Marc Lynch discusses that the Arab media is reporting on the slight (yet still important) divide between Netanyahu and Obama on Palestinian statehood and settlements. Obama said: state, no settlements, and apparently Netanyahu wouldn't cede on either, and his facial expressions apparently showed his discontent.
This whole Iran - Israel - Palestine thing highlights such a huge difference between the Obama and Bush admins. Bush would have been out there with fiery anti-Iran pro-Israeli security rhetoric, upping the ante, creating himself another war, whereas Obama approaches it logically and rationally; the road to Iran for Israel goes through Palestine, not the other way around:
"If there is a linkage between Iran and the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, I personally believe it actually runs the other way.. to the extent that we can make peace... between the Palestinians and the Israelis, then I actually think it strengthens our hand in the international community in dealing with the potential Iranian threat."
Showing posts with label Palestine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Palestine. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
On the diplomacy front...
Obama will host talks Afghan and Pakistani leaders.
Obama will host Palestinian, Egyptian and Israeli leaders in separate talks.
Obama will host Palestinian, Egyptian and Israeli leaders in separate talks.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Peace talks to be based on 2002 Arab Initiative
US announces concurrent peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians and Israelis and Syrians.
Most promising is that they will base the talks on the much overlooked 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. Article on this in the Wash Post.
Most promising is that they will base the talks on the much overlooked 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. Article on this in the Wash Post.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Israeli troops speaking out on IDF conduct during war on Gaza
Watch the Al Jazeera special on Israeli troops speaking out.
IDF soldiers are speaking out against their treatment of Palestinians in Gaza. Reports filed by Israeli soldiers state killing civilians and destroying houses was allowed. Specific incidents are described in the video; articles below show quotations from reports. The IDF will be conducting an investigation and the UN Human Rights council is doing the same.
Here is an article on Haaretz - IDF probe into Gaza War.
Front page article in the NYTimes today.
Some excerpts from reports:
"The platoon commander let the family go and told them to go to the right. One mother and her two children didn't understand and went to the left, but they forgot to tell the sharpshooter on the roof they had let them go and it was okay, and he should hold his fire and he ... he did what he was supposed to, like he was following his orders." "The sharpshooter saw a woman and children approaching him, closer than the lines he was told no one should pass. He shot them straight away. In any case, what happened is that in the end he killed them. "I don't think he felt too bad about it, because after all, as far as he was concerned, he did his job according to the orders he was given. And the atmosphere in general, from what I understood from most of my men who I talked to ... I don't know how to describe it .... The lives of Palestinians, let's say, is something very, very less important than the lives of our soldiers. So as far as they are concerned they can justify it that way," he said.
"You do not get the impression from the officers that there is any logic to it, but they won't say anything. To write 'death to the Arabs' on the walls, to take family pictures and spit on them, just because you can. I think this is the main thing: To understand how much the IDF has fallen in the realm of ethics, really. It's what I'll remember the most."
IDF soldiers are speaking out against their treatment of Palestinians in Gaza. Reports filed by Israeli soldiers state killing civilians and destroying houses was allowed. Specific incidents are described in the video; articles below show quotations from reports. The IDF will be conducting an investigation and the UN Human Rights council is doing the same.
Here is an article on Haaretz - IDF probe into Gaza War.
Front page article in the NYTimes today.
Some excerpts from reports:
"The platoon commander let the family go and told them to go to the right. One mother and her two children didn't understand and went to the left, but they forgot to tell the sharpshooter on the roof they had let them go and it was okay, and he should hold his fire and he ... he did what he was supposed to, like he was following his orders." "The sharpshooter saw a woman and children approaching him, closer than the lines he was told no one should pass. He shot them straight away. In any case, what happened is that in the end he killed them. "I don't think he felt too bad about it, because after all, as far as he was concerned, he did his job according to the orders he was given. And the atmosphere in general, from what I understood from most of my men who I talked to ... I don't know how to describe it .... The lives of Palestinians, let's say, is something very, very less important than the lives of our soldiers. So as far as they are concerned they can justify it that way," he said.
