Be on our side!

Details

Written by AUPHR AUPHR

Published: 27 September 2011 27 September 2011

Hits: 6405 6405

Israel approves 1,100 settler homes in Gilo, Jerusalem

Details

Written by BBC News BBC News

Published: 27 September 2011 27 September 2011

Hits: 5169 5169

"With this, Israel is responding to the Quartet's statement with 1,100 'NOs',"

[PHOTO: ]Construction cranes in Gilo (January 2011) Gilo is built on land captured by Israel in 1967]


Israel has approved the construction of 1,100 homes in the Jewish settlement of Gilo on the outskirts of Jerusalem.

The move comes days after Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas called for full UN membership for a Palestinian state.

Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, EU Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton, and the US all lamented the move.

Almost 500,000 Jews live in settlements on occupied territory. The settlements are illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.

US-brokered peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians are deadlocked over the issue of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Also on Tuesday, three UN special rapporteurs called for an immediate end to the demolition of Palestinian-owned homes and other structures in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.
'Nice gift'

The plan for construction in Gilo includes the construction of small housing units, public buildings, a school and an industrial zone, according to the Ynet news website.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

Settlement activity threatens the viability of an agreed two-state solution ”

Catherine Ashton EU Foreign Policy Chief

"It's a nice gift for Rosh Hashanah [Jewish New Year]," Yair Gabay, a member of the Jerusalem planning committee, told Ynet.

The authorities have now approved the building of almost 3,000 homes in Gilo over the past two years.

Mr Erekat said the decision represented a rejection of a proposal by the Quartet of Mid East negotiators - the US, the EU, Russia and the UN - for new talks between the Palestinians and Israelis.

"With this, Israel is responding to the Quartet's statement with 1,100 'NOs'," he said.

The US said the move was "deeply disappointing" and "counterproductive".

The EU's Baroness Ashton noted that the Quartet had called for parties "to refrain from provocative actions".

"It is with deep regret that I learned today about the decision to advance in the plans for settlement expansion in east Jerusalem," she said in a statement.

"This plan should be reversed. Settlement activity threatens the viability of an agreed two-state solution and runs contrary to the Israeli-stated commitment to resume negotiations."

The US and UN have criticised earlier announcements of building projects.
'Discriminatory demolitions'

Israel built the settlement at Gilo on land it captured in 1967. It later annexed the area to the Jerusalem municipality in a move not recognised by the international community.

Israel says it does not consider areas within the Jerusalem municipality to be settlements.

Gilo lies across a narrow valley from the Palestinian village of Beit Jala. It became a target for militants during the second Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation in 2000.

Meanwhile, the UN rapporteurs on housing, water, sanitation and food rights said there had been a "dramatic increase" in the demolitions this year.

"The impact and discriminatory nature of these demolitions and evictions is completely unacceptable," they said in a statement.

"These actions by the Israeli authorities violate human rights and humanitarian law and must end immediately."

Turkish government releases identities of IDF soldiers who attacked the Mavi Marmara

Details

Written by ANNIE on MondoWeiss ANNIE on MondoWeiss

Published: 26 September 2011 26 September 2011

Hits: 7487 7487

After an extensive investigation the Turkish government has released the names of the IDF soldiers who participated in the attack on the Mavi Marmara. This news broke today in Sabah, a Turkish newspaper.

The search for the identities of IDF soldiers who participated in the deadly Flotilla raid began after Turkish intelligence demanded the information from Israel who refused to release the information. The Turkish government has requested an apology from Israel as well as compensation for victims of the attack and lifting the blockade on Gaza to abort this investigation. After Israel refused the Turkish government warned they would pursue criminal charges against individuals who participated in the attack. The prosecutor conducting the investigation on the Mavi Marmara raid is Mehmet Akif Ekinci of Turkey's Ministry of Justice.

The Turkish Intelligence Service as well as other agencies have conducted the identification and image hunt by meticulously combing thru all video and photographic evidence available thru worldwide media including leads thru thousands of facebook and twitter accounts. Members of the crew as well as passengers on the Mavi Marmara also participated in the investigation. Turkish experts in Hebrew were vital in following leads thru Israeli social media sites.

