Psyche, Science, and Society

Guardian: CIA colluding with Palestinian torturers

The Guardian reports that the CIA is complicit in Palestinan Authority torture of Hamas members:

Palestinian CIA working with Palestinian security agents
US agency co-operating with Palestinian counterparts who allegedly torture Hamas supporters in West Bank

By Ian Cobain

security agents who have been detaining and allegedly torturing supporters of the Islamist organisation Hamas in the West Bank have been working closely with the CIA, the Guardian has learned.

Less than a year after Barack Obama signed an executive order that prohibited torture and provided for the lawful interrogation of detainees in US custody, evidence is emerging the CIA is co-operating with security agents whose continuing use of torture has been widely documented by human rights groups.

The relationship between the CIA and the two Palestinian agencies involved – Preventive Security Organisation (PSO) and General Intelligence Service (GI) – is said by some western diplomats and other officials in the region to be so close that the American agency appears to be supervising the Palestinians’ work.

One senior western official said: “The [Central Intelligence] Agency consider them as their property, those two Palestinian services.” A diplomatic source added that US influence over the agencies was so great they could be considered “an advanced arm of the war on terror”.

While the CIA and the Palestinian Authority (PA) deny the US agency controls its Palestinian counterparts, neither denies that they interact closely in the West Bank. Details of that co-operation are emerging as some human rights organisations are beginning to question whether US intelligence agencies may be turning a blind eye to abusive interrogations conducted by other countries’ intelligence agencies with whom they are working. According to the Palestinian watchdog al-Haq, human rights in the West Bank and Gaza have “gravely deteriorated due to the spreading violations committed by Palestinian actors” this year.

Most of those held without trial and allegedly tortured in the West Bank have been supporters of Hamas, which won the Palestinian elections in 2006 but is denounced as a terrorist organisation by the PA – which in turn is dominated by the rival Fatah political faction – and by the US and EU. In the Gaza Strip, where Hamas has been in control for more than two years, there have been reports of its forces detaining and torturing Fatah sympathisers in the same way.

Among the human rights organisations that have documented or complained about the mistreatment of detainees held by the PA in the West Bank are Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, al-Haq and the Israeli watchdog B’Tselem. Even the PA’s human rights commission has expressed “deep concern” over the mistreatment of detainees.

The most common complaint is that detainees are severely beaten and subjected to a torture known as shabeh, during which they are shackled and forced to assume painful positions for long periods. There have also been reports of sleep deprivation, and of large numbers of detainees being crammed into small cells to prevent rest. Instead of being brought before civilian courts, almost all the detainees enter a system of military justice under which they need not be brought before a court for six months.

According to PA officials, between 400 and 500 Hamas sympathisers are held by the PSO and GI.

Some of the mistreatment has been so severe that at least three detainees have died in custody this year. The most recent was Haitham Amr, a 33-year-old nurse and Hamas supporter from Hebron who died four days after he was detained by GI officials last June. Extensive bruising around his kidneys suggested he had been beaten to death. Among those who died in GI custody last year was Majid al-Barghuti, 42, an imam at a village near Ramallah.

While there is no evidence that the CIA has been commissioning such mistreatment, human rights activists say it would end promptly if US pressure was brought to bear on the Palestinian authorities.

Shawan Jabarin, general director of al-Haq, said: “The Americans could stop it any time. All they would have to do is go to [prime minister] Salam Fayyad and tell him they were making it an issue.. Then they could deal with the specifics: they could tell him that detainees needed to be brought promptly before the courts.”

A diplomat in the region said “at the very least” US intelligence officers were aware of the torture and not doing enough to stop it. He added: “There are a number of questions for the US administration: what is their objective, what are their rules of engagement? Do they train the GI and PSO according to the manual which was established by the previous administration, including water-boarding? Are they in control, or are they just witnessing?”

Sa’id Abu-Ali, the PA’s interior minister, accepted detainees had been tortured and some had died, but said such abuses had not been official policy and steps were being taken to prevent them. He said such abuses “happen in every country in the world”. Abu-Ali sought initially to deny the CIA was “deeply involved” with the two Palestinian intelligence agencies responsible for the torture of Hamas sympathisers, but then conceded that links did exist. “There is a connection, but there is no supervision by the Americans,” he said. “It is solely a Palestinian affair. But the Americans help us.”

The CIA does not deny working with the PSO and GI in the West Bank, although it will not say what use it has made of intelligence extracted during the interrogation of Hamas supporters. But it denies turning what one official described as “a Nelson’s eye to abuse”.

The CIA’s spokesman, Paul Gimigliano, denied it played a supervisory role over the PSO or GI. “The notion that this agency somehow runs other intelligence services … is simply wrong,” he said. “The CIA … only supports, and is interested in, lawful methods that produce sound intelligence.”

Concern about detainee abuse is growing in the West Bank despite an effort by the international community to create Palestinian institutions that will guarantee greater security as a first step towards creating a Palestinian state. More than half of the PA’s $2.8bn (£1.66bn) budget came from international donors last year; more than a quarter was swallowed up by the ministry of the interior and national security. Human Rights Watch and al-Haq have said that in raising the security capacity of the PA, donor countries have a responsibility to ensure it observes international human rights standards.

At the heart of the international effort is the creation of the Palestinian national security force, a 7,500-strong gendarmerie trained by US, British, Canadian and Turkish army officers under the command of a US general, Keith Dayton. Many Palestinians blame Dayton for the mistreatment of Hamas sympathisers, although the general’s remit does not extend to either of the intelligence agencies responsible.

Some in Dayton’s team are said to have been warned by senior CIA officers that they should not attempt to interfere in the work of the PSO or GI. Privately, some of them are said to fear that the mistreatment of detainees, and the anger this is arousing among the population, may undermine their mission. One source said: “I know that Dayton and his crew are very concerned about what is happening in those detention centres because they know it can jeopardise their work.”

December 18th, 2009

Physicians for Human Rights — Israel: Torture in Israel and Physicians’ Involvement in Torture

Physicians for Human Rights — Israel has issued a new position paper:  Torture in Israel and Physicians’ Involvement in Torture [pdf].  Here is their announcement:

To the members and volunteers of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel

Over the past year, PHR-Israel has held extensive correspondence with the Ministry of Health and the Israeli Medical Association (IMA) on the subject of the roles and responsibilities of doctors regarding the interrogation of detainees in general and interrogations involving torture in particular. As will be made clear in the attached Position Paper, PHR-Israel calls for the removal of doctors from facilities in which torture is employed, in order to protect them from breaches of medical ethics, and seeks to increase the awareness of medical communities regarding this issue.

As detailed in the Position Paper, the leadership of the medical community in Israel did not in the past take a clear enough stand against torture, and only a ruling by the High Court of Justice provided a clear prohibition on torture. Our current correspondence with IMA and the Ministry of Health suggests that the medical leadership in Israel is still not acting in a determined way against torture, as required by the principles of medical ethics. The Position Paper aims to provide a response to the majority of questions that may arise on this issue, such as: Why are doctors obliged to follow the rules of medical ethics? What are we demanding of IMA and the Ministry of Health (and what is their position on this issue)? and What is the role of international bodies in this struggle?.

