza Strip and Sinai, which constitute an important economic lifeline for the Strip.

Saudi Arabia sacrifices Palestine

When the Brotherhood leadership in Egypt sits behind bars, and when the Hamas leadership is besieged in the Gaza Strip, the time is ripe for Abu Mazen to tighten the noose on Hamas by cooperating with Israel. It will be remembered that Morsi took advantage of the last war in Gaza to get US support by brokering a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas; immediately afterwards he made the famous declaration that put himself above the constitution (this declaration, by the way, marked the beginning of the end for his regime). In the same way, Saudi Arabia today is taking advantage of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations to gain US support for the shady military coup in Egypt. Just as Morsi sacrificed Hamas to win US support for his totalitarian declaration, so Saudi Arabia is sacrificing the Palestinian cause to gain US support for its status in the region and the new regime in Egypt.

This strategy is doomed. With all due respect to the US, governments are dependent on popular support. If Morsi failed the aspirations of the Egyptian people,

The post Abu Mazen’s failed gamble first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The Daam Party adds its voice to the call of the Palestinian people and all people of conscience in Israel and the world, who demand an end to the Israeli authorities’ arbitrary policy against Palestinian prisoners, particularly those in mortal danger, prisoners Samer Issawi and Ayman Sharawna, who have been on hunger strike for over 200 days. We demand their immediate release.

Daam strongly condemns the brutal measures taken against Palestinian prisoners, especially the administrative detainees languishing in jail for protracted periods of time without being told the reason for their arrest and without any indictment brought against them.

At the center of the prisoners’ struggle are 14 prisoners from East Jerusalem and the West Bank who were arrested by Israeli security forces under new military order number 1677. This order was drafted in secret in 2011, during discussions over a prisoner exchange deal – the Shalit deal – involving over one thousand Palestinian prisoners, among them Samer Issawi. The order permits the Israeli security forces to arrest freed prisoners on any pretext however marginal or insignificant, without furnishing any explanation and to return them to jail until they have completed their original sentence. All this without granting them the right to be informed of the accusations against them.

The order reflects a vindictive attitude towards the Palestinians that refuses to make concessions despite the fact that prisoners had been freed to obtain the release of  kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit. As a result of the arbitrary use of this order, Samer Issawi finds himself facing 20 more years in prison for contravening the conditions of his release by going to the Al-Ram neighborhood. This is an absurd situation that contravenes the principles of justice.

Genuine concern for the lives of Samer and Ayman raises a bigger question, notably that of Palestinian security prisoners who continue to suffer as long as the Israeli government adheres to a policy of war and occupation and refuses to move towards ending the conflict.

Daam cautions that repressive policies against the prisoners will bring about a clash and calls for the immediate liberation of Samer Issawi and Ayman Sharawna, respect for prisoners’ rights in accordance with the Geneva Convention, the cessation of the use of administrative detention and the revocation of order 1677.

Oppression and violence will not be able to stop a people determined to gain its natural right to freedom and independence.

The post The Daam Party in solidarity with the struggle of Palestinian prisoners, particularly Samer Issawi and Ayman Sharawna first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

In March, after Bibi Netanyahu forms Israel’s new government, U.S. President Barack Obama intends to arrive for a first historic visit to Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Obama wants to talk with the Israeli people, but has nothing of note to tell them. First on the American president’s crowded agenda will be Iran, and then Syria. Last will be the Palestinian issue, concerning which he has no new initiative.

That Obama is distancing himself from the Palestinian question is unsurprising. He has already crashed and burned on that one, when he named George Mitchell his special envoy, in vain. In response to Obama’s demand, Netanyahu did freeze settlement construction for ten months, but then he renewed it with greater vigor. Meantime another term in office has passed, both in Israel and in the United States, without even the semblance of an Israeli-Palestinian political process, and four more arid years lie ahead. Netanyahu committed himself to the principle of two states, but his actions belied it – the settlements expanded and the would-be Palestinian state continued to shrink.

