Wikileaks on Israel, Iraq and the Iranian Specter

Details

Written by Juan Cole Juan Cole

Published: 29 November 2010 29 November 2010

Hits: 2334 2334

Thoughtful Israeli analysts point out that even if a nuclear-armed Iran did not immediately launch a strike on the Israeli heartland, the very fact that Iran possesses nuclear weapons would completely transform the Middle East strategic environment in ways that would make Israel’s long-term survival as a democratic Jewish state increasingly problematic.

A 2007 cable from then US ambassador to Israel to Secretary of State Condi Rice shows a) that the Israeli leadership did not want the US to withdraw from Iraq and b) that Israeli politicians think that even if Iran never used a nuclear weapon, just for it to have one would doom Israel.

Since the US is in fact withdrawing from Iraq, and will be mostly out by next year this time, we may conclude that the Israeli leadership is very nervous about Tel Aviv – Baghdad relations. That the new government being formed by Prime Minister-designate Nuri al-Maliki depends deeply on the support of Muqtada al-Sadr and his Sadrist movement, the most anti-Israel political force in Shiite Iraq, must petrify Prime Minister Netanyahu and his security cabinet. The likelihood of the Sadrists further coordinating with Lebanon’s Hizbullah party-militia is high. So the fall of Saddam did not in fact take away the Iraq file from consideration in Israel’s future.

As for Iran, US intelligence still cannot find evidence of a nuclear weapons program, and the UN inspectors again certified spring, 2010, that no nuclear material has been diverted from the Natanz facility to non-civilian purposes.

But the cable shed light on the thinking of high Israeli officials about why Israel cannot, as many US analysts have suggested, just live with an Iranian bomb if one is achieved. They believe that such a development would create a psychological nervousness in the Israeli public that would likely doom it as a Jewish state.

Read more: Wikileaks on Israel, Iraq and the Iranian Specter

Due to Gisha's Petition: Israel Reveals Documents related to the Gaza Closure Policy

Details

Written by Gisha, Legal Center for Freedom of Movement Gisha, Legal Center for Freedom of Movement

Published: 29 November 2010 29 November 2010

Hits: 2119 2119

Thursday, October 21, 2010: After one and a half years in which Israel at first denied their existence and then claimed that revealing them would harm "state security", the State of Israel released three documents that outline its policy for permitting transfer of goods into the Gaza Strip prior to the May 31 flotilla incident. The documents were released due to a Freedom of Information Act petition submitted by Gisha - Legal Center for Freedom of Movement in the Tel Aviv District Court, in which Gisha demanded transparency regarding the Gaza closure policy.  Israel still refuses to release the current documents governing the closure policy as amended after the flotilla incident.

"Policy of Deliberate Reduction"

The documents reveal that the state approved "a policy of deliberate reduction" for basic goods in the Gaza Strip (section h.4, page 5*). Thus, for example, Israel restricted the supply of fuel needed for the power plant, disrupting the supply of electricity and water. The state set a "lower warning line" (section g.2, page 5) to give advance warning of expected shortages in a particular item, but at the same time approved ignoring that warning, if the good in question was subject to a policy of "deliberate reduction". Moreover, the state set an "upper red line" above which even basic humanitarian items could be blocked, even if they were in demand (section g.1, page 5). The state claimed in a cover letter to Gisha that in practice, it had not authorized reduction of "basic goods" below the "lower warning line", but it did not define what these "basic goods" were (page 2).

"Luxuries" denied for Gaza Strip residents

In violation of international law, which allows Israel to restrict the passage of goods only for concrete security reasons, the decision whether to permit or prohibit an item was also based on "the good's public perception" and "whether it is viewed as a luxury" (section c.b, page 16). In other words, items characterized as "luxury" items would be banned – even if they posed no security threat, and even if they were needed. Thus, items such as chocolate and paper were not on the "permitted" list. In addition, officials were to consider "sensitivity to the needs of the international community".

Ban on Reconstructing Gaza

Although government officials have claimed that they will permit the rehabilitation of Gaza, the documents reveal that Israel treated rehabilitation and development of the Gaza Strip as a negative factor in determining whether to allow an item to enter; goods "of a rehabilitative character" required special permission (section g, page 16). Thus, international organizations and Western governments did not receive permits to transfer building materials into Gaza for schools and homes.

Read more: Due to Gisha's Petition: Israel Reveals Documents related to the Gaza Closure Policy

Israeli Government Documents Show Deliberate Policy to Restrict Food to Gaza

Details

Written by Saed Bannoura | International Middle East Media Center | Report Saed Bannoura | International Middle East Media Center | Report

Published: 29 November 2010 29 November 2010

Hits: 2428 2428

Documents, whose existence were denied by the Israeli government for over a year, have been released after a legal battle led by Israeli human rights group, Gisha. The documents reveal a deliberate policy by the Israeli government in which the dietary needs for the population of Gaza are chillingly calculated, and the amounts of food let in by the Israeli government measured to remain just enough to keep the population alive at a near-starvation level. This documents the statement made by a number of Israeli officials that they are "putting the people of Gaza on a diet".

In 2007, when Israel began its full siege on Gaza, Dov Weisglass, adviser to then Prime-Minister Ehud Olmert, stated clearly, “The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.” The documents now released contain equations used by the Israeli government to calculate the exact amounts of food, fuel and other necessities needed to do exactly that.

The documents are even more disturbing, say human rights activists, when one considers the fact that close to half of the people of Gaza are children under the age of eighteen. This means that Israel has deliberately forced the undernourishment of hundreds of thousands of children in direct violation of international law and the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Read more: Israeli Government Documents Show Deliberate Policy to Restrict Food to Gaza

Boycott: Put more pressure on Israel to change

Details

Written by Steven Goldberg Steven Goldberg

Published: 23 November 2010 23 November 2010

Hits: 2383 2383

Published: Tuesday, November 23, 2010, 5:41 AM

Guest Columnist
By Steven Goldberg

As Israel increasingly ignores our government's objections to the expansion of settlements, its primary concern is with placating its own right-wing parliamentary coalition. And why should Israel be concerned with the protests of the Obama administration when U.S. military aid to Israel – now billions of dollars per year, paid by U.S. taxpayers at a time when they have no jobs and are losing their homes – continues unabated?

Israel is increasingly a rogue nation under international legal standards. Decisions from the International Court of Justice declaring the separation wall illegal, United Nations reports detailing Israel's illegal actions during its invasion of Gaza (the Goldstone Report), and the recent U.N. Human Rights Council report criticizing Israel's attacks on the Gaza flotilla are bolstered by ongoing reports by groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch detailing Israel's illegal actions. In past generations, American policy has often led us to support dictatorships and overlook gross violations of human rights. The Obama administration promised a different path, but not in its unquestioned support for Israel as legal, ethical and moral concerns are readily tossed aside.

Oregon has not done much better. Our progressive politics and concern about the environment don't seem to apply to the Israeli government's policy of destroying Palestinian homes and crops as Israel expands its borders. Ethics and morals be damned if Israel promises opportunities for Oregon businesses. Thus our governor leads a trade delegation to Israel, the city of Portland promotes seminars encouraging investment in Israel, and local stores such as New Seasons – which tout their commitment to promoting local communities and agriculture – stock products made in Israel.

Read more: Boycott: Put more pressure on Israel to change