Doctors are in danger of transgressing their ethical responsibilities, often because of they lack awareness of the issues at hand. For this reason, PHR-Israel has published a short Handbook explaining the ethical responsibilities of doctors in such cases, and detailing the most common injuries of victims of torture and/or violence, in order to improve the chances that when a doctor encounters a victim of torture, he or she will identify the evidence and will be able to provide the victim with assistance and protection.

We appeal to you, members and volunteers of our organization, to play an active part in the struggle against torture and against the involvement of doctors in torture. We ask all members and volunteers of PHR-Israel to act for change in Israel in all matters related to torture, and to help us by distributing the Handbook and the Position Paper among your colleagues in the medical community. Only your public support can help those doctors who are working within systems with high risk for dual loyalty.

We believe that raising awareness of this issue is an essential stage in the struggle against torture in Israel.

Please distribute this email as widely as possible.

And here is the Summary from the report:

• PHR-Israel reiterates its sweeping opposition to all forms of torture that continue to be carried out in Israel, regardless of their rationalization. In a speech he gave to the Bar Association, Justice Aharon Barak said that in the past the heads of the security authorities would thank him for the intervention of the High Court of Justice (HCJ) in matters of security. “The head of the General Security Services said ‘thank you’ after a ruling declared that it was prohibited to use torture against detainees. We reached the conclusion that when you use your head and not your
hands, the results are better.” 1 Despite the ruling a decade ago by the HCJ prohibiting torture of prisoners and detainees except under very specific circumstances, torture continues to be practiced in Israel’s interrogation facilities. Most cases of torture are not investigated, and interrogators are typically authorized in advance to use torture or other inhumane or degrading methods. These practices are illegal, contradicting Israeli and international law.

• PHR-Israel calls upon physicians to immediately and completely cease their participation in torture, and to fulfill their duty to report all cases of torture or suspected torture that have come to their knowledge. Physicians participate in interrogation procedures that involve torture by examining interrogated persons
before, during and after interrogation, and failing to report cases of torture that have been revealed to them. Such participation in torture stands in stark opposition to international conventions to which Israel is a signatory and to the rules of medical ethics that apply to physicians, and may make physicians who participate in torture legally accountable. Physicians’ refusal to participate in torture may undermine the
legitimacy of those who practice it, and may contribute to ending torture.

• PHR-Israel calls upon the Israel Medical Association (IMA) to utilize its status appropriately to lead the Israeli medical community in the struggle against torture. The IMA must put an end to years of turning a blind eye to torture and physicians’
involvement in it. It must seriously investigate complaints it receives on this issue, and take steps to remove physicians who provide services to GSS interrogation facilities from those posts. At the same time, the IMA must publicly provide legal and financial support to physicians who testify regarding torture.

• PHR-Israel calls upon the Ministry of Health to a) reformulate its position such that it is clear that physicians are not only prohibited from participating in illegal activity, but are also prohibited from participating in torture, even if it has been authorized by the Attorney General and/or the Head of the GSS; and b) change its position – that torture is a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, and thus does not justify guidelines – and to issue clear guidelines on torture, in accordance with the rules of medical ethics and international law.

Finally, also look at their fact sheet: Medical Teams: Prevent Torture.

August 3rd, 2009

New report on abuse of Palesinian children in Israeli custody

An Israeli human rights group, Defense for Children International — Palestine Section, has issued a report on the abuse and torture of Palestinian child prisoners by Israeli authorities. Jonathan Cook writes about this report in today’s CounterPunch. Here is the DCI/PS description of their report:

Ill-treatment and torture of Palestinian children – a report

RAMALLAH, 11 June 2009] – Today, DCI-Palestine is releasing a report which documents the widespread ill-treatment and torture of Palestinian children at the hands of the Israeli army and police force – Palestinian Child Prisoners: The systematic and institutionalised ill-treatment and torture of Palestinian children by Israeli authorities.

The release of the report comes just days after an article was published in The Independent newspaper reporting the testimonies of two Israeli soldiers which detail the deliberate abuse of Palestinian children. One soldier is reported as saying that in an incident that occurred in a Palestinian village in March, he saw a lot of soldiers ‘just knee (Palestinians) because it’s boring, because you stand there for 10 hours, you’re not doing anything, so they beat people up.’

The report published today contains the testimonies of 33 children, one as young as 10 years old, who bear witness to the abuse they received at the hands of soldiers from the moment of arrest through to an often violent interrogation.

Most of these children were arrested from villages near the Wall and illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank. There is evidence that many children are painfully shackled for hours on end, kicked, beaten and threatened, some with death, until they provide confessions, some written in Hebrew, a language they do not speak or understand.

A soldier [...] pointed his rifle at me. The rifle barrel was a few centimetres away from my face. I was so terrified that I started to shiver. He made fun of me and said: ‘shivering? Tell me where the pistol is before I shoot you.’

(Ezzat, 10 years old)

Disturbingly, the report finds that these illegally obtained confessions are routinely used as evidence in the military courts to convict around 700 Palestinian children every year. And the most common charge against these children is for throwing stones. Once sentenced, the children who gave these testimonies were mostly imprisoned inside Israel in breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention where they receive few family visits, and little or no education.

The report concludes that this widespread and systematic abuse is occurring within a general culture of impunity where in 600 complaints made against Israeli Security Agency interrogators for alleged ill-treatment and torture, not a single criminal investigation was ever conducted.

The report also contains recent recommendations made by the UN Committee Against Torture which expressed ‘deep concern’ at reports of the abuse of Palestinian children when it reviewed Israel’s compliance with the Convention Against Torture in May 2009.

The report is now available on-line in PDF format: Palestinian Child Prisoners: The systematic and institutionalised ill-treatment and torture of Palestinian children by Israeli authorities.

See video

Hard copies can be obtained by contacting DCI-Palestine at ria@dci-pal.org.

They have produced a video to go along with the report’s release:

June 17th, 2009

Samuels: Israeli interests dictate an Iran attack

David Samuels in Slate has a very interesting argument as to Why Israel Will Bomb Iran. In an odd way, it is refreshingly realistic in discussing the issue totally within the context of the national interests of the various actors. In particular, an Israeli attack on Iran is seen as a way that Israel has of extending its usefulness to the US as its main client state in the Middle East:

The key fact of the American-Israeli alliance that most commentators seem eager to elide is that Israel is America’s leading ally in the Middle East because it is the most powerful country in the Middle East….

By shattering the old balance of power in the Middle East with its spectacular military victory in the Six Day War, Israel announced itself to America as the reigning military power in the region and as a profoundly destabilizing influence that needed to be contained. The parallels between Israel’s rise to superpower-client status in the 1950s and 1960s and the Iranian march toward regional hegemony over the past decade are quite striking. Both Israel circa 1967 and modern-day Iran are non-Arab states that utilized innovative military tactics to panic the Arabs. Yet where Iran is a non-Arab country with a population of more than 70 million, Israel was and is a tiny non-Arab, non-Muslim country whose small population and seat-of-the-pants style of leadership made even the country’s modest colonial ambitions seem like a stretch. In the absence of any fixed plan of expansion, or any long-term plan for dealing with its neighbors, Israel decided to use its excess military power and captured lands as a chit that it could exchange for resources provided from outside the region by its wealthy American patron.