Economically bankrupt

On the Palestinian side of the Separation Barrier, senior members of the Palestinian Authority (PA) are running around as if trapped in a maze, looking for any way out. Whether in the West Bank areas under PA control, or in Gaza under Hamas, a catastrophe is unfolding, in the fullest sense of the word. Yet this subject is absent from Israeli public discourse. Periodically we hear about what goes on in the West Bank, the account buried on an inside page of the newspaper, when some young Palestinian man or woman is killed by IDF fire under murky circumstances and an investigation is opened into the matter. The issue at the top of today’s agenda is “equal sharing of the burden” by the Ultraorthodox in Israel’s military and economy; no one is interested in “the conflict.” The Israeli middle class has wearied of funding the Ultraorthodox, and people are pleased to see Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid joining forces to make life easier.

Doubtless it will not be long until the unrest in the West Bank becomes palpable to the Israeli public on its side of the wall. The economic situation is bad. The PA is not paying salaries because its coffers are empty; since it employs 16% of the Palestinian workforce, the entire local economy is paralyzed. A Palestinian teacher earns NIS 3000 a month, and a laborer not more than NIS 87 a day. (Compare that to Israel’s minimum wage of NIS 182 per day.) According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, unemployment stands at 20%, reaching 34% among young people aged 15–25. What we’ve got is an active volcano, with the lava boiling over. Rather than do anything, Israeli leaders apparently prefer to hope that the lava won’t flow past the Separation Barrier.

What is causing the economic crisis in the West Bank? The EU and the Arab countries provide billions to the Palestinian Authority, hoping that the conflict will be resolved and the Palestinian State achieve economic independence. This arrangement has been around for 22 years now, and instead of serving the Palestinian people, it serves the Israeli occupation, which uses the time to expand the settlements. The Europeans respond to the stalemate by delaying grants and preparing a blacklist of settlement exports. The goal is to force the Israeli government to stop investing in the settlements and start resolving the conflict.

Israel for its part “punishes” the Palestinian Authority, holding up payments of tax money it has collected at customs points on imported goods entering PA territory. This further empties the already strained Palestinian treasury. One of the absurd outcomes of this mode of economic punishment concerns the supply of electricity to the PA, still provided by the Israel Electric Company (IEC). Without work and salaries, residents of the territories cannot pay their electric bills to the PA, so its debt to the IEC keeps growing. The Israeli government pays what the PA owes to the IEC and recoups those funds from the tax money the government is supposed to transfer to the PA. Thus the Palestinian economy is stuck, with no way out of these vicious cycles of the Occupation.

Abu Mazen and Hamas, politically bankrupt

Given this warped reality, Abu Mazen has struck out in every direction. First, he turned to the UN General Assembly seeking recognition of Palestine as an observer state. This was granted but, in the event, it only made things worse. As punishment for his UN initiative, the US Congress decided to delay financial aid to the PA. Once again, it became clear that the PA is totally dependent on Israel. Abu Mazen learned the hard way that declaring a state isn’t enough; one must also establish it – and without territory, without money and without an economy, the prospects for a sustainable regime are nil. Abu

Mazen’s UN initiative turned out to be no more than a political exercise, intended to show Palestinians that the PA is not sitting and twiddling its thumbs.

Meanwhile, Abu Mazen also turned to Hamas. This move was intended to display a united front and undermine Israel’s claim that, because of a rift between the PA and Hamas, it has no partner for peace. On February 8, Abu Mazen met with Khaled Mashal in Cairo, and they made the heads of all the Palestinian factions come along to Cairo too — to draw up a memorandum of understanding to end the divisions. At the conclusion of the talks they parted friends. No agreement resulted, however, and it’s doubtful one ever will.

Hamas rules Gaza with an iron fist and is not interested in new elections. Hamas fears, not without justification, that if it were to win the elections, neither Fatah nor the rest of the world would recognize the outcome. On the other hand, if Fatah were to win, Hamas would lose control of Gaza. Thus elections are not an option now, and without elections there is no way to overcome the internal Palestinian split.

The split arises from an absence of strategy about the way to establish a Palestinian state. On the one hand, after 22 years of futile talks, clearly the path of negotiation has been exhausted. On the other hand, the armed struggle by Hamas has also been exhausted, given that in the wake of Israel’s recent “Operation Pillar of Defense,” aka “Pillar of Cloud,” the Hamas government reached an agreement with Israel. The agreement included three points: an end to targeted assassinations by Israel, an easing of Israel’s blockade on Gaza, and an end to Gazan attacks on Israel.

