Commemorating Palestinian villages

According to a report in Ha'aretz, the Jewish National Fund will place signs in parks which were formerly occupied by Palestinian villages. For those not familiar with the Israeli land ownership system, the Jewish National Fund owns some parts of Israeli land but is also the custodian of "absentee lands"--i.e. lands of Palestinian refugees (including those who were in Israeli territory at the cease-fire but not actually on their land).

About 500 former Palestinian villages were demolished. According to the organization Zochrot, which is fighting for the commemoration, there are 86 former villages within the boundaries of national parks; the JNF has reportedly will commemorate 31, placing information about the villages on their former sites.

There are different ways to look at this move. A cynic would say that the JNF wants to accelerate the process of historicizing and making everything a fait accompli, as has always been Israel's strategy; but realistically, it's almost certain no Palestinian will return to these demolished villages to live. Note that the organization, Zochrot (Remembering), which is pushing for the commemoration, supports the right of return for Palestinian refugees, so they clearly hope that such moves will keep the memory alive as older refugees who went through Nakba continue to die out. I would think a bigger question is, what about the other 450 villages that aren't yet commemorated?

It's also sad that most of these plaques will probably be vandalized by right-wingers. The Ha'aretz article shows a standing sign which had already been mostly removed. Just another reminder that the issue is far from being ancient history.

Might want to say that more softly...

In a move sure to play well on Iraqi TV, George Bush apparently said that Israel is a good standard for Iraq to work towards, as quoted by the BBC:

"In places like Israel, terrorists have taken innocent human life for years in suicide attacks. The difference is that Israel is a functioning democracy and it's not prevented from carrying out its responsibilities. And that's a good indicator of success that we're looking for in Iraq."

Right. And Israel faces multiple suicide bombings and car bombings on a daily basis as well as sectarian death squads working within its army and police force that are leaving thousands dead. Uhhh, wait a minute... when was the last suicide bomb in Israel again? Oh yeah, but Hamas sporadically fires ineffective missiles at an isolated border town. Same thing as Iraq, pretty much.

Anyway, Iraqis, the point is that Israelis aren't letting a few stray missiles here and there prevent them from carrying out their responsibilities! Figure it out already, if you want to be like Israel! Take advantage of your freedom! (By the way, Iraqis, a good way to unite your population is to fight a foreign war. Maybe try that out... invade a small neighbor or something...)

Attractive new homes in central Palestine

Ha'aretz reports on the plan of Palestinian entrepreneurs to build a new city--in the middle of the West Bank:

According to sources who were at the Herzliya event, the idea was received with enthusiasm by the attendees, including Defense Minister Amir Peretz. The Palestinian Authority has already allocated land for the new city. ...

They see the new community as comprising several thousand housing units containing 140 to 200 square meters of floor space apiece. It will be meant mainly for young, middle-class families.

The new city is supposed to be built between Ramallah and Nablus, that is to say, north-center West Bank. Forgive me for being skeptical, but... note the following rule has generally held for anything built in the Palestinian territories:

(1) It gets destroyed.

Like, for instance, pretty much everything built during the days of "peace" in the late '90s that was funded by international aid money. [To be fair, Gaza had it much worse, but is the West Bank that good of an investment right now, even for charity capital infusions?]

Who is going to pay for these construction workers? They are hoping for international support. "Small businesses" are supposed to be part of the economy... well, that requires a few roadblocks to actually be removed (that is, the IDF doesn't lie about them) so that inter-city transportation can occur. I mean, the idea is fine--if there's a peace agreement. Until then, it's throwing money down a hole.

Here's an interesting quote:

"It's not any of Israel's business if the Palestinians want to build a city on their territory," said one [of the Defense Ministry officials].

Hmm. Really? Well then, why are you at this meeting? Oh, right... "their territory" doesn't really exist. According to the Oslo accords--the entire basis for Area A--there is Palestinian "jurisdiction over territory," but there's no sovereignty, of course. And then there's the matter of actually getting all the construction materials to the little island of territory that this "city" will be built on.

So, the Israelis are all there (a pretty good list in the article) to approve plans for a Palestinian city. Funny how Oslo has created the autonomy for the Arabs that Begin wanted, and how the five-year PA has achieved permanence. And how easily it was predicted by some. But... that's a matter for another posting.