IDF soldiers who have been identified thus far are:

Agai Yehezkel, Aharon Haliwa, Alex Shakliar, Amir Ulo, Amir Abste, Amir Shimon Ashel, Anna Strelski, Anton Siomin, Aram Zehavi, Ariel Brickman, Ariel Karo, Ariel Rifkin, Ariel Yochanan, Arnon Avital, Assaf Bryt, Avi Balut, Avi Bnayahu, Avi Mizrakhi, Avi Peled, Aviad Perri, Aviel Siman, Avihay Wizman, Avihu Ben Zahar, Avishay Levi, Avishay Shasha, Aviv Edri, Aviv Kochavi, Aviv Mendelowitz, Baruch (Barry) Berlinsky, Basam Alian, Ben-Zion (Benzi) Gruver, Bnaya Sarel, Boaz Dabush, Boaz Rubin, Boris Schuster, Dado Bar- Kalifa, Dan Dolberg, Dan Harel, Daniel Kotler, David Shapira, David Slovozkoi, David Zini, Eden Atias, Eden Atias, Efraim Aviad Tehila, Efraim Avni, Eitan Ben-Gad, Elad Chachkis, Elad Itzik, Elad Shoshan, Elad Yakobson, Eli Fadida, Eli Yafe, Eliezer Shkedi, Elik Sror, Eran Karisi, Erez Sa'adon, Eyal Eizenberg, Eyal Handelman, Eyal Zukowsky, Gil Shen, Gur Rozenblat, Gur Schreibmann, Guy Givoni, Guy Hazut, Haggai Amar, Hanan Schwart, Harel Naaman, Hila Yafe, Ido Nechushtan, Ilan Malka, Itay Virob, Liran Nachman, Michelle Ben-Baruch, Miki Ohayon, Moshe Tamir, Nadav Musa, Nathan Be'eri, Nezah Rubin, Nimrod Schefer, Nir Ben-David, Nir Dupet, Nir Ohayon, Niv Samban, Noam Keshwisky, Ofek Gal, Ofer Lahad, Ofer Levi, Ofer Winter, Ofer Zafrir, Ofir Edri, Ohad Girhish, Ohad Najme, Omer Dori, Omri Dover, Or Nelkenbaum, Oren Bersano, Oren Cohen, Oren Kupitz, Oren Zini, Pinkhas Buchris, Raz Sarig, Ron Asherov, Ron Levinger, Ron Shirto, Ronen Dan, Ronen Dogmi, Roi Elkabetz, Roi Oppenheimer, Roi Weinberger, Sahar Abargel, Shai Belaich, Shaked Galin, Sharon Itach, Shaul Badusa, Shay Unger, Shimon Siso, Shiran Mussa, Shlomit Tako, Tal Alkobi, Tal Bendel, Tal Kommemi, Tal Ruso, Tamir Oren, Tamir Yadai, Tom Cohen, Tomer Meltzmann, Geva Rapp, Tslil Birbir, Udi Sagie, Uri Ron, Yair Keinan, Yair Palay, Ya'akov(Yaki) Dolf, Yaniv Zolicha, Yaron,Finkelman, Yaron Simsulo, Yehosua (Shuki) Ribak, Yehu Ofer, Yehuda Fuchs, Yehuda Hacohen, Yigal Slovik, Yigal Sudri, Yizhar Yona, Yoav Galant, Yoav Gertner, Yoav Mordechai, Yochai Siemann, Yochanan Locker, Yom-Tov Samia, Yonathan Barenski, Yonathan Felman, Yoni Weitzner, Yossi Abuzaglo, Yossi Bahar, Yossi Beidaz, Yotam Dadon, Yishai Ankri, Yishai Green, Yuval Halamish, Zion Bramli, Zion Shankour, Ziv Danieli, Ziv Trabelsi, Zuf Salomon, Zvi Fogel, Zvi Yehuda Kelner.

There remain IDF soldiers who have yet to be identified by name although their images are familiar to investigators.

Abbas at the United Nations a game changer? Maybe.

Details

Written by Phyllis Bennis Phyllis Bennis

Published: 25 September 2011 25 September 2011

Hits: 5086 5086

There was a potential game changer in Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas’ speech at the General Assembly – but it wasn’t in the words he said: that this marks the end of the 20-year-long U.S.-backed failed peace process, and the potential beginning of a whole new approach to Palestinian-Israeli diplomacy, one based on international law, human rights and equality for all.

No longer is the failed U.S.-controlled "peace process" the only diplomatic game in town. The Palestinian application for recognition as a full Member State of the United Nations places the diplomacy squarely where it has always belonged — in the UN, not in Washington. And while that may be weakened by Abbas' seeming willingness to continue to engage in this long-failed process, there is at least the basis for rebuilding a new diplomatic basis different from the current approach that maintains Israel’s huge disparity power and accepts Israeli “red lines.” This could mean something really new – diplomacy grounded in international law and human rights that ends occupation, ensures the right of refugees to return to their homes, and replaces apartheid with equality for all.

