יום שישי, 25 במאי 2012

Elder of Ziyon Daily News

Elder of Ziyon Daily News

Link to Elder of Ziyon

US Senate may change definition of "Palestinian refugees"

Posted: 24 May 2012 06:45 PM PDT

Great news, from The Times of Israel:

Nearly everyone agrees that around 650,000 Palestinians fled or were forced from their homes between June 1946 and May 1948. But when it comes to counting the number of Palestinian refugees alive today, the math gets fuzzy.


According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) – the main body tasked with providing assistance to Palestinian refugees – there are more than 5 million refugees at present. However, the number of Palestinians alive who were personally displaced during Israel's War of Independence is estimated to be around 30,000.


This enormous disparity is explained by UNRWA decisions in 1965 and 1982 that extended the definition of "refugees" to include the children and grandchildren of displaced Palestinians. Today, UNRWA's annual budget stands at approximately $600 million, of which $250 million is contributed by the United States. Overall, America has contributed $4.4 billion to the UN agency since its establishment in 1949.


Writing in Foreign Policy, Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies cites a study that projects nearly 15 million Palestinian refugees by the year 2050 if UNRWA does not reform its method of accounting. Nevertheless, Schanzer predicts a lot of resistance to the Senate provision.


"In recent years, politicians and policy wonks, including one former UNRWA administrator, have called for UNRWA reform. The agency hasn't merely demurred; it has girded for battle," he says. "UNRWA set up shop in Washington with two Hill-savvy professionals, despite the fact that its operations are entirely based in the Middle East, anticipating the need for what looks like a full-scale lobby effort to defend its mission. The agency even toyed with changing its name last year in an attempt to burnish its image in the West."
The US State Department, which pledged an additional $10 million in UNRWA funding earlier this year, is also making noises opposing the measure. But Schanzer says "such grumblings will likely pale in comparison to the expected outcry in the West Bank, Gaza, and the Palestinian refugee camps in neighboring Arab countries."
"The refugee narrative is a sacred one in Palestinian political culture. Palestinian leaders will not simply table it because Congress passes new legislation. Rather, it's a fair bet they will mobilize. When UNRWA merely mulled a name change in July 2011, Palestinians organized protests and sit-ins.  Proposing real changes to UNRWA could even prompt violence," he says.
In Newsweek/The Daily Beast, Lara Friedman of the left-leaning Americans for Peace Now criticizes Kirk for trying to "unilaterally" resolve the refugee issue "outside of negotiations." She believes the issue should be solved in bilateral permanent status negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians and adds that, even if made into law, the Kirk amendment wouldn't work.
"Palestinians who consider themselves refugees don't do so simply because UNRWA, or anyone else, gives them permission to do so," she says. "They do so because this is their personal experience and their personal narrative.  Forcing the UN to redefine millions of them to no longer officially qualify as refugees won't change that self-definition, and it won't make the issue easier to solve in the future.  In truth it will just make it harder, since the new, Kirk-approved terms of reference will be totally disconnected from the actual issues at the heart of the conflict."
Kirk's office explains, however, that the legislation does not call for a total cutoff to needy Palestinian descendants receiving aid from UNRWA.
Instead, it changes the way the US views them – as people living below the poverty line rather than as refugees.They say the amendment will improve the chances for Israeli-Palestinian peace, as it could yield a Palestinian "right of return" without resulting in demographic suicide for Israel.
The Lara Friedman quote shows how much some Jews have gone off the deep end.

Although I don't believe for a minute that the State Department or White House would allow this to happen, the real effect of creating a universal definition of "refugee" would be to pressure Arab states to naturalize the many Palestinians who were born in their countries, as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states explicitly:
Article 7

1. The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and. as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.

2. States Parties shall ensure the implementation of these rights in accordance with their national law and their obligations under the relevant international instruments in this field, in particular where the child would otherwise be stateless.
Arab countries that discriminate against Palestinian Arab children, including Lebanon and Syria, have signed this convention. And they flout it.

So there is a universal definition of refugee created by the UN - with the exception of Palestinian Arabs. There is a universal convention on assigning citizenship to children - except for Palestinian children. And there is even a Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, that apparently doesn't apply to Palestinians either:
A Contracting State shall grant its nationality to a person born in its territory who would otherwise be stateless.
Palestinians really are exceptional, aren't they?