This logic leads Israel to take actions to counter its declining importance to the US:

[T]he weaker and more dependent Israel becomes, the more Israeli interests and American interests are likely to diverge. Stripped of its ability to take independent military action, Israel’s value to the United States can be seen to reside in its ability to give the Golan Heights back to Syria and to carve out a Palestinian state from the remaining territories it captured in 1967—after which it would be left with only the territories of the pre-1967 state to barter for a declining store of U.S. military credits, which Washington might prefer to spend on wooing Iran.The untenable nature of this strategic calculus gives a cold-eyed academic analyst all the explanation she needs to explain Israel’s recent wars against Hezbollah and Hamas, its assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists and engineers, and its 2007 attack on the Syrian nuclear reactor. Israel’s attempts to restore its perceived capacity for game-changing independent military action are directed as much to its American patron as to its neighbors.

This logic will lead, Samuels argues, to an attack on Iran:

An attack on Iran might be risky in dozens of ways, but it would certainly do wonders for restoring Israel’s capacity for game-changing military action….

Short of an Iranian-hostage-rescue-mission-type debacle in which a small Israeli tactical force crashes in the Iranian desert, or a presidential order from Obama to shoot down Israeli planes on their way to Natanz, any Israeli air raid on Iran is likely to succeed in destroying masses of delicate equipment that the Iranians have spent a decade building at enormous cost in time and treasure. It is hard to believe that Iran could quickly or easily replace what it lost. Whether it resulted in delaying Iran’s march toward a nuclear bomb by two years, five years, or somewhere in between, the most important result of an Israeli bombing raid would be to puncture the myth of inevitability that has come to surround the Iranian nuclear project and that has fueled Iran’s rise as a regional hegemon.

For Israel fears that the US will eventually surrender Israel as its primary Middle East client for Iran:

The parallels between Israel’s rise to superpower client status after 1967 and Iran’s recent rise offer another strong reason for Israel to act—and act fast. The current bidding for Iran’s favor is alarming to Israel not only because of the unfriendly proclamations of Iranian leaders but because of what an American rapprochement with Iran signals for the future of Israel’s status as an American client. While America would probably benefit by playing Israel and Iran against each other for a while to extract the maximum benefit from both relationships, it is hard to see how America would manage to please both clients simultaneously and quite easy to imagine a world in which Iran—with its influence in Afghanistan and Iraq, its control over Hezbollah and Hamas, and easy access to leading members of al-Qaida—would be the partner worth pleasing.

In a surprising conclusion, Samuels argues that a Palestinian state will be the price that Israel will have to pay for its attack on Iran, and that this is a price they are quite willing to pay:

The only real downside for Israel of an attack on Iran is Washington’s likely response to the anger of the Arab street and the European street, both of which are likely to express their fierce outrage against Israel and the United States. The price of an Israeli attack on Iran is therefore clear to anyone who reads Al Ahram or the Guardian: a Palestinian state. It seems fair to say that both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak see the establishment of some kind of Palestinian state as inevitable and also as posing real security risks to Israel.

Yet, in a perverse way, the idea that the price of an attack on Iran will be the establishment of a Palestinian state makes the logic of such an attack even clearer. Israel’s leaders know that the security threats inherent in giving up most of the West Bank will be greatly augmented or diminished depending on how a Palestinian state is born. A Palestinian state born as the result of Israeli weakness is a much greater danger to Israel than a state born out of Israeli strength….

The inevitability of a future Palestinian state is the most powerful argument for the inevitability of an Israeli attack on Iran—unless the Iranian nuclear program is stopped by other means. Taking out the Iranian nuclear program is the one obvious avenue by which Israel can turn the debilitating drip-drip-drip of territorial giveaways and international condemnation into a convincing appearance of strength. Destroying a respectable number of Iranian centrifuges will end Iran’s march to regional hegemony and eliminate Israel’s chief rival for America’s affections while also allowing Israel to gain the legal and demographic benefits of a Palestinian state with a minimum of long-term risk.

While I’ve extracted the central argument here, the entire article is well worth reading. I do not know if the argument is correct. But it certainly is plausible.

UPDATE: For an alternate view, that Isreal may be tempted to attack, but simply cannot do so without US permission, see Roane Carey’s Don’t Flash the Yellow Light.

April 12th, 2009

Calling for a Boycott of Israel for its Treatment of Palestinians is not Anti-Semitic say Progressive Jews

Recently I posted an open letter: Progressive Jews say calling for Israeli boycott not antisemitic. The organizers of the letter have issued the following press release along with the following information for those Jews still wishing to sign:

The site is www.gopetition.com/petitions/dierkes-letter.html It’s just been set up so there are very few names at the moment, but please feel free to pass on this link.

The press release:

For immediate release

Contacts:
Stephen R. Shalom, stephenrshalom@gmail.com
Racheli Gai, racheli@sonoracohousing.com

Jewish Peace Activists Defend German Critic of Israel
Calling for a Boycott of Israel for its Treatment of Palestinians is not Anti-Semitic

Montclair, NJ, April 8, 2009 — More than 370 Jewish peace activists from around the world signed a statement defending German politician Hermann Dierkes against charges of anti-Semitism.

Dierkes, a left-wing politician with a distinguished record of fighting for social justice, called for a boycott of Israeli goods as a means of putting pressure on the Israeli government to end its oppression of Palestinians. For this he has been subjected to vicious denunciations for anti-Semitism.

The signers of the statement — from Israel, Germany, the United States, and several other countries — expressed their objection to those “who use charges of anti-Semitism to attempt to squelch legitimate dissent.”

The signers have differing views on the wisdom and efficacy of a general boycott, some favoring it, some preferring a more selective boycott focused on the occupation, but all agree that a call for a boycott of Israel has nothing in common with the Nazi policy of “Don’t buy from Jews.”

“It is no more anti-Semitic to boycott Israel to end the occupation,” the statement declared, “than it was anti-white to boycott South Africa to end apartheid.”

Among the U.S. signatories are Phyllis BENNIS; Stephen Eric BRONNER; Leslie CAGAN; Noam CHOMSKY; Daniel ELLSBERG, Melanie KAYE/KANTROWITZ; Joanne LANDY; Zachary LOCKMAN; Frances Fox PIVEN; Adrienne RICH, Matthew ROTHSCHILD; Sami SHALOM CHETRIT; Jerome SLATER; and Howard ZINN.

Among the foreign signers are Tikva HONIG-PARNASS, Adam KELLER, Lea TSEMEL, and Michel WARSCHAWSKI (Israel); Daniel BENSAÏD and Michaël LÖWY (France); Naomi KLEIN (Canada); Felicia LANGER (Germany); and Moshe MACHOVER and Eyal WEIZMAN (UK).

“We gathered these names in just a week,” said Stephen R. Shalom, a professor of political science at William Paterson University, one of several individuals who initiated the letter in response to their outrage at the accusation of anti-Semitism levelled at Dierkes. “We’ve been getting a constant stream of additional names of people who want to add their names to the statement.” They can do so at.

Racheli Gai, an Israeli-American peace activist, noted that ” “There is real anti-Semitism in the world, and — like all forms of racism — it must be vigorously denounced.  But frivolously making charges of anti-Semitism makes fighting the real thing harder, because it cheapens its meaning, and renders the motivations of even those who are making the charge legitimately suspect.” As the statement concluded, “The Holocaust was one of the most horrific events in modern history. It is a dishonor to its victims to use its memory as a bludgeon to silence principled critics of Israel’s unconscionable treatment of Palestinians.”