This arrangement gives Hamas breathing room but it doesn’t solve the real problem: the continuing Occupation. Egyptian President Muhammad Morsi promised Obama to insure quiet in Gaza, in return for financial aid. But in order to enforce quiet, he needs conciliation between Fatah and Hamas, and as long as that is impossible, Gaza will continue to bleed.

To reach economic stability, Gaza must be liberated from dependence on Israel and have an open crossing between Rafah and Egypt. Control of the Rafah crossing, however, is mired in disagreement. Egypt made a commitment to the international community that the crossing into its territory would be under PA control with Israeli supervision. Hamas of course refuses to let Abu Mazen set foot in Gaza. Hence, without the presence of Abu Mazen, Egypt cannot open the Rafah crossing, and Gaza remains tied to the Israeli umbilical cord.

In despair, the Egyptians decided to flood the tunnels connecting Sinai and Gaza, to send a message to the Hamas leadership that they must be more flexible toward Fatah. Abu Mazen, for his part, began arresting Hamas members in the West Bank. This led Mousa Abu Marzook, Deputy Chief of the Hamas political bureau, to complain that the arrests are damaging Palestinian reconciliation and constitute proof that elections cannot be held (Al Hayat, February 14).

What Obama will discover on his visit

When Obama reaches PA territory, he will see that his policy of appeasing the Israeli right has nearly killed the PA. Perhaps he understands that his policy of appeasing the Mubarak regime in Egypt and Ben Ali in Tunisia eventually led to the Arab Spring. This script may be repeated in the PA territories: when the young people, the university graduates, do not find work, they will take to the streets in protest, and their anger will be directed above all at the PA, which is directly responsible for their situation. At the end of the day, it is the PA that is late in paying salaries, that is not creating jobs, and that cannot persuade Israel to negotiate.

One may reasonably assume that Obama also knows what the entire world knows: the new Israeli consensus, encompassing all the Zionist parties, accepts the doctrine formulated by Avigdor Lieberman, holding that the conflict cannot be resolved. What’s left, then, is to manage the conflict through negotiations, the declared goal of which is the establishment of a Palestinian state within temporary borders. Having already experienced the Oslo accords, the Palestinians have already seen how the temporary becomes permanent, and there is no way they will accept this.

Obama is going to miss another chance to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Anyone surprised by this ought to remember that we have here the same Obama who missed a historic chance to repair American society, when he caved in repeatedly to the extreme right.

The post What’s left on the Palestinian side of the Separation Barrier? first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

From the Challenge Magazine

What do the top leaders of Israel and Hamas have in common? They share the same enemy: PA President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). Abbas embodies all that Ismail Haniyeh despises: secularism and compromise with Israel. Benjamin Netanyahu, for his part, hates Abbas because his moderation threatens Israel’s control of the West Bank. Abbas wants to achieve peace with Israel on the basis of the 1967 lines, including dismantlement of the settlements. He threatens Netanyahu’s political future, for in paying the price of peace, the Israeli PM would have to part from his extremist right-wing allies, as well as the Land of the Patriarchs.

Netanyahu and Haniyeh, who have led their citizens into yet another round of bloodletting, share something else in common: their tacit agreement concerning the fate of the Gaza Strip, and in consequence of the West Bank too. Netanyahu greatly loves the schism within Palestinian ranks between Hamas and Fatah. It gives him a marvelous pretext to continue his mantra that “There is no partner for peace.” Haniyeh, for his part, in order to preserve the separate status of Gaza, deepens the rift with Fatah at every opportunity, ever seeking ways to destroy the “partner,” Abbas.

The real partners, then, are Netanyahu and Haniyeh, and they know it. Neither believes in peace. Haniyeh repeats ad nauseam that he will never recognize Israel. Netanyahu, though compelled by Obama to utter the words “two states,” has clearly demonstrated by his behavior that he will never recognize a Palestinian state. The ideal for both is not peace, rather an amorphous situation that goes by various names, such as hudna, tahdiyya, cease fire, or mutual deterrence.