None of this, of course, is certain. Diplomacy is far more about political will and political power than it is about abstract rules; relying on the UN as both venue and player in a new process makes some new results possible — it doesn’t make them inevitable. Reality will require a huge level of new political will, certainly from some countries willing to back the membership/statehood bid, and most especially within the Palestinian diplomatic strategy and the  Palestinian diplomats themselves.

Chairman Abbas’ speech was very carefully drafted to include the right of return of Palestinian refugees as a continuing right, and the continuing role of the Palestine Liberation Organization as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. That's important, because there has been much understandable fear among Palestinians, especially refugees and exiles, that the potential transfer of UN representation from the PLO to the “government” of a still-inchoate “state” could mean the disenfranchisement of refugees both in their representation at the UN, and in the need to fight for their right of return as guaranteed by UN Resolution 194.

Ensuring that a "government" of Palestine actually acts on that right, of course, remains a difficult challenge, but again it is a matter of political will, not UN rules. Any country — certainly the State of Palestine but also South Africa, or Micronesia, or indeed the United States — could take up the cause of Palestinian refugees’ right to return home in the UN forum in a serious way, demanding UN enforcement of Resolution 194. The problem of the right of return still being denied after so many years reflects U.S.-backed Israeli power, but the problem of it not being central to UN operations and high on the UN agenda reflects political will, not arbitrary rules. But, as Abbas finally acknowledged, “It is neither possible, nor practical, nor acceptable to return to conducting business as usual, as if everything is fine.”

So the challenge now is to make this new opportunity real, and to take maximum advantage of it, not to let it dissolve into endless bureaucracy. There is a serious danger that the UN Security Council, rather than moving to schedule a rapid vote with its inevitable US veto, will instead move to create a committee, to launch an investigation, to commission a report… and otherwise move to simply bury the Palestinian application in the labyrinthine mumbo-jumbo of UN diplo-speak. The issue might not re-surface for months — perhaps not even until after the November 2012 U.S. election, which would of course mean President Obama would not face the international consequences of the veto he has promised for domestic political reasons.

It was perhaps especially important that Abbas referred directly to the nonviolent mobilization of Palestinians across the Occupied Palestinian Territory, praising the “popular peaceful resistance to the Israeli occupation and its settlement and apartheid policies and its construction of the racist annexation Wall” and described it directly as being “consistent with international humanitarian law and international conventions.” That recognition was significant, given that the initiative for the widespread nonviolent protest movement in the Territory was created by and continues to gain most of its support from mobilized civil society, not from the officials of the Palestinian Authority.

And while he didn’t mention the word “BDS” — the Palestinian civil society call for “boycott, divestment and sanctions” that shapes much of the international mobilization in support of international law and human rights in Palestine — Abbas clearly was including the global movement for nonviolent pressure on Israel in his reference to that movement’s “support of peace activists from Israel and around the world, reflecting an impressive, inspiring and courageous example of the strength of this defenseless people, armed only with their dreams, courage, hope and slogans in the face of bullets, tanks, tear gas and bulldozers.” The reference to bulldozers as part of the Israeli war machine was particularly powerful, both because of the centrality of the boycott and divestment campaigns against Caterpillar across the U.S., and especially because of the worldwide outrage over the killing of Rachel Corrie, the young American peace activist killed in Gaza in 2003 while protecting a Palestinian family’s home, by an Israeli soldier driving a giant D-9 Caterpillar bulldozer.

At the end of the day, a speech is only a speech, an application for membership is only a piece of paper. But these actions set the stage for some possibilities that did not exist before. Certainly dangers continue. The head of the PLO was greeted with a standing ovation from at least part of the General Assembly when he said that “after 63 years of suffering of the ongoing Nakba: Enough. Enough. Enough. It is time for the Palestinian people to gain their freedom and independence.”

Maybe he’ll set a deadline, and maybe some governments will take seriously their obligation to protect an occupied population suffering under decades of occupation, apartheid and dispossession. Maybe, just maybe, this will mark the beginning of a different approach to achieving Palestinian rights and equality — with the world, not the U.S., as the “honest broker.” Twenty years of a U.S.-controlled process designed to maintain Israeli power and privilege is over — it’s enough. Now the challenge remains to create a new, UN-based process grounded in international law, equality and human rights — for all.

Phyllis Bennis is a Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies; her books include “Understanding the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Primer” and “Calling the Shots: How Washington Dominates Today’s UN.” This post originally appeared on the Institute for Policy Studies blog.