Hermann Dierkes, a former city counsellor in the German city of Duisberg representing the Left Party, said the accusations of anti-Semitism hit him very hard. “Because I am well aware of the German inextinguishable heritage of fascism and the genocide of the European Jews, I feel especially obliged to fight against racist prejudices and oppression. Human rights are indivisible for all individuals and peoples of the world. The right of self-determination has to be guaranteed for the Palestinian people too. This is a precondition to gain peace for the whole region.”

Among the many messages of solidarity he has received thus far, said Dierkes, “what moved me most was the open letter, signed by more than 370 Jewish peace activists from so many countries, including Israel.”

The full text of the open letter can be seen here, along with the full list of initial signatories. The developing list of additional signers can be seen at www.gopetition.com/petitions/dierkes-letter/signatures.html.

1 comment April 8th, 2009

Progressive Jews say calling for Israeli boycott not antisemitic

Progressive Jews in Europe, Israel, and North America unite against idea that calling for a boycott of Israel is antisemitic. [Note, I signed.]:

We are peace activists of Jewish background. Some of us typically identify in this way; others of us do not. But we all object to those who claim to speak for all Jews or who use charges of anti-Semitism to attempt to squelch legitimate dissent.

We have learned with dismay the allegations regarding Hermann Dierkes, a trade unionist and leader of the Left Party (DIE LINKE) in the German city of Duisburg. Dierkes, in response to the recent Israeli assault on Gaza expressed the view that one way people could help Palestinians obtain justice would be to support the call of the World Social Forum to boycott Israeli goods, so as to put pressure on the Israeli government.

Dierkes has been subjected to widespread and vitriolic denunciations for anti-Semitism, and accused of calling for a repeat of the Nazi policy of the 1930s of boycotting Jewish products. Dierkes responded that “The demands of the World Social Forum have nothing in common with Nazi-type racist campaigns against Jews, but aim at changing the Israeli government’s policy of oppression of the Palestinians.”

No one has made any claims of anti-Semitism against Dierkes for anything other than his support of the boycott. Yet he has been accused of “pure anti-Semitism” (Dieter Graumann the Vice-President of the Central Jewish Council), of uttering words comparable to “a mass execution at the edge of a Ukrainian forest” (Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung editorialist Achim Beer), and of expressing “Nazi propaganda” (Hendrik Wuest, General Secretary of the Christian Democratic Party).

We signatories have differing views on the wisdom and efficacy of calling for a boycott of Israeli goods. Some of us believe that such a boycott is an essential component of a campaign of boycott, divestment, and sanctions that can end the four-decade-long Israeli occupation; others think the better way to pressure the Israeli government is with a more selective boycott focused on institutions and corporations supporting the occupation. But all of us agree that it is essential to apply pressure against the Israeli government if peace and justice are to prevail in the Middle East and all of us agree that a call for a boycott of Israel has nothing in common with the Nazi policy of “Don’t buy from Jews.” It is no more anti-Semitic to boycott Israel to end the occupation than it was anti-white to boycott South Africa to end apartheid. Social justice movements have often called for boycotts or divestment, whether against the military regime in Burma or the government of Sudan. Wise or not, such calls are in no way discriminatory.

Violence in the Middle East has indeed led to some acts of anti-Semitism in Europe. There was a call to boycott Jewish-owned stores in Rome that was widely and appropriately condemned. We deplore such bigotry. Israel’s crimes cannot be attributed to Jews as a whole. But, at the same time, a boycott of Israel cannot be equated with a boycott of Jews as a whole.

An acute and disturbing form of racism rising in Europe today is Islamophobia and xenophobia directed at immigrants from Muslim countries. Dierkes has been a champion in defense of the rights of immigrants, while some of those who accuse all critics of Israel of being anti-Semitic often participate themselves — like the Israeli government and state — in such forms of racism.

The Holocaust was one of the most horrific events in modern history. It is a dishonor to its victims to use its memory as a bludgeon to silence principled critics of Israel’s unconscionable treatment of Palestinians.

[We have spent just a week gathering names on this letter, circulating it only in a few countries. We apologize to all those who would have liked to sign, but didn't get a chance or whose names arrived too late for inclusion. For information on how you can help support this effort, please contact Dierkes.Letter@gmail.com.]

Signatories

(organizations listed for identification purposes only)

BELGIUM

Marc ABRAMOWICZ, Psychothérapeute

Mateo ALALUF, Professeur, Université libre de Bruxelles

Joëlle BAUMERDER, Directrice institution culturelle

Marianne BLUME, Professeur

Jacques BUDE, Professeur émérite, Université libre de Bruxelles

Willy ESTERSOHN, Union des Progressistes Juifs de Belgique

Fanny FILOSOF

Thérèse FRANKFORT, Professeur

Victor GINSBURGH, Professeur émérite, Université libre de Bruxelles

Tom GOLDSCHMIDT, Journaliste

Martine GOLDSTEIN, Psychologue, Université libre de Bruxelles

Henri GOLDMAN, Auteur

José GOTOVITCH, Professeur retraité

Anne HERSCOVICI, Sociologue

Miaden HERZL

Henri HURWITZ, Professeur émérite, Université libre de Bruxelles

Paul JACOBS, Professeur, Université libre de Bruxelles

Willy KALB

Daniel LIEBMAN, Romaniste

Léon LIEBMAN, Magistrat honoraire

Nicole MAYER, Professeur émérite, Université libre de Bruxelles

Henri ROANNE-ROZENBLATT, Journaliste

Dominique RODRIGUEZ, Union des Progressistes Juifs de Belgique

Edith RUBINSTEIN, Femme en noir

Serge SIMON, Ecrivain et Union des progressistes juifs de Belgique

Michel STASZEWSKI, Professeur

Léo TUBBAX

Elie VAMOS, Médecin

Esther VAMOS, Professeur émerite, Université libre de Bruxelles

Serge VIDAL

Jean VOGEL, Professeur, Université libre de Bruxelles

Laurent VOGEL, Professeur, Université libre de Bruxelles

Henri WAJNBLUM, Co-président de l’Union des Progressistes Juifs de Belgique

CANADA

Elizabeth BLOCK, Not In Our Name: Jewish Voices Opposing Zionism, Women in Solidarity with Palestine, Independent Jewish Voices

Corey BALSAM, Student

Julia BARNETT

Lawrence BOXALL, Jews for a Just Peace

Mark Robert BRILL

Anne-Marie BRUN

Smadar CARMON, Not In Our Name: Jewish Voices Opposing Zionism

James DEUTSCH, MD

Judith DEUTSCH, MSW, President, Science for Peace

Gordon DOCTOROW

Inge FLEISCHMANN FOWLIE, Independent Jewish Voices

Barry FLEMING

Matt FODOR

Inge FOWLIE

Daniel FREEMAN-MALOY, Activist and writer

Sam GINDIN, York University

Rachel GUROFSKY, Trent University

Larry HAIVEN, Saint Mary’s University

Jean HANSON, Independent Jewish Voices

Jake JAVANSHIR, Not In Our Name: Jewish Voices Opposing Zionism

Mira KHAZZAM, Independent Jewish Voices

Mark KLEIN

Naomi KLEIN, Author

Jason KUNIN

Richard Borshay LEE, Professor Emeritus, University of Toronto

Abby LIPPMAN, Independent Jewish Voices

Henry LOWI

Elizabeth MOLCHANY, Esquire

Rabbi David MIVASAIR, Ahavat Olam Synagogue, Vancouver

Joanne NAIMAN

Yakov M. RABKIN, Professeur titulaire, Département d’histoire, Université de Montréal