This is a false refugee problem that has not been resolved directly because of Arab discriminatory actions against Palestinians. The US has chance to be a leader in eliminating this problem and solving a huge humanitarian crisis created by the Arab nations. The hundreds of millions of dollars now going to UNRWA can be properly channeled to allow Arab countries to naturalize their Palestinian Arab "guests."

It is only sixty years too late.

Abbas lies, again, and dooms his people to misery

Posted: 24 May 2012 02:10 PM PDT

Ma'an reports:
According to Beirut-based Now Lebanon news agency, Abbas told the An-Nahar newspaper of "permanent" cooperation with the Lebanese government to maintain security in Palestinian refugee camps.

The president also voiced hope that the lives of Palestinians in Lebanon would be "easier", adding that they did not "want to be naturalized."
(Now Lebanon mirrors the article. In his original speech it appears that he says that "we do not want resettlement.")

Either way, it is a lie that the Lebanese do not want citizenship. As I've pointed out numerous times, every time Lebanese Palestinians gained a loophole to become citizens they jumped at it. (So have Gazans to become Egyptian citizens in recent months, over 2000 have done that including Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar.)

In 2005, Abbas actually said that Lebanese and other "guest" Palestinians should have the right to become citizens of their host states if they want, and then he did an abrupt about-face, deciding that they should have no freedom to make such a decision themselves.

Arab "leaders" like Abbas have consistently campaigned to deprive Palestinian Arabs of their rights to become citizens of their host countries, as well as the rights of their children to become citizens of their home countries. They effectively tell their people to go to hell.

And it is all because they are holding out hope that millions of Palestinian Arabs will one day flood Israel and destroy the Jewish state. That is the only reason these people have suffered for 64 years, and their freedom to choose to become citizens - that all other Arabs have automatically - is taken away from them.

Not that Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch care. Amazingly, HRW actually agrees that Palestinian Arabs must remain stateless. Really.

(h/t Tamzen)

Freedom for me, boycott for thee

Posted: 24 May 2012 12:40 PM PDT

Next week the Israeli Habima theatre company will perform The Merchant of Venice at the Globe Theatre in London.

Anti-Israel activists have already said that they will do everything they can to disrupt the performances.

The Globe says it is beefing up its security:
Shakespeare's Globe has stepped up security in anticipation of next week's two performances by Israel's Habima Theatre Company in order to avoid a repeat of the scenes at the Proms last year.

Pro-Palestinian activists have made clear their intention to disrupt proceedings with demonstrations at both performances. Both shows are now sold out.

In a letter sent this week to ticket-holders, the Globe reserved the right "to refuse admission to anyone we have reason to believe may cause a disruption" and that "any objects or material which could be used in disrupting the performance will be deemed prohibited items".

The organisers warned that individuals who attempted to disrupt the show would be asked to leave and advised that ticket-holders should leave bags at home.

The letter also said that there would be "enhanced security processes in place" including extensive checks of bags and audience members, with food and drink banned in the auditorium and no video or photography equipment allowed at the venue.

The audience has been advised to arrive up to 90 minutes before curtain-up, with plans for the show to be significantly delayed "if the majority of the audience arrive after 7pm".
Interestingly, a theater company that represents a brutal dictatorial regime already played at the Globe without incident. Their government has banned public gatherings, censored newspapers and jailed people whose opinions it disagreed with. Yet no one protested their right to perform; ther ewere no letters to the Guardian insisting that hosting this play would empower the despot rulers to continue their brutal oppression of their people.

I'm talking of course about the well-reviewed Palestinian Arab production of Richard II as part of the same Shakespeare festival.

That theatre company, Ashtar, spoke about the importance of art as a basic human right:
Last week, after receiving a standing ovation for their colourful and enjoyable Arabic-language version of Richard II as part of the Globe's Shakespeare festival, Ashtar members joined a discussion on "theatre under occupation," organised by Jewish anti-Israel campaigner Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi.

The panel event, held at the Globe but organised independently, featured Ashtar's artistic director Iman Aoun, actors George Ibrahim and Nicola Zreineh, as well as Bidisha, author of the forthcoming book Beyond the Wall, and playwright Sonja Linden.

Questioned by the audience on the role of theatre, Mr Zreineh, who played Bolingbroke, said that it was "about communicating stories."

"This is why we Palestinians believe that theatre can be a very powerful tool to create change first in Palestine, and then regionally and internationally," he said.

To nods of approval and applause from the other panellists, Bidisha added: "It's about artists saying, I want to create artistic practices, to exhibit, to perform, to go on tour. These are normal, absolutely basic human rights.

"Artistic creation and drama is wholly universal, and it is a human right to create and perform."

