All Content

Take No Prisoners: The Fatal Shooting of Palestinians by Israeli Forces During Arrest Operations

26 May 2005


During the second intifada, Israel formally adopted a policy of assassinating Palestinians suspected of membership in armed organizations waging battle against it. In an attempt to counter the sharp criticism against this policy, Israel argued, among other things, that targeted assassinations were only carried out when it was unable to apprehend the persons targeted for assassination. According to B’Tselem’s figures, since the beginning of 2004, Israelis security forces have killed eighty-nine Palestinians during operations that the defense establishment refers to as arrest operations. At least seventeen of the persons killed were not wanted by Israel, but were civilians who were not suspected by Israel of having committed any offense. In addition, at least forty-three of those killed were unarmed, or were not attempting to use their arms against Israeli security forces at the time they were killed. None of these cases were investigated. 

Half-blind 15-year-old boy faces long jail sentence

26 May 2005


Zaki Mohammed Mansour (15) of Saffa village, West Ramallah, in the West Bank of Occupied Palestine was released on “bail” of 20 000 shekels (about $4800) two days ago. Zaki, who has been charged with making a roadblock and throwing stones, has lost two months of school this year. There is a strong possibility that when Zaki is called for final judgement in his case in about one month’s time, that he will either get a prison sentence or he will have to pay a hefty fine of 5,000 or 10,000 shekels, which will be deducted from the 20,000 shekels bail money he has paid. 

No man's land: Government mistreatment of Palestinian asylum seekers

Jeff Handmaker and Adri Nieuwhof 25 May 2005


Governments should be allowing Palestinians the opportunity to claim political asylum, but they are failing to do so and mistreating Palestinians in the process. In this article, the writers consider international law in relation to this. They also examine the case of Khalil, who has — contrary to international law — not been given an effective opportunity to claim refugee status in the Netherlands and instead has been confined to a bureaucratic ‘no man’s land’, with severe personal consequences. 

At the UN, Palestinian democracy tests American and Israeli limits

Michael Kagan 25 May 2005


Last week, an obscure UN body called the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations decided to “defer” the application from the Badil Resource Center, a Palestinian organization working for Palestinian refugee rights based in Bethlehem. Badil was asking for “consultative status” that would allow it to make statements at official UN gatherings. The committee was supposed to decide if Badil’s work was consistent with the purposes of the UN. Germany demanded that Badil provide a copy of every statement it has ever made on terrorism. The US demanded to hear Badil’s position on the land issue in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Then the US asked if Badil had anything to do with the International Solidarity Movement. 

Boycotting Israel Put High on the Agenda

Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel 25 May 2005


The Special Council of the Association of University Teachers (AUT) in the United Kingdom will be convening to reconsider the motions to boycott two Israeli universities passed less than a month ago. Considering the well-orchestrated campaign of vilification and misinformation aimed at demonizing and discrediting the idea of boycott and boycott activists in the UK and beyond, it will not be surprising if the Special Council revokes the boycott motions. Despite this anticipated setback, the inspiring process of awareness building and mobilizing that was launched in preparation for the AUT’s initial meeting will persist and can only grow. 

Academic boycott will lead to Israeli self-examination

Oren Ben-Dor 25 May 2005


Moving away, but only for a moment, from the issue of Nakba-denial in the academy, there are arguably very good reasons for a general boycott of Israel, in such areas as trade, sports and so on. Here, parallels with South Africa are not out of place. Such a boycott is separate from one directed against Nakba-denial in the Israeli academy. When academics are included in a general boycott, it is as a result of their belonging to a population which is boycotted because its various activities nourish a criminal state. 

Why Us? On the academic boycott

Tanya Reinhart 25 May 2005


A boycott decision — like that passed by Britain’s Association of University Teachers to boycott two Israeli universities — naturally raises a hue and cry among Israelis. Why us? And why now just when negotiations with the Palestinians might be renewed? In the eyes of the world, the question is what can be done when the relevant institutions do not succeed in enforcing international law? The boycott model is drawn from the past: South Africa also disregarded UN resolutions. At that time as well, the UN (under pressure from the United States), was reluctant to impose immediate sanctions. 

The Clash of Democratic Ideals

Omar Yousef Shehabi 25 May 2005


Two years ago a US magistrate judge pronounced al-Arian “a model of civic involvement” but denied him bail, substituting a nationalistic play for a real assessment of flight risk. The problem, evidently lost on the judge, is that Palestine cannot offer al-Arian or any other of its refugees safe haven; the Israeli military has occupied the Palestinian areas for 38 years and prohibits their return. Under US Supreme Court precedent, this flight risk makes al-Arian’s two-year pretrial stay in a Florida maximum-security prison, with 23 hours a day in solitary confinement, a constitutional administrative measure, not punishment. 

Federation of University Unions Calls on All Parties to Uphold Palestinian Call for Boycott of Israeli Academic Institutions

25 May 2005


During a press conference held at Birzeit University’s Media Institute on May 25, 2005, the Federation of Unions of Palestinian Universities’ Professors and Employees, Birzeit University Employees Union and the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI), together stated their support for the courageous decision taken by the Association of University Teachers in the United Kingdom (AUT), on 22 April 2005, to boycott Haifa and Bar Ilan Universities in Israel as institutions complicit in the illegal and violent occupation of Palestinian land. They further voiced their strong condemnation of the signing of an agreement between the President of Al Quds University, Dr. Sari Nusseibeh, and the President of the Hebrew University. 

Palestinian farmers, women and youths support the AUT position to boycott Israeli universities

25 May 2005


The Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees (PARC) with its six affiliated associations and 400 hundred community-based organizations and grassroots committees in the West Bank and Gaza Strip would like to express their full support to the proposal of the largest British Association of University Teachers (AUT) to boycott two Israeli universities (Haifa and Bar Ilan) passed on April 22, 2005. We wish to stress our respect and high appreciation of this courageous and moral position, which signaled the globally rejected racist and colonial policies of the State of Israel towards the native Palestinian people with which some Israeli academic institutions identify themselves.