Diana RALPH, Independent Jewish Voices

R.S. RATNER, University of British Columbia

Herman ROSENFELD, Instructor, Labour Studies, McMaster University

Martha ROTH, United Jewish Voices-BC

Marty ROTH, United Jewish Voices-BC

Regine SCHMID

Alan SEARS, Ryerson University

Edward SHAFFER, University of Alberta

Sid SHNIAD, Independent Jewish Voices

Greg STARR, Jews for a Just Peace

Vera SZOKE

Judith WEISMAN

Suzanne WEISS, Not In Our Name: Jewish Voices Opposing Zionism

FRANCE

Houria ACKERMANN, Directrice de crèche

Nuri ALBALA, Avocat

Paula ALBOUZE

Paul ALLIÈS, Professeur à l’Université de Montpellier

Arlette ALVARENGA, Consultante retraitée

Simon ASSOUN, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Marc AYBES, Infographiste

Bernard BATT

Raphaël BÉNARROSH, Avocat retraité

Eliane BÉNARROSH, Mouvement contre le racisme et pour l’amitié entre les peuples

Zvi BEN-DOR, Professor, New York University (Paris, France)

Daniel BENSAÏD, Professeur à l’Université Paris 8

Jean BRAFMAN, Conseiller régional d’Île-de-France

Kurt BRAININ, Médecin

Rony BRAUMAN

Kenneth BROWN, Mediterraneans/Méditerranéennes

Alice CHERKI, Psychiatre, psychanalyste, auteure

Élisabeth CHOPARD-LALLIER, Conceptrice d’édition

Sonia DAYAN-HERZBRUN, Professeur émérite à l’université Paris 7

Gilles DERHI, Pédopsychiatre, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Sylvia EVRARD, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Mireille FANON-MENDÈS-FRANCE, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Patrick FELDSTEIN, Bureau national, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Rafael GOLDWASER

Jean-Guy GREILSAMER, Président des Amis du Théâtre de la Liberté de Jénine

Serge GROSSVAK

Bertrand HEILBRONN

Avi HERSHKOVITZ, Cinéaste

Thamara HORMAECHEA, Médecin

Gonzague HUTIN, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Bernard JANCOVICI, Professeur émérite, Université de Paris-Sud

Christine JEDWAB, Psychologue

Jacques JEDWAB

Samuel JOHSUA, Professeur émérite, Université de Provence

Nicole KAHN

Florence KERAVEC, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Maurice KERNBAUM

Daniel LARTICHAUX-ULLMANN, Documentaliste

Catherine LÉVY, Sociologue

Daniel LÉVYNE, Enseignant retraité

Michaël LÖWY, Sociologue

Françoise MALFROID

Alain MARCU, Petit fils de déporté, fils de juifs résistants

Jean François MARX

Véronique MARZO, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Pierre MAUREL

Ariane MONNERON, Ancien Chef de Clinique, Directeur de recherche au CNRS

Jean-Hugues MORNEAU, Bibliothécaire, Université Joseph Fourier de Grenoble

François MUNIER

Josiane OLFF-NATHAN, Université de Strasbourg
Perrine OLFF-RASTEGAR, Porte-parole Collectif Judéo Arabe et Citoyen pour la Paix

Martine OLFF-SOMMER, Psychologue

Henri OSINSKI

Marie-France OSINSKI

Nahed PUST, Femmes en Noir de Strasbourg

Jocelyne RAJNCHAPEL-MESSAÏ, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Sabrina RANASINGHE

Claude RAYMOND, Retraitée

Yaël REINHARZ HAZAN, co-directrice du Festival du Film et Forum International sur les Doits Humains

Suzanne ROSENBERG

Jacques SCHWEIZER, Physicien

Michèle SIBONY, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Claude SZATAN

Hannah TAIEB, Union Juive Française pour la Paix

Marlène TUNINGA, Présidente section française, Ligue internationale des femmes pour la paix et la liberté

Dominique VENTRE, Directeur de Formation Télécom

René VONWALLENBERG, Avocat
Fabrice WEISSMAN, Directeur d’études Fondation Médecins Sans Frontières

Adek ZYLBERBERG

Marie Claire ZYLBERBERG

GERMANY

Galit ALTSHULER, European Jews for Just Peace

Linda BENEDIKT

Stacey BLATT

Elias DAVIDSSON, Komponist, Menschenrechtler

Ilil FRIEDMAN, European Jews for Just Peace

Ruth FRUCHTMAN, Writer, European Jews for Just Peace

Harri GRÜNBERG, Mitarbeiter der Bundestagsfraktion DIE LINKE

Iris HEFETS, European Jews for Just Peace

Tal HEVER

Michal KAISER-LIVNE, European Jews for Just Peace

Kate KATZENSTEIN-LEITERER, European Jews for Just Peace

Jason KIRKPATRICK

Felicia LANGER

Mieciu LANGER

Jean Joseph LEVY

Edith LUTZ, European Jews for Just Peace

Jakob MONETA, früherer Chefredakteur der Zeitung Metall

Abraham MELZER, Publisher, European Jews for Just Peace

Moshe PERLSTEIN, European Jews for Just Peace

Fanny Michaela REISIN, European Jews for Just Peace

Paul Otto SAMUELSDORFF

Lawrence ZWEIG, Solidarity International

ISRAEL

Hillel BARAK, Movement Against Israeli Apartheid in Palestine

Ronnie BARKAN, Anarchists Against the Wall

Judith BLANC, Bat Shalom, Women in Black, HADASH

Matan COHEN, Tarabot

Adi DAGAN, Coalition of Women for Peace

Rotem DAN MOR, Student, Center of Middle Eastern Classical Music in Jerusalem

Yvonne DEUTSCH, Social worker and feminist peace activist

Daniel DUKAREVICH

Emmanuel FARJOUN, Professor of Mathematics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem

Naama FARJOUN

Alon FRIEDMAN, MD, Departments of Physiology and Neurosurgery, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

Yodfat Ariela GETZ, Filmmaker and social activist

Rachel GIORA, Tel Aviv University

Angela GODFREY-GOLDSTEIN, Action Advocacy Officer, Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions

Neta GOLAN

Vardit GOLDNER

Amos GVIRTZ, Recognition Forum

Connie HACKBARTH, Alternative Information Center

Roni HAMMERMANN, Machsomwatch

Shir HEVER, Alternative Information Center

Tikva HONIG-PARNASS

Ronnee JAEGER, Bat Shalom, Coalition of Women for a Just Peace

Jimmy JOHNSON, Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions

Matan KAMINER

Reuven KAMINER

Teddy KATZ

Hava KELLER

Adam KELLER, Journalist

Idan LANDAU, Department of Foreign Literatures & Linguistics, Ben Gurion University