"Art really does have a role in our very conflict-ridden world," said Ms Linden. "The artist's role is to reflect and engage. I'm interested in theatre as a forum for communicating."
But some freedoms are just too much for the oh-so-principled thespians of Ashtar:
[M]oments later, asked to share their views on the recent calls for the Globe to withdraw its invitation to Israel's Habima Theatre company – due to perform The Merchant of Venice at the Globe later this month – the panellists argued that no Israelis should be given a place on stage.

"It's not about Habima, it's about any Israeli organisation, governmental or non governmental, because for us we call for boycotting Israel. That's it," said Mr Zreineh. "As long as there is no justice in our area, we call for boycotting Israel as a state.

"For us it's not about Habima or not Habima, it's about an Israeli existence in our land, in our area."

"We support the BDS [boycott, diverstment and sanctions] and the cultural boycott of Israel," said Ms Aoun. "We have also written to the Globe asking them to disinvite Habima."
It seems that blatant, sheer hypocrisy is also a human right.

Syria loves Shlomo Sand

Posted: 24 May 2012 10:50 AM PDT

A symposium was held yesterday at the Lecture Hall of the al-Assad National Library in Damascus, as reported by Syrian's official TV network website.

The subject? "The Invention of the Jewish people."

Yes, the entire symposium was dedicated to the absurd ramblings of Shlomo Sand.

The sponsors of the meeting was the "Syrian Arab Popular Committee to support the Palestinian people and resistance to the Zionist project."

I guess the only people who take Sand seriously are School of Oriental and African Studies in London - and the Syrian government.

Al Manar op-ed: "We need an Arab Netanyahu"

Posted: 24 May 2012 09:05 AM PDT

An Al Manar (Lebanon) op-ed by Fayez Abu Shamala looks at Binyamin Netanyahu's acts over the past few days.

It talked about him offering deep condolences to Rachel Atias, whose entire family was wiped out in a horrific car crash in Tiberias on Monday night.

The article then went on to discuss how Netanyahu emotionally described the importance of Jerusalem to the entire Jewish nation, and how it would be a fatal mistake give up the Temple Mount, saying that if Jerusalem is gone, Zionism is gone.

The op-ed concludes with this:
Arab people want a leader they can believe in, ideologically and revolutionary, who is honest with them, as Netanyahu is with the Jews. The Arab people want a leader who does not betray their covenant, nor abandon their rights, a president careful about their future, compassionate to them, at the same time be firm in his positions, solid against the their enemies, tough on the holy sites, and aggressively against those who want to undermine their rights.
And, yes, this is the same Al Manar run by Hezbollah.

We have seen many times that Arabs treat Israeli concessions as signs of weakness and they deride them. Here we see the flip side: they respect power and principles.

Report on the AZM panel Monday night

Posted: 24 May 2012 07:25 AM PDT

On Monday night, I participated in a panel discussion on Israel advocacy sponsored by the American Zionist Movement in New York.

My co-panelists were Bari Weiss, senior editor at Tablet Magazine, and Noah Pollak, writer and one of the founders of the Emergency Committee for Israel.

I had met Noah before, and he is always fun to talk to. He knows a lot of important people and when he says things like "Bill Kristol reads your blog and wonders 'Who is this Elder of Ziyon?'"  it blows me away.

Bari is super nice, and she was surprised that I wouldn't tell her my real name even in person.I think she is taking that as a challenge.

I'm such a dork; I put on my badge and walked around with "Elder of Ziyon" on my lapel until I realized at the beginning of the panel that the other panelists weren't wearing theirs. I discreetly removed it during the introductions. What do I know about panel speaker badge etiquette?

I enjoyed myself. I feel a bit guilty because ShalomTV wanted to cover it and I insisted I remain anonymous; since they couldn't guarantee that my face wouldn't end up on the video they chose not to come. It is a shame because events like this need to be covered so that it is not limited to the audience of 50 or so that showed up. (AZM made a video, when it is available I'll link to it.They promised to keep my face out of it.)

Noah talked about what American Jews need to do from a political perspective to help Israel, and he pointed out that Jews tend to like to discuss things but politics requires going on the offensive and taking the battle to the other side. That's what the other side is doing and it is what we need to be doing as well to defend Israel. And, he pointed out, making fun of BDSers is pretty easy - they parody themselves.

Bari talked about how she became galvanized to become a journalist after seeing the documentary Columbia Unbecoming, which showed how pro-Israel students at Columbia University were intimidated