Update: Speaking of cities, though not the same one: The Head Heeb, an extremely well-spoken and well-informed blogger, has a great post on a proposed new Arab city in Israel, as well as the continued battle for integration of previously Jewish-only communities, and the dynamic of racial separation within Israel proper.

Back to the drawing board for Israeli Labor, again

Labor's leadership election looms in May and current leader Amir Peretz looks extremely vulnerable. When the Kadima-Labor coalition took power, some felt it was a good move on Peretz's part to take the Defense portfolio, since he couldn't get Finance. He can establish himself as a competent minister and not take the heat for tough budget and taxing decisions, it was said. Well, Olmert and the IDF screwed that up for him, looks like...

Now Peretz faces opposition from several fronts--it's only early January, but Peretz has been in trouble since Lebanon. Former Labor leader Ehud Barak is jumping back in as a Labor establishment candidate and is supported by such long-term Labor figures as Benjamin Ben-Eliezer. Ami Ayalon, former head of the Shin Bet, is a candidate, backed by Avishay Braverman. Both are relatively new to electoral politics but have been prominent figures for a longer time. They appear to be pragmatists without the baggage of Barak. Finally, there is Ophir Pines-Paz, the principled ex-cabinet member who left government over the appointment of Yisrael Beitenu's Avigdor Lieberman to a ministry.

At this point, Ayalon and Barak appear the front-runners. Of all of them, Ayalon seems to most represent the perspective of a social-liberal party, which Labor now is; Pines-Paz is too left, and not really a major figure, while Barak seems more to the right, and still very vulnerable to criticism, though not immune to bouncing back, due to the general low standing that all public figures today enjoy. Personally, I saw Ayalon speak while in college, as he was doing a tour on his citizens' initiative with Sari Nusseibeh, and while he certainly held back for what I believe to be public-image concerns as well as very real personal beliefs, I believe he is sincere (not to be making any comparisons with Ehud Barak...).

What does this mean for the peace process? Ehh... essentially nothing. Unlike past times when it's been asserted that "there is no Palestinian partner" except that there really was, Israel now through its destructive policies has managed to self-fulfill this prophecy. Now there really is no partner, at least for now--not because nobody will negotiate, but because the legitimacy of whoever does it will be questioned by a majority. (Given that Israel controls the process overall, this is not an insurmountable obstacle if they really wish to take action; but the problem is that the Palestinians must present a united front to challenge them at the table, or the Israelis simply will not move due to domestic political concerns).

As for Ehud Olmert... check out this great post for how he's doing.

Getting scarier in Gaza

The situation in Palestine is getting scarier (if this is possible). The prime minister, or head of the PNA "government," Ismail Haniyeh, is declaring that the shots fired at his limousine were an assassination attempt.

The context for this is that Haniyeh had gone on a visit abroad and was attempting to return to the open-air prison in Gaza with some money for food and salaries to alleviate the misery that continues to increase in the territories. Haniyeh had to leave about $30m in Egypt and eventually, after diplomatic negotiations, was allowed to return. But hey, humiliating the head of "government" is always an acceptable step.

The PNA should have been dissolved long ago, when Abbas could still make the decision himself to end the charade and return responsibility to Israel. If your "government" is arrested by its supposed negotiating "partner," then what sort of "government" is it and what does it "govern"? The Israelis still have all the cards and, like true Likudniks, treat the Palestinians elected as the elected representatives of the prisoners (sorry, "Arabs of Eretz Israel"). But now, Hamas and Fatah cannot agree on anything, and neither will concede for fear of giving the other some sort of edge; and even if they did, other groups make the situation impossible.

As for the horrible situation in the Territories, this can be credited almost entirely to Israel as the power broker. The Palestinian track, if such a thing exists, no longer has anything to do with diplomacy; it is entirely about Israeli domestic politics. Peretz and Olmert jockey for who gets to talk to Abbas or other Palestinians (who hasn't met them in person since the election, but is forced to receive lower ranking Israeli diplomats). Israel's refusal to negotiate or concede any points, and its policies in the Territories, were largely responsible for Hamas's election victory (along with its attempts to subvert Fatah and make it a dependent puppet); and now the boycott and the checkpoints, and the closure of Gaza to almost any traffic, are sealing the deal.