Yael LERER, Publisher

Orit LOYTER

Eilat MAOZ, Women’s Coalition

Anat MATAR, Department of Philosophy, Tel Aviv University

Dorothy NAOR, Activist for justice and peace

Israel NAOR

Gilad NATHAN

Amos NOY

Adi OPHIR, Professor of Philosophy, Tel Aviv University

Amit PERELSON

Shai Carmeli POLLAK

David REEB, Artist

Andre ROSENTHAL, Civil rights lawyer

Yehoshua ROSIN

Sergeiy SANDLER, New Profile

Ayala SHANI

Kobi SNITZ, Technion

Lea TSEMEL, Attorney, SOS Torture

Roy WAGNER

Michel WARSCHAWSKI, Alternative Information Center

Sergio YAHNI, Alternative Information Center

Uri ZACKHEM

Beate ZILVERSMIDT

ITALY

Liviana BORTOLUSSI, Rete Radiè Resch di solidarietà Internazionale

Paola CANARUTTO, Medico

Giorgio CANARUTTO, Impiegato

Marina DEL MONTE, Psicoterapeuta

Ronit DOVRAT, Pittrice

Douglas DOWD, Professor of Economics

Giorgio FORTI, Professore Emerito Università di Milano

Milena MOTTALINI, Avvocata

Carla ORTONA, Funzionaria sanità

Marco RAMAZZOTTI, Funzionario Nazioni Unite, Rete Ebrei Contro L’occupazione, Jews Against Occupation

Stefano SARFATTI , Commerciante

Susanna SINIGAGLIA

Ornella TERRACINI, Insegnante in pensione

SWITZERLAND

Guy BOLLAG

Shraga ELAM, Winner of the Australian Gold Walkley Award for Excellent Journalism 2004

Dorrie ITEN, Jewish Voice for a Just Peace

Leo KANEMAN, Co-directeur Festival du Film et Forum International sur les Droits Humains

Rolf KRAUER, Gewerkschafter UNIA

Martine RAIS, Médecin

Peter STRECKEISEN, Soziologe

Ursel URECH, Lehrerin, Gewerkschaft VPOD

Sharon Weill, Ph.D. candidate in International Law, University of Geneva

Robin WINOGROND, Jewish Voice for a Just Peace

UK

Hanna BRAUN, Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Richard BRENNER, Editor, Workers Power

Haim BRESHEETH, Professor of Media and Cultural Studies

Peter COHEN, London South Bank University

Angela DALE, Jews Against Zionism

Mark ELF, Jews Sans Frontieres

Liz ELKIND, Scottish Jews for a Just Peace

Rayah FELDMAN, London South Bank University

Alf FILER

Sylvia FINZI, Jews for Justice for Palestinians

Tony GREENSTEIN , Trade unionist (UNISON)

Pete HALL

Abe HAYEEM, Jews for Justice for Palestinians /International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network

Rosamine HAYEEM, Jews for Justice for Palestinians/International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network

Dan JUDELSON, Secretary, European Jews for a Just Peace

Yael KAHN

Bernice LASCHINGER

Les LEVIDOW, Open University

Vivien LICHTENSTEIN

Yosefa LOSHITZKY, Professor of Film Studies

Moshe MACHOVER, Professor Emeritus, founding member of the Socialist Organization in Israel “Matzpen”

Hilda MEERS, Scottish Jews for a Just Peace

Diana NESLEN, Jews Against Zionism

Esther NESLEN

Susan PASHKOFF, Jews Against Zionism

Roland RANCE, Jews Against Zionism

Anna ROBIN

Shrila ROBIN

Brian ROBINSON

Miriam SCHARF

Ruth SIRTON

Inbar TAMARI, Jews Against Zionism

Norman TRAUB

Eyal WEIZMAN, University of London

Jay WOOLRICH

USA

Deborah AGRE, Middle East Children’s Alliance

Michael ALBERT, ZNet

Barbra APFELBAUM, Riverside Language Program, New York City

Rann BAR-ON, International Solidarity Movement and North Carolina Coalition for Palestine

Trude BENNETT

Phyllis BENNIS, Institute for Policy Studies

Carl BLOICE, Committees of Correspondence for Democracy & Socialism

Audrey BOMSE, Lawyer

Daniel BOYARIN, University of California-Berkeley

Lenni BRENNER

Stephen Eric BRONNER, Director of Global Relations, Center for the Study of Genocide, Conflict Resolution, & Human Rights, Rutgers University

Judith BUTLER, Professor, University of California-Berkeley

Leslie CAGAN, National Coordinator, United for Peace and Justice

Ellen CANTAROW, Writer

Barbara H. CHASIN, Professor Emerita, Montclair State University

Noam CHOMSKY, Professor Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Jill Hamburg COPLAN, Journalist

Lawrence DAVIDSON, West Chester University

Daniel ELLSBERG, Revealed Pentagon Papers, writer

Carolyn EISENBERG, Hofstra University

Judith FERSTER, Jewish Voice for Peace and BritTzedek

Michelle FINE, Graduate Center, City University of New York

Barry FINGER, Editorial board, New Politics

David FINKEL, Managing Editor, Against the Current

Norman G. FINKELSTEIN, Independent scholar

Laurie FOX

Racheli GAI, Co-editor, Jewish Peace News

Irene GENDZIER, Boston University

Jack GERSON, Oakland Education Association Executive Board

Alice GOLIN, Bloomfield-Glen Ridge NJ Peace Action

Steve GOLIN, Bloomfield College

Linda GORDON, Professor of History, New York University

Marilyn HACKER, Writer, City College of New York

Stanley HELLER, Moderator “Jews Who Speak Out”; Host “The Struggle” TV news magazine

Edward S. HERMAN, Professor Emeritus, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

Carol HORWITZ, “Jews Say No”

Louis KAMPF, Professor Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Stan KARP, Rethinking Schools

Melanie KAYE/KANTROWITZ, Queens College, City University of New York

Richard LACHMANN, University at Albany – State University of New York

Joanne LANDY, Campaign for Peace & Democracy

Jesse LEMISCH, Professor Emeritus, John Jay College of Criminal Justice

Howard LENOW, American Jews For A Just Peace

Zachary LEVENSON, University of California-Berkeley

Joseph LEVINE, Professor of Philosophy, University of Massachusetts

Mark LEVINE, Professor of Middle East History, University of California, Irvine

Nelson LICHTENSTEIN, University of California, Santa Barbara

Lawrence LIFSCHULTZ, Author and journalist

Zachary LOCKMAN, New York University

Marvin MANDELL, Co-editor, New Politics

Marilyn Kleinberg NEIMARK, co-host of “Beyond the Pale: Jewish Culture and Politics,” WBAI radio, New York

Joan NESTLE

Henry NOBLE, National Secretary, U.S. Section, Freedom Socialist Party

Judith NORMAN, Co-editor, Jewish Peace News

David OST, Hobart & William Smith Colleges

Frances Fox PIVEN, Graduate Center, City University of New York

Karen REDLEAF, International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network

