The endorsement of Ariel Sharon’s unilateral plan of disengagement from the Gaza Strip and from parts of the West Bank by US President George W. Bush has angered many Palestinians and inflamed tensions throughout the Arab world. It has also surprised policy makers, diplomats and politicians from the European Union - including Britain, America’s closest ally - who have sought to distance themselves from Bush’s remarks. It prompted a rebuttal from French President Jacques Chirac in Algiers, who described it as a “dangerous and troubling precedent”. Victor Kattan looks at Sharon’s plan in light of international law. Read more about Ariel Sharon, George W. Bush, "Unilateral Declarations" and International Law
Liat Weingart, Valerie Heinonen and Mary Ann McGivern28 April 2004
On April 14, an American corporation was confronted with the choice of whether or not to examine their role in perpetuating the cycle of violence in the Mideast. An alliance of Catholic nuns and Jewish peace activists teamed up to introduce a shareholder resolution asking Caterpillar, Inc. to conduct an internal investigation to determine if the use of their bulldozers to violate human rights laws goes against corporate policies. In fact, it was the first time ever that a shareholder resolution relating to human rights violations in the occupied territories has been brought before a US corporation. Though the odds against the resolution were tremendous, it still garnered 4% of the vote, enough to be re-introduced next year. Read more about Drawing Caterpillar Out Of Its Corporate Cocoon: Company Should Examine Its Role in Mideast Violence
Revd. Jeremy Frost, Precentor of Canterbury Cathedral, expresses through poetry his concerns regarding Bethlehem, a town steeped both in religious history and recent political violence. Frost has visited the Middle East on several occasions, and has researched the theological relationshp between Israel and the Church, countering Christian Zionism in the process. Read more about Poem: On the Ending of the Siege at the Basilica of the Nativity, Bethlehem (10th May 2002)
Amidst the political storm in Israel regarding the “Gaza disengagement” plan, only one really meaningful fact emerges: Sharon received Bush’s approval to proceed with his plan for the Wall in the West Bank. Along this route, Israel is uprooting tens of thousands of trees, dispossessing Palestinian farmers of their land, and pushing them into small enclaves between fences and Walls, until, at the final stage, the Wall will surround them on all sides, as in the Gaza Strip. Israeli academic Tanya Reinhart looks at the steadily increasing number of facts on the ground and the implications of Sharon’s plan. Read more about What kind of state deserves to exist?
Of course, why should anybody expect anything else in a week such as this one? The American commander-in-chief repeatedly misrepresented the situation in Iraq and dodged questions during his news conference of April 13. Then, the next day, with Ariel Sharon at his side he undid decades of U.S. foreign policy and placed US policy in clear violation of international law. When asked on both April 12 and 14 about settlements being an obstacle to peace he avoided the question. This is a leader who habitually is unable to give a plain answer to a plain question. Michael Brown examines the Bush-Sharon letters. Read more about The Bush-Sharon Palestinian disenfranchisement pact
Pro-Israel groups in the US and Europe have campaigned to suggest the European Union is aflame with a “new anti-Semitism,” and to thereby stifle criticism of Israel. But recently they’ve suffered several setbacks. Contrary to the findings in a EUMC report produced in late 2003, the new EUMC report concluded there was no evidence that the increase could be attributed mainly to Muslims and pro-Palestinian groups. Ei’s Ali Abunimah investigates new and disturbing trends in Israeli lobbyists’ efforts to silence criticism of Israel. Read more about Arabs, Muslims are not behind European anti-Semitism
The 14 April meeting between President Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Washington sent Palestinian leaders into a flying panic. But their response reeks of desperation and self-interest rather than any real concern for the fate of the Palestinian people and their land or because the results of the meeting represented any new setback for Palestinian rights. EI co-founder Ali Abunimah examines the results of the meeting and the Palestinian Authority response, and makes sense of it all. Read more about Why all the fuss about the Bush-Sharon meeting?
A majority of Israeli Jews - 63.7 percent - believes the Israeli government should encourage Palestinians to leave the country. These are the results of a poll recently released by the Haifa University. The poll comes at a time when Ariel Sharon, Israel’s Prime Minister is working on his unilateral “disengagement plan” and while various governments are trying to influence the process. However, the longer it takes them to realize the facts on the ground and the sense of urgency, the more Palestinians will lose their faith in a two-state solution. The longer it takes to Israel to discover the mess it has worked itself in, the sooner the day on which a Palestinian majority will start calling for “one-man-one-vote”. Read more about Catch 22: The end of the two-state solution
Lately, Senator John Kerry has been reassuring voters that he will be as pro-Israel as President Bush. He has expressed his support for Sharon’s policy of unilateral disengagement, building of the so-called security barrier and the political isolation of Yasser Arafat. The candidate’s present position toward Middle East peace contradicts his past support of the Oslo peace process and provides a surprising contrast to his views when he was a young anti-war leader in the early ’70s. Ira Glunts looks at the record of Kerry’s position. Read more about Kerry Indicates He Would Continue Bush's Pro-Sharon Policy
House Resolution 3077 passed last fall. It included a provision to establish an advisory board to monitor campus international studies centers in order to ensure that they advance the national interest. While the law would apply to all federally funded institutes with an international focus, the target is clearly the nation’s 17 centers for Middle East studies. The driving force behind this provision is the same group of conservative ideologues who have long promoted the war on Iraq and who support the extreme right-wing politics of the Sharon government in Israel. Their aim is to defend the foreign policy of this administration by stifling critical and informed discussion on U.S. campuses. Professor Beshara Doumani reports. Read more about Be careful what you say on campus