Like Siamese twins

These things came to clear expression in a speech of Haniyeh’s on the second day of the current conflict. The TV channels hyped it in advance. We waited in suspense: Haniyeh’s words would no doubt determine the fates of people on both sides of the Gaza fence. At precisely 8:00 p.m., the man appeared, features somber and tense. For the first twenty minutes of his half-hour speech, he eulogized Ahmad Ja’abri, the Hamas commander whose assassination by Israel sparked the current round; he heaped praise on the other Hamas martyrs as well. In the remaining ten minutes he praised Egypt for its energetic steps, which amounted, in fact, only to the recall of its ambassador from Tel Aviv and the sending of its prime minister, Hisham Kandil, for a visit on the following day. Haniyeh included himself in the Arab Spring with the rest of the Muslim Brotherhood. He had only one more thing to ask of Egypt. Not the cancellation of its peace with Israel, not to threaten war, only this: to open the Rafah Crossing (the border point in Sinai between Egypt and Gaza).

Haniyeh’s speech showed what he was aiming for. He made no mention of a Palestinian state. He didn’t threaten to turn to the United Nations for international recognition. Nor did he bother to appeal to the entire Palestinian people. In fact, when he named the Palestinian martyrs, he mentioned Ahmad Yassin and Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi, but he had no word for the PLO leaders who had likewise been murdered by Israel, such as Fatah founder Abu Jihad, author Ghassan Kanafani, and Abu Ali Mustafa, leader of the Popular Front. Palestinian history according to Haniyeh began with Hamas, whose mission is to establish the State of Gaza, which is slowly gaining recognition.

In tandem with Haniyeh’s speech, the Israeli TV studios hosted Likud ministers who were sent to justify the operation, which Israel calls “Pillar of Smoke” (Exodus 13:21). Their job was to blur the facts and mobilize the public for this new round. Yisrael Katz, who is coordinated with Netanyahu, explained that the operation’s purpose is not to unseat the Hamas regime, but to arrive at a long period of quiet like that on the Lebanese border since 2006. Katz claimed that Israel needs gradually to stop supplying Gaza with electricity and fuel, as well as essential products. That is exactly what Haniyeh demands from Egypt: Open the Rafah Crossing for the passage of goods and people to Egypt, and then the border between Gaza and Israel will be quieter.

We should note that whenever the Likudniks appear in a studio, the Opposition is also invited—an election campaign is on, after all, so time must be apportioned equally. As expected, the representatives of the “opposition” express total support for the government’s military moves, while trying nonetheless to insert now and then a shy little word for peace. They agree that it’s important to impose a long-term cease-fire on Hamas, but if one wants to solve the problem and prevent the renewal of warfare, one should talk to Abbas and reach a comprehensive solution. The Likudniks, in turn, break into the “opposition’s” remarks with phrases like, “What’s the connection?” or “We won’t do Abu Mazen’s job and overthrow Hamas,” and of course, “Abu Mazen is weak and doesn’t have control, so there’s no one to talk to.”

It isn’t so easy

These then are Siamese twins: the Israeli Right, which hopes to perpetuate its rule in the West Bank, and Islamic fundamentalism, which hopes to perpetuate its rule in Gaza. There is, however, a fly in the ointment. In order for this common dream to be realized, the Rafah Crossing must be opened, freeing Israel from the yoke of Hamas and Hamas from dependency on Israel. Without Egypt that won’t happen. The opening of Rafah would mean the political demise of Abbas and the Palestinian Authority (PA), hence the death of the never-born Palestinian state. Netanyahu’s desire is the nightmare of Egypt’s President Muhammad Morsi, who conditions the opening of Rafah on the reconciliation of Hamas and Fatah, of Haniyeh and Abbas, so that the Crossing will come under PA control.

Thus everything comes back to Abbas, the non-partner, the irrelevant and impotent butt of ridicule. The Americans, the Europeans, and the Egyptians understand very well that the de facto recognition of Hamas will prolong the conflict in the West Bank. It will cement the fundamentalist group’s control of Gaza, while the Palestinian question will continue to bubble and endanger the region.