Adrienne RICH, Poet and activist

Bruce ROBBINS, Columbia University

Robert C. ROSEN, William Paterson University

Deborah ROSENFELT, Professor of Women’s Studies, University of Maryland

Emma ROSENTHAL, Cafe Intifada/Los Angeles Palestine Labor Solidarity Committee

Paula ROTHENBERG, Professor Emerita, William Paterson University

Matthew ROTHSCHILD, Editor, The Progressive magazine

Rachel RUBIN, University of Massachusetts, Boston

Marjorie SCHEER, Jews for a Just Peace – North Carolina

Michael SCHWARTZ, Stony Brook State University

Alexander SHALOM, Lawyer

Beverly SHALOM, Social worker

Evelyn R. SHALOM, Health educator

Stephen R. SHALOM, William Paterson University

Sami SHALOM CHETRIT

Ira SHOR, City University of New York

Jerome SLATER, Writer

Alan SOKAL, New York University

Stephen SOLDZ, Co-founder, Coalition for an Ethical Psychology

David S. SURREY, Saint Peter’s College

Norman TRAUB

Carol WALD, War Resisters League

Richard I. WARK, Jews for a Just Peace-North Carolina

Lois WEINER, Professor of Education, New Jersey City University

Adrienne WELLER

Eleanor WILNER, Writer

Howard ZINN, Historian

OTHER

Marshall ANSELL, Sweden

David BARKIN, Mexico

Viviane COHEN, Architect, Morocco

Hans DIELEMAN, Universidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México, Mexico

Mary ELDIN, Ireland

Dror FEILER, Musician, Chairperson of European Jews for a Just Peace and Judar för Israelisk Palestinsk Fred, Sweden

Jacques HERSH, Professor Emeritus, Denmark

Zachris JÄNTTI, Finland

Jakob LINDBERG, Judar för Israelisk Palestinsk Fred, Sweden

Margot SALOM, Palestinian & Jewish Unity for Justice and Peace, Australia

March 30th, 2009

Allegations of human rights abuses by Israel and by Hamas

In a pair of articles, Haaretz is reporting on human rights abuses by Israel and by Hamas. regarding Israel, they report on claims by Human Rights Watch that Israel used white phosphorous in Gaza despite the risk to civilians:

[T]he group said the army knew the munitions threatened the civilian population but “deliberately or recklessly” continued to use them until the final days of the Dec. 27 – Jan. 18 operation “in violation of the laws of war.”

It called on senior Israeli military commanders to be held to account, and urged the United States, which supplied the shells, to conduct its own investigation.

The Israelis are investigating:

The Israel Defense Forces have announced an internal probe, the results of which have yet to be made public.

Meanwhile, A Palestinian human rights group, Independent Commission for Human Rights (ICHR) is accusing Hamas of torturing a prisoner to death:

The Independent Commission for Human Rights (ICHR) said one of its researchers had seen marks on the hands and legs of the inmate, Jamil Assaf, indicating he had been tortured in jail.

Assaf was detained by police on March 9 and died in Gaza’s main hospital on Tuesday. The ICHR said he was suffering from kidney failure after a beating.

This death was part of a pattern:

Assaf’s death was the second of a prisoner in a Hamas jail in Gaza this month, the ICHR added.

Hamas is investigating:

Islam Shahwan, a police spokesman in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip, said police were investigating Assaf’s death.

“If it was proven that Assaf died as a result of torture, those proven to have been involved in the incident will suffer maximum punishment,” Shahwan said

March 25th, 2009

Trapped in a Closed Zone

As Netanyahu and Lieberman strike a deal to expand West Bank settlements in order to destroy any possibility of a Palestinian state, here is an Israeli short on what it is like to be a Palestinian trapped in Gaza:

See Closed Zone for background.

Yoni Goodman, director of animation for the Academy Award-nominated film, “Waltz with Bashir”, talks about the process of making his new animated film on the closure of Gaza together with the human..

[In Hebrew, with subtitles.]

March 25th, 2009

Physicians for Human Rights — Israel: IDF violated medical ethics

Physicians for Human Rights — Israel has claimed that:

Israel violated medical ethics in Gaza: report

JERUSALEM (AFP) – Israel’s army violated codes of ethics and international law during the war in Gaza by attacking medics and refusing to allow the treatment of wounded, a human rights group charged on Monday.

The actions reflect a “demonisation of Palestinians (which) bears a heavy price for Israeli society,” warned a report by Physicians for Human Rights that called for an independent body to investigate the military’s conduct during its 22-day Operation Cast Lead in Gaza that ended on January 18.

The Israeli army said it had not yet concluded its investigation, but that fighters from Gaza’s ruling Hamas movement had battled under cover of ambulances and medical facilities.

Among the offences listed by the Israeli non-governmental organisation are “attacks on medical personnel; damage to medical facilities and indiscriminate attacks on civilians not involved in the fighting.”

“Israel placed numerous obstacles in the course of the operation that impeded emergency medical evacuation of the sick and wounded and also caused families to be trapped for days without food, water and medications,” the report said.

“The actions … violate directives of international law which forbid attacks on medical centres and medical teams during fighting” and “blatantly violated codes of ethics.”

During the offensive, Israeli fire killed 16 Palestinian medical personnel and wounded 25 others while eight hospitals and 26 primary care clinics were attacked, according to figures from the United Nations and the group.

Among the specific incidents cited is that of a Mr. Shurrab whose two sons were shot by Israeli forces while the trio drove toward the southern city of Khan Yunis on January 16.

“One of the sons died immediately, the other bled to death for 12 hours,” it said. “All that time the Israeli soldiers were within a short distance from the Shurrabs but did not provide any assistance despite the father’s repeated requests.”

Such incidents reflect a general demonisation of Palestinians, a process that “reached its nadir when soldiers in an army that flaunts its morality declined to help evacuate injured civilians and trapped families, when soldiers acted in a trigger-happy manner as they opened fire on ambulances, medical installations and medical personnel.”

“We have noticed a stark decline in IDF (Israeli Defence Forces) morals concerning the Palestinian population of Gaza, which in reality amounts to a contempt for Palestinian lives,” said Dani Filc, the chairman of the group.

“It is critical that the investigation of Operation Cast Lead is completed by a neutral, external investigator without ties to the IDF.”

The army said that it was investigating the claims in a “thorough” manner and said its forces were instructed to “act with the utmost caution in order not to cause harm to medical vehicles and medical facilities.”

“Throughout the fighting, Hamas methodically made use of medical vehicles, facilities and uniforms in order to conceal and camouflage terrorist activity, and in general used ambulances to carry terror activists and weapons,” it said in a statement.

“Hamas used ambulances to ‘rescue’ terror activists from the battlefield and used hospitals and medical facilities as hiding places.”

Such actions “greatly complicated the coordination of rescue and medical evacuation.

“It must be emphasised that under international law, the protections afforded to medical teams or ‘protected institutions’… cease to exist when these medical teams or institutions are not used for humanitarian purposes rather for carrying out actions intended to harm the State of Israel,” the statement said.

Meanwhile, army chief of staff Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi on Monday dismissed separate allegations of wanton killing of civilians during the Gaza offensive, based on soldiers’ testimonies published last week.

“I do not believe that IDF troops hurt Palestinian civilians in cold blood,” Ashkenazi said in a speech.

“We will wait the outcome of an investigation, but my impression is that the IDF acted morally and if such cases did take place they were isolated.”

March 23rd, 2009

Levy: Why do Western leaders love us?

Gideon Levy writes of the especially favorable treatment given Israel by the leaders of the Western nations, which make public opinion in those countries irrelevant:

The world is always against us, period. But the world is not against us – to the contrary: The truth is that there is no other nation toward which the world is so forgiving, even today. Yes, today.

