Opinion and analysis

A very combustible status-quo


In occupied Palestine, the more things change, the more they stay the same. In the last several months, we have seen the death of former Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, the election of Mahmoud Abbas, and preparations for the planned Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and a few small settlements in the north of the West Bank. But what we haven’t seen is a change to the status-quo, a change that is desperately needed to prevent the situation from collapsing into something far worse than the first and second intifadas. While the world’s attention is diverted to the Gaza disengagement - where some 8,000 or so settlers are to be removed, a drop in the bucket of the total 415,300 illegal settlers - Israel is busily eating away at the land it prizes the most, and prejudicing final status issues. 

G8 and Disengagement: Palestine needs justice not charity


While rock stars made poverty the central issue in the world’s biggest concert at the weekend, the world’s most powerful leaders are under increasing pressure to do something concrete about it. This week the leaders of the G8 — the US, Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Russia — meet in Gleneagles (Scotland), hosted by Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair. But while African poverty may feature in the G8 debate, poverty in Palestine is man-made. The expansion of Israeli settlements and the completion of the Wall render a two-state solution as wished for by the G8 impossible. Palestinians are not asking for charity but justice. 

Judging Abbas


The silence from the Middle East, and particularly from the new Palestinian leadership, following Bush’s shift in language at the May 26 Abbas-Bush press conference might be understandable. After all, this would not be the first time that Bush gave a significant statement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and then retired, self-satisfied, to the Oval Office. A former senior American foreign policy advisor gave his judgment of the Bush administration’s policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “When George Bush gives a policy speech on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, everyone stop talking and listen very closely. Because what he says is policy.” Mark Perry analyzes the situation for the Palestine Report. 

The Power of Belief and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict


Apologists for Israel are deeply relieved when they can find a flaw in anyone who criticises Israel. If you are a non-Jew you must be an antisemite, they would argue. If you are a Jew then you must be crazy or a ‘self-hater’. Being a former Israeli from Jewish background, and a supporter of a one-state solution I regularly receive hate-mail. There is always a sense in Israel that nothing short of complete military and political superiority will be sufficient for Israel’s safety and survival. The only way to save the Palestinian people is through international sanctions as was done in the South African case. We do not have much time left for any other option. 

Dancing to Sharon's tune


EI contributor Hasan Abu Nimah examines the Israeli plan for “disengagement” from Gaza. While American, European and Arab diplomats pretend the Gaza plan is an achievement of the “peace process” and a step in fulfilling the Road Map, Abu Nimah argues that it is nothing of the sort. Israel is being forced to withdraw only because of stiff Palestinian resistance. At the same time, Israel is trying to extract a price for leaving Gaza and impose additional costs, burdens and conditions on the Palestinians. Will Israel be allowed to turn defeat into victory? 

Palestinians placed between false choices


For some time the Palestinians have been divided on how to pursue their cause. Their choice, it seems, is between winning the support and favour of the international community and actually pursuing their rights, but not both, writes EI contributor Hasan Abu Nimah. The Palestinian Authority, and its leader Mahmoud Abbas, seem to have accepted the false choices placed before them, allowing others to define the struggle for Palestinian rights as illegitimate and “terrorist.” As the PA is increasingly impotent and irrelevant, a passive international community sits idly by, while Israel continues to create facts on the ground. 

A better strategy for the Palestinian Authority


In Palestinian-Israeli politics, Israel remembers that there are certain mutual understandings used to manage the troubled relationship only when Palestinians take actions that anger the Israelis. Only in such circumstances does Israel complain of threats to the roadmap, the Sharm El Sheikh understandings, or even the entire peace process. When the Palestinians do whatever they are asked, however, such understandings and frameworks suddenly cease to exist. EI contributor Hasan Abu Nimah looks at current Palestinian Authority strategy and considers alternatives. 

Time to admit it is only gravel


Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas has just completed a “successful” visit to Washington. He expressed great satisfaction with the results, and comparing what he had expected to what he had achieved, he must be right. Regular EI contributor Hasan Abu Nimah argues that despite the fanfare and the claims, what the visit actually brought to the Palestinians amounts to much less. Abu Nimah notes that Bush was visibly cordial. He praised Abbas, described him as “a man of peace,” thus elevating his stature to that of Sharon, and addressed him right from the start as “Mr President”, when Arafat had never achieved anything beyond “Mr Chairman.” 

One Hand Clapping: Applauding Tolerance and Pluralism in Israeli Academia


The walls and outposts of the Zionist enterprise are becoming ever more conspicuous, so too are the contradictions inherent in the 57-year-old experiment of establishing a state that is both “Jewish” and “democratic” in pluralistic Palestine. The recent, albeit short-lived, decision of Britain’s Association of University Teachers (AUT) to impose an academic boycott on Bar-Ilan and Haifa Universities attests to the growing realization abroad that Israel’s policies adversely affect Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line. 

Why Us? On the academic boycott


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.