"You do not get the impression from the officers that there is any logic to it, but they won't say anything. To write 'death to the Arabs' on the walls, to take family pictures and spit on them, just because you can. I think this is the main thing: To understand how much the IDF has fallen in the realm of ethics, really. It's what I'll remember the most."
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Palestinan natural resources
Yesh Din op ed in Jerusalem Post on Israeli expropriation of Palestinian natural resources (rock) in West Bank that could be the building blocks (ha ha) but seriously of the future state (natural resources = economic viability)
This echos the article in the NYTimes a few days back that I wrote about - see post below.
This echos the article in the NYTimes a few days back that I wrote about - see post below.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Pressure on Israel
Interesting argument by David Aaron Miller in NYTimes article ,"On Middle East Trip, Clinton Turns up the Caution," that might (not sure) to quell some of us that are getting nervous about the lack of pressure on Israel to stop settlements and the destruction of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem: "Pressuring Israel because we're frustrated with them or we want them to make nice with the Arabs is a dumb policy...Pressuring Israel at the right during a peace negotiation that actually promises to produce a breakthrough is much smarter."
Article - Desert's Sand and Rocks Become Precious Resources in West Bank Dispute
In a NYTimes article, Ethan Bronner reveals Israeli expropriation of resources (sand and rocks) crucial to a future Palestinian state. This is the kind of counterproductive move that prevents a Palestinian state (natural resources are key to a viable economy) and therefore Israel's own security.
These expropriated West Bank natural resources account for nearly a quarter of the sand and rock Israel uses every year.
I wonder if they are using this to build settlements? (And then employing Palestinian laborers to do the work...) Talking about twisting the knife in the wound...or in this case, driving the knife in the peace talks.
In legal terms - the Fourth Hague Convention states that occupying powers may not remove natural resources and that any gain obtained from their exploitation must be kept in a designated fund for the local population.
While of course this was not Bronner's intent - there is a parallel to colonial practices of exploitation of natural resources in Africa.
Israeli rights group Yseh Din is bringing the case to the Israel Supreme Court next week.
These expropriated West Bank natural resources account for nearly a quarter of the sand and rock Israel uses every year.
I wonder if they are using this to build settlements? (And then employing Palestinian laborers to do the work...) Talking about twisting the knife in the wound...or in this case, driving the knife in the peace talks.
In legal terms - the Fourth Hague Convention states that occupying powers may not remove natural resources and that any gain obtained from their exploitation must be kept in a designated fund for the local population.
While of course this was not Bronner's intent - there is a parallel to colonial practices of exploitation of natural resources in Africa.
Israeli rights group Yseh Din is bringing the case to the Israel Supreme Court next week.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Salem Fayyad, Fatah PM, submits resignation
Interesting development - Salem Fayyad, PM of Palestinian Authority, who Hamas demanded depart from the before a unity govt could be orchestrated - submitted his resignation.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7929927.stm
Interesting conciliatory step by Fatah to Hamas.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7929927.stm
Interesting conciliatory step by Fatah to Hamas.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Article - What Iran's Jews Say
Roger Cohen had a great op ed in the NYTimes on Iran last week.
The article reveals that Iran's rhetoric toward Israel is not at all racist (directed at Jews) but rather political and nationalist (directed at struggle for Palestinain state.) I love the opener of this article, Cohen writes about a sign he saw, "Congratualtions on the 30th Anniversary of the Islamic Revolution from the Jewish Community of Esfahan." He also mentions Jews in Iran who protested against the attacks on Gaza. (This article must have really sent Avigidor Lieberman off the deep end.)
Conflicts are so rarely (never really) at their core about religion and ethnicity, but about land and politics and power. Only when people realize this (thanks to Cohen for helping us down this road) will we be able to solve the problems of the region. Blaming suicide attacks on Islam just doesn't pay the bill.
The article reveals that Iran's rhetoric toward Israel is not at all racist (directed at Jews) but rather political and nationalist (directed at struggle for Palestinain state.) I love the opener of this article, Cohen writes about a sign he saw, "Congratualtions on the 30th Anniversary of the Islamic Revolution from the Jewish Community of Esfahan." He also mentions Jews in Iran who protested against the attacks on Gaza. (This article must have really sent Avigidor Lieberman off the deep end.)