The whole article:

Has anyone in Israel asked why the Swedes hate us?

By Gideon Levy

Was it a coincidence? The day after Israel’s Davis Cup tennis match in Sweden, played in a practically empty arena this week, a brief item appeared on the Haaretz Web site: Historians have discovered that Sweden, former tennis superpower, aided the Nazi war machine by extending credit to German industrial plants.

Coincidence or not, neutral in 1941 or not, 68 years later, public opinion in Sweden is definitely not neutral: Thousands demonstrated there against Israel, which was forced to wield its racket like a leper, with no audience in attendance. Did anyone in Israel even ask why it was considered a pariah in Sweden? No one dared question whether the war in the Gaza Strip was worth the price we’re paying now, from Ankara to Malmo. It’s enough to recall that the Swedes were always against us. The fact that there were times when they were awash in love for Israel was erased from our consciousness.

The world is always against us, period. But the world is not against us – to the contrary: The truth is that there is no other nation toward which the world is so forgiving, even today. Yes, today. Granted, world public opinion is very critical, sometimes in a way that’s unique to Israel, but most governments (except Venezuela and Turkey, but including Egypt and Sweden) are far from being in sync with the public opinion in their countries. The official world continues to be sympathetic to Israel, regardless of its actions. The rise of Hamas, the increase in hatred for Islam in the West, the American hegemony – all this helps in strengthening the support, and we know how to make the very most of it.

What’s the difference between national tennis player Andy Ram and national tennis player Thomas Johansson? Johansson and his angry fans saw real pictures from Gaza; Ram and his complacent fans never did. Had Ram seen them, maybe he, too, would demonstrate. But he, like most Israelis, was spared this discomfort, thanks to the gung-ho Israeli press. Can we and Ram really criticize those who were horrified by the pictures from the war? Can we reproach those who dare to protest against the people responsible for those scenes? Are we demanding that the world remain silent once again?

The demonstrators in Stockholm waved banners against violence and racism. It may be okay to ask why they waved them only against us, as there are some other racist and violent places in the world, but it is not okay to question the right to do so in general. Was there really no violence in Gaza, and is there no racism in Israel? If we were Swedes, wouldn’t we protest against the pointless killing and destruction wrought by Israel?

But we needn’t get too worked up over the fury of public opinion in Sweden; its right-wing government is much less agitated, like all the other European governments. One need only recall the surreal scene at the height of the brutal assault on Gaza, when the heads of the European Union came to Israel and dined with the prime minister in a show of unilateral support for the side wreaking the killing and destruction. They didn’t give a thought to visiting Gaza, and uttered nary a word of criticism against Israel. That is official Europe.

Now, as a new government is about to be formed, there is concern that Israel will pay a price in the international arena for its composition. Not to worry: Everything will be just dandy. The world will accept Benjamin Netanyahu as Israel’s No. 1 statesman, Avigdor Lieberman as its No. 1 diplomat and Moshe Ya’alon as its No. 1 soldier. Lieberman’s belligerent statements and the Israel Defense Forces’ violent actions in the territories under former chief of staff Ya’alon will not present any obstacles. The world will accept them, too.

Furthermore, the growing concern that the new U.S. administration may be about to change the rules of the game vis-a-vis Israel could also prove to be unfounded: Barack Obama’s new America has already pledged to clean up after Israel, as usual. The $900 million the administration has pledged to contribute to rebuild Gaza – without a word of criticism about who caused the destruction there, as if it were a natural disaster and not the work of an unrestrained army, particularly in light of America’s current economic state – is a bad sign for anyone hoping for change. Israel wrecked Gaza with U.S. weapons, and America and Europe step in to fix things, not for the first time or for the last.

As the saying goes around here, what was is what will be: Israel will continue to destroy, and America will continue to mop up after it, without a word. A bad sign? Yes, for anyone who thinks that change will only come from the outside or, in other words, only from America.

Note how the upcoming Durban II conference on racism is also being thwarted, because of the fear that it will harshly criticize Israel. Does anyone know of any other country that can win such sweeping international backing? But we always complain: The whole world is against us. It’s good for shoring up national unity and for squeezing out more and more support in the world.

The bleak prophecies about a change in America’s attitude toward Israel are as old as the country itself. Whenever there’s a change of administration in the U.S., anxiety spikes. But from president to president, our strength only grows: When George W. Bush was elected, we were told to be wary of the Texan, a friend of the Arabs and of oil. And what did we get? Never was there a president more “sympathetic to Israel,” who gave it such a blank check for all its settlements, targeted assassinations and occupation activities. Obama is scary, too: He’s already talking with Iran and with the Taliban. Most likely, fears surrounding this will also prove to be overblown, once he gets around to dealing with Israel.

International interest in Israel is completely disproportionate. Last week, every taxi driver in Bursa, Turkey could recite by heart the names of Lieberman, Tzipi Livni, Netanyahu – and also Avi Mizrahi, the major general who had criticized their country. Every little flutter of coalition action in Israel immediately makes headlines; the world does not focus as much attention on the internal politics of any other country. Only Israel. Whether it’s good or bad for the Jews, it’s hard to put one’s finger on the roots of this phenomenon.

For decades now, the world has been buying the Zionist narrative almost in full. The occupation and settlements have been going on for more than 40 years with no serious impediment. Except for some international grumblings and resolutions no one has any serious intention of implementing, Israel continues to belong to the camp of the “good guys”; the Arabs are the “bad guys.” The new atmosphere in the West against Islam is reinforcing this trend and Israel is benefiting yet again. Criticism of the media in the West from Israel’s supporters is also quite excessive.

A Swedish journalist was recently laid off from her newspaper because she sided with the Palestinian position in the conflict. It’s hard to imagine her editors acting the same way if it were a Jewish reporter who had written in support of Israel.

When I was interviewed once by a reporter from the France 1 channel, a commercial channel, at the doorway of a house in Gaza – where the army had killed the only daughter of a paralyzed mother – and I said that it was these sorts of moments that made me feel ashamed to be an Israeli, my words were not broadcast. The reporter phoned me the next day and told me his editors had decided not to include the quote, for fear of viewer response. When I once published an article in the German paper Die Welt, which is part of the publishing group of Axel Springer, where all writers had to sign a pledge that they would never cast doubt on the State of Israel’s right to exist, the editor told me: “If this critical article about the occupation had been written by a German journalist, we would not have published it.”

Despite mounting criticism of Israel, Europe is still very cautious. With Europe’s Holocaust guilt, its anxiety in the face of Islam and its readiness to blindly follow the United States anywhere, Israel still enjoys preferential status in the world. Very preferential.

But perhaps this will not always be the case. Perhaps the worse our actions become, the harsher the criticism will be. Meanwhile, two pointless wars in two years were not enough to achieve this. Maybe the time will indeed come when the world will get fed up with this aggression and violence of ours, which endanger world peace, and will say at long last: No more occupation, no more wars perpetrated by Israel for which the world has to pay. Perhaps when Israel’s dream team of Netanyahu-Lieberman-Ya’alon faces the American dream team of Obama-Clinton, conservatives versus liberals, warmongers versus seekers of negotiation – something will happen then.

In the meantime, let us remember: Israel beat Sweden 3-2 in tennis and justice prevailed once again.

March 14th, 2009