So Israel, as Danny Rubinstein opines in Ha'aretz, will probably have a full-scale Palestinian civil war on its hands soon. If they are hoping the Palestinians will horribly weaken themselves again, they may well be correct, but the fallout won't be pleasant, and the Palestinians won't go away.

What could be done about this? A circumvention of the boycott to pay civil servants through roundabout means, including U.S. funds; release of Palestinian tax funds stolen by the Israeli government to serve this purpose; an alleviation of the unnecessary WB checkpoints; extension of the Gaza "ceasefire" to the WB; an immediate halt to outposts and dismantling of some; resumption of negotiations and diplomatic overtures to Abbas; encouragement of a Palestinian unity government; reopening of the Gaza-Karni and Gaza-Rafah checkpoints to allow agricultural export, movement between Gaza and Egypt and products to move between GS and WB.

What will be done about this? None of the above. At some point, the Israeli government may decide to kill or arrest someone else, to show that they can.

New: Israel is taking land from Palestinians!

So many Israeli settlements, in particular Ma'ale Adumim, are built largely on private Palestinian land. So that accounts for about 40 percent of their land area. So?

This information was leaked from inside the Civil Administration (the Israeli government body responsible for the occupied territories). The Yesha Council, as usual, responded by lying (see the Ha'aretz article cited below) and the government responded in its usual way--by essentially admitting that this was true and saying nothing. For example: "Miri Eisin, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said that Israeli officials would have to see the data and the maps and added that ownership is complicated and delicate." Of course they need to see the data and the maps, it's not as though they've had access to them before! Inevitably they will have to conclude (after seeing the data and the maps for the first time) that the expropriated land is necessary to protect Israeli citizens from terrorism.

I find it interesting that the organizers (Peace Now) apparently placed as much emphasis on getting the information to The New York Times--where it was reported prominently, and who actually spoke to the informant--as to the Israeli public, though they did, according to Ha'aretz, hold a press conference in Jerusalem. The American public doesn't already know these facts. The Israeli public is well aware already, and by and large, doesn't care.

Yes, this should cause an outrage, but it's just another one of those things that should cause an outrage that is all too common in this conflict and won't really change anything.

A new strategy in Gaza

So, Palestinians are using human shields en masse to block IAF targeted bombings of houses (BBC, Ha'aretz). A couple quick reactions, both of which are actually negative for the Palestinians:

(1) Bad publicity. Supports those who say that Palestinians deserve the treatment they get because they are supportive of terror in their midst. Generally, this is rebutted by the assertion that Palestinians in places such as Beit Hanoun have no choice because they would be killed/hurt if they object to the launching of Qassam missiles (or suicide bombings or what have you).

(2) Paves the way to let Israel launch these attacks unannounced, based on the negative publicity of (1). Deliberately putting citizens in harm's way is a crime, regardless of who is doing it. Citizens who decide to put themselves in harm's way are becoming combatants.

I don't think this is a good way to go. As regards my point (1), I still don't agree with it--I just assert that a lot of people will invoke it. This is one way that the Palestinians in Beit Hanoun can show their opposition to Israel. I don't think it necessarily shows that they support Qassam launching, just that they can't do anything about it, and they may as well express their anger about the situation in some sort of manner that may help save some people or houses as well. It's like the Lebanese who were caught in the Israel-Hezbollah conflict: what are they supposed to do, side with Israel?

The decline continues

What kind of country allows this sort of statement from a member of its government?

I mean, we all knew. But for Olmert and, especially, Peretz and Labor to sit there and act like this is acceptable is disgusting.

To say that any statement made by a member of the government automatically represents the government is false; but there are certain lines that should not be crossed.

Beitenu is home

So Lieberman has agreed to join the government and take one ministry. He hopes to force out Labor eventually and take more. Meanwhile Labor is evenly divided about what to do. Arab members of Labor say they'll quit if Lieberman joins and Peretz is technically opposed, but influential members want to do it. Peretz is doomed and Labor is weak...

Who is Labor? What is the reason for the party's existence, other than opportunism? Technically, I guess, it represents secular, economic left, non-dovish voters. But how many of those are around? Eventually everyone who represents the hawkish (and economically liberal) wing will join Kadima (or whoever succeeds it) and everyone from the dovish side will unite with Meretz-Yahad. Or so one would think. But the remaining structure and advantages that exist (resources) to campaigning with Labor may continue to prolong the agony.