Conflicts are so rarely (never really) at their core about religion and ethnicity, but about land and politics and power. Only when people realize this (thanks to Cohen for helping us down this road) will we be able to solve the problems of the region. Blaming suicide attacks on Islam just doesn't pay the bill.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Olivier Roy is the man; Politics of Chaos in the Middle East is the book
Everyone should read Olivier Roy's book The Politics of Chaos in the Middle East NOW. It is amazing. (Also read his The Failure of Political Islam while you're at it...)
Usually a book makes one or two brilliant points throughout; this one has like 50. Here are the two I found most interesting:
1. He emphasizes the importance of political legitimacy - he believes in neither neocons nor in NGOS. Neither the top down democratisation/ state-building, (like what the US did in Iraq establishing a Parliament etc. in Baghdad), nor the bottom up run of the mill civil society building will work because these structures do not come from indigenous (and therefore legitimate) actors. Roy also points out that civil society building attempts divide local actors between those working with the western institutions and those that do not - driving a wedge among players that should be working together.
(Sidenote: I happen to have always been of the school that believes that as foreigners we can be effective in encouraging civic engagement/ indigenous participation, building frameworks within which local actors can thrive, building relationships with leaders and their constituencies, voter participation, training candidates, rule of law etc. Olivier Roy and led me to question this belief.)
2. Roy brings up the problem with how the US media and Bush administration use the terrorist label. To call every group that attacks innocent civilians terrorists is an oversimplification and does not reveal the nuances of these groups. If you dismiss groups as simply 'terrorists' you miss their motives and goals and if you do not understand their motives and goals how can you ever hope to prevent the attacks? Terrorist attacks can not be stopped by militaries and force - they will always win bc their tactics (no rules etc) will have far worse consequences than those of traditional militaries and states.
So Roy says you must take into account the purpose of the terrorist acts. Terrorism is used nowadays in two main areas: One, it plays a role in the nationalist movements (IRA, Basque, Tamil Tigers, Palestinians, Chechens) and then the global deterritorialised sort (AQ). Negotiation is possible with the former - their 'terrorism' is a means to an end, whereas negotiations with AQ are impossible and ineffective bc they attack the 'system' in general.
Applied to what is going on now, I would translate this section read 'Engage with Hamas.' I really hope someone in the Obama administration has read this part of this book and tells the Pres about it.
Usually a book makes one or two brilliant points throughout; this one has like 50. Here are the two I found most interesting:
1. He emphasizes the importance of political legitimacy - he believes in neither neocons nor in NGOS. Neither the top down democratisation/ state-building, (like what the US did in Iraq establishing a Parliament etc. in Baghdad), nor the bottom up run of the mill civil society building will work because these structures do not come from indigenous (and therefore legitimate) actors. Roy also points out that civil society building attempts divide local actors between those working with the western institutions and those that do not - driving a wedge among players that should be working together.
(Sidenote: I happen to have always been of the school that believes that as foreigners we can be effective in encouraging civic engagement/ indigenous participation, building frameworks within which local actors can thrive, building relationships with leaders and their constituencies, voter participation, training candidates, rule of law etc. Olivier Roy and led me to question this belief.)
2. Roy brings up the problem with how the US media and Bush administration use the terrorist label. To call every group that attacks innocent civilians terrorists is an oversimplification and does not reveal the nuances of these groups. If you dismiss groups as simply 'terrorists' you miss their motives and goals and if you do not understand their motives and goals how can you ever hope to prevent the attacks? Terrorist attacks can not be stopped by militaries and force - they will always win bc their tactics (no rules etc) will have far worse consequences than those of traditional militaries and states.
So Roy says you must take into account the purpose of the terrorist acts. Terrorism is used nowadays in two main areas: One, it plays a role in the nationalist movements (IRA, Basque, Tamil Tigers, Palestinians, Chechens) and then the global deterritorialised sort (AQ). Negotiation is possible with the former - their 'terrorism' is a means to an end, whereas negotiations with AQ are impossible and ineffective bc they attack the 'system' in general.
Applied to what is going on now, I would translate this section read 'Engage with Hamas.' I really hope someone in the Obama administration has read this part of this book and tells the Pres about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