Four years ago, just before Israel launched Operation Cast Lead, Hamas accused the Mubarak regime of collaborating with the Occupation because it refused to open the Rafah Crossing. Today the issue of Rafah remains unresolved, despite the fact that Mubarak has been replaced by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The key to a solution in Gaza does not depend on broadening the military operations. Seventy thousand Israeli soldiers won’t do the trick, and like Cast Lead, this Pillar of Smoke will disperse. The only way to secure calm in the south, as well as in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, is to resolve the conflict with the Palestinians. Four years ago, after the conclusion of Cast Lead, I wrote the following in a piece called, “Israel and Hamas Won, So Who Lost?”:

“Today, when the truth is clear to all—that a solution requires return to the 1967 borders—Olmert, Barak and Netanyahu do all they can to shirk an agreement. The Israeli leadership refuses to negotiate about East Jerusalem or the Golan Heights. It continues to finance the settlers. The ineluctable result of this policy will be more blood, without justification, point or aim.”

Four years later, amid sirens and blasts, these words again become relevant. Operation Cast Lead, headed by Olmert and Livni, brought Netanyahu to power. Today, as elections approach, it is upon everyone who wants to build an alternative to the fundamentalist right wing, and prevent more wars, to proclaim loud and clear: Stop this war, end the Occupation, tear down the settlements, and at last make peace!

The post Netanyahu and Haniyeh: The common denominator first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

We can relax: the disturbances in the Occupied Territories appear to have subsided, and the would-be third Intifada may have skipped over 2012 as it did over 2011. Back then it was supposed to break out after Abu Mazen vainly sought a Palestinian state at the UN Security Council. Israeli intelligence missed the mark in 2011 and misled others. This year, when all its analysts were worrying about how to get through the Jewish holidays in peace and quiet, they completely missed what was about to happen in the Palestinian territories.

The protest broke out in reaction against a hike in petrol prices, derived from a similar price hike by the Israeli government, which seeks to reduce its budgetary deficit. After the Israeli social protestors tired and lost interest in demonstrations, the baton has passed to the Palestinians, who suffer many times more from the cost of living. What can you do: after 45 years of an Occupation that flooded their markets with Israeli goods, they too eat Tnuva cottage cheese, whose price triggered protest in Israel last year.

The Palestinian response to the petrol hike came very fast and was far less polite than the Israeli version. The Palestinians weren’t ashamed to shout that their prime minister, Salam Fayyad, should “get the hell out!” As for Israeli PM Bibi Netanyahu, he didn’t need to form a new Trajtenberg Committee to pacify the Palestinians. He simply injected $250 million from the taxes he collects for the Palestinian Authority (PA), thus enabling it to pay part of its August salaries. Fayyad too was compelled to roll back the increase on petrol prices, as well as reduce the Value Added Tax (VAT) from 17% (the Israeli rate) to 15%.

Occupation economics

The Palestinian protest, like the Arab Spring, is not aimed directly against Israel, and this fact bothers Netanyahu. The hatred is not against Jews, rather against the PA that is supposed to be serving them. The demonstrating Palestinian youth understand that the protests against the Israeli checkpoints work in favor of the PA leaders, who like to blame the Occupation for their society’s ills, shrugging off responsibility. However, ever since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, the Israeli Occupation has acquired a new form. Israel outsourced control over the Palestinian population, creating the PA as a service contractor. The latter is supposed to keep the peace and provide the residents with services, financed by donors like the EU, the US and the rich Arab states.

Like every subcontractor, the PA cuts itself a fat coupon on the workers’ account, and the donor money greases the wheels of its high officials, business cronies, clerks and police (whose function is not at all clear). Beneath this thin layer is the vast majority, who suffer from unemployment of at least 20% (30%, according to the General Secretary of the Palestinian Trade Unions) and a daily wage of $12 or so. It is clear that the arrangement cannot go on forever. The same reality was a factor leading to the second Intifada in the year 2000 and the rise of Hamas. The same reality is preparing the conditions for the third Intifada, which will be directed this time against the subcontractor and will dispel the fond illusion which goes by the name “Palestinian state.”

Economically speaking, we live in a binational state. The government of Israel is the sovereign in all economic areas: the Bank of Israel determines, by means of the shekel, the PA’s currency policy, while Israel’s Treasury Secretary controls PA fiscal policy by means of the “customs envelope” common to both parties. The problem is that the economic control in no way obliges Israel, because Israeli law is irrelevant in the PA territories. The labor laws, the national insurance, and all the public services which exist in Israel do not apply to the residents of the PA.

The outcome is social tragedy. The prices are Israeli prices, but the services and the wages are more like those in Syria and Egypt. Poverty rises—and with it anger at the PA leaders and their allies who benefit from the arrangement. The economic situation is similar to that in other Arab lands. A Palestinian Spring, long in the bud, can sprout at any moment.

The economic crisis in Europe and the US also has a part in the timing of the protests. The donor nations have cooled toward the PA. The Arab Spring has opened opportunities elsewhere, whereas the money that flows into PA coffers does not go to building an economy, rather only to financing the pleasures of the middle class, which consumes but does not produce. Israeli intransigence on a peace accord and the establishment of an independent Palestine have created an impression of pouring good money into a bottomless barrel.

To what have the donations contributed? To the creation of a big consumer bubble. Until now, the gap between PA salaries and the rise in the cost of living was bridged by loans from banks, which have sprouted like mushrooms. Today, when donations begin to dwindle while the PA deficit swells, it is clear that the party is grinding to an end. If in the past the middle class got benefits from the Oslo Accords, receiving mortgages and buying cars on credit, today it can no longer pay its debts. As in Israel, so in the West Bank, it was the middle class that first went out to demonstrate. The holdback on salaries, the petrol price hike, and the VAT propelled them into the streets. As in the Arab countries, the protest of the middle class opens a gateway for the protest of the poor, which will be more angry and more violent.

The PA on the verge of bankruptcy

Like Greece, Spain, and Ireland, the PA is on the edge of bankruptcy. But it has no Germany or Bank of Europe to bail it out, rather only Israel, and the coinage is not the euro, rather the shekel, which Israel controls. There is no chance in the world that the Bank of Israel will decide on a package to save the PA when it can’t even save the million destitute Israelis. “The poor of your land come first,” and the poor of the neighboring autonomy will have to manage alone.

However, the bankruptcy of the subcontractor places the boss before a hard choice. The fall of the PA will leave Israel alone in responsibility for the Occupied Territories. The result is paradoxical: The more Israel deepens its hold and builds settlements, the more it weakens the PA, increasing its own responsibility for those trapped behind the separation barrier which it built.

The Palestinian demonstrators demand cancellation of the Paris Agreement, the economic part of Oslo, for it chains them to the Israeli economy—as if the cancellation alone might lay the economic foundation for an independent state. But there’s a fly in the ointment. Independence would mean not just control of the currency and of fiscal policy, but also the definition of the territory where the Palestinian law and economy will apply. Such a definition, however, is something that Israel refuses to discuss, and the settlement project makes the problem insoluble. The demand to cancel the Paris Agreement therefore puts the cart before the horse. The way to gain economic independence from Israel is first to gain political independence, that is, to cancel the Oslo Accords to which the Paris Agreement belongs.

Netanyahu is conducting a much publicized campaign on the issue of Iran and the bomb. He is ready to send planes 3000 kilometers in order to save Israel from an imagined new Holocaust. But right outside his window the ground is quaking. The Palestinians are again being pushed, with excessive force, into the Israeli agenda. Bibi sees far-off Iran, but he won’t look into his own backyard. His economic policy and his political blindness are creating the conditions for a new round of violence.

Despite all the attempts to hide this reality, it is coming to meet us. The moment is approaching when Israel will have to decide between a return to full military and civil control over the Territories or, alternatively, withdrawal and abandonment of the settlements in order to enable an independent Palestine. Given that there is no political arrangement in sight, a Palestinian Spring becomes almost the only choice. Like Assad in Syria, Bibi may then send his soldiers to put down demonstrations by the Palestinian poor, but if he does this, then he, like Assad, will lose all legitimacy, and so will the nation he leads.

The post The hot Palestinian summer first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.