Two-State Illusion



THE last three decades are littered with the carcasses of failed negotiating projects billed as the last chance for peace in Israel. All sides have been wedded to the notion that there must be two states, one Palestinian and one Israeli. For more than 30 years, experts and politicians have warned of a “point of no return.” Secretary of State John Kerry is merely the latest in a long line of well-meaning American diplomats wedded to an idea whose time is now past.

True believers in the two-state solution see absolutely no hope elsewhere. With no alternative in mind, and unwilling or unable to rethink their basic assumptions, they are forced to defend a notion whose success they can no longer sincerely portray as plausible or even possible.

Read more on the NY Times

URGENT ACTION: Forced evictions of Palestinians to go ahead

Further Information on UA: 170/13 Index: MDE 15/013/2013 Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories        Date: 11 September 2013
Eastmed <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>

URGENT ACTION
Forced evictions of Palestinians to go ahead
Some 1,000 Palestinians living in the south of the occupied West Bank, nearly half of them children, are still facing forced eviction by the Israeli army; the Israeli High Court of Justice did not rule in favour of their rights.
The Israeli army plans to expel and forcibly evict from their homes all the residents of eight villages situated in the hills south-east of Hebron, in the southern West Bank, to make way for a military training zone, Firing Zone 918. The villages are Safai, Majaz, Tabban, Fakhit, Halaweh, Mirkez, Jinba and Hillet al-Dhaba’a. If the evictions go ahead they have the potential to violate a range of residents’ rights including adequate housing, water, sanitation, health and education.

Read more: URGENT ACTION: Forced evictions of Palestinians to go ahead

NSA shares raw intelligence including Americans' data with Israel

• Secret deal places no legal limits on use of data by Israelis
• Only official US government communications protected
• Agency insists it complies with rules governing privacy
Read the NSA and Israel's 'memorandum of understanding'

Read more on the Guardian

The Flawed Case for US Intervention in Syria

 

This is a response to a Facebook post by someone who posed a question about US attacks on the Syrian regime. Her question was based on a recent op-ed piece by Nicolas Kristof (The Right Questions on Syria, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/opinion/kristof-the-right-questions-on-syria.html?src=mb&_r=0). The question he raised was basically this, “How can “you” (meaning those opposed to US military action in Syria) really be for peace and do nothing about Syria’s use of chemical weapons?” That question is rather easily answered.

Non-intervention is in the greater service of peace because the options available to the US are 1.) not likely to improve the situation in Syria, eliminate chemical weapons, or reduce deaths there from any cause and 2.) They do not even meet the lowest standard that any intervention that claims to be humanitarian should meet, i.e. that such intervention should at least do no greater harm than exists under current circumstances. This simple notion is the essence of the Hippocratic oath. Perhaps that is the basic standard that should be applied in these situations.

In fact, US intervention (as currently envisaged) is predicated on the notion that “Assad must go.” In other words, regime change. The words “as currently envisaged” should retain our attention. It is a commonplace of military history that the best of plans rarely survives its initial contact with the enemy--or with the real world.

I usually like Kristof’s work; he has often been a principled voice for peace and human rights, but he falls down badly in this piece. His argument is riddled with nonsense.

Read more: The Flawed Case for US Intervention in Syria

Amnesty: Accountability needed for killings in Israeli raid on West Bank refugee camp


27 August 2013

Accountability needed for killings in Israeli raid on West Bank refugee camp


Protests were held in the West Bank amid the funerals of the three Palestinians killed on Monday. © Ilia Yefimovich/Getty Images

Evidence strongly suggests that three men who were shot dead with live ammunition during an arrest raid on a Palestinian refugee camp in the occupied West Bank on Monday were unlawfully killed by Israeli forces, Amnesty International said today.  

Another 19 people, including six children, were injured by live ammunition fired during the raid on Qalandia refugee camp, the highest number of casualties in a single Israeli operation in the West Bank this year. Five of those wounded, including three children, had injuries to the upper body.

“The intentional lethal use of firearms – such as firing live ammunition at individuals’ upper bodies – is only permissible if strictly unavoidable to protect life,” said Philip Luther, Middle East and North Africa Programme Director at Amnesty International.

“The loss of life and high number of casualties in this incident raise serious questions as to whether heavily armoured Israeli troops acted according to international standards.”

Rubin ‘Abd al-Rahman Zayed, a 34-year-old employee of UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, was among those killed when he was shot in the chest by Israeli troops from a military vehicle as it was exiting the camp after the raid.

Read more: Amnesty: Accountability needed for killings in Israeli raid on West Bank refugee camp

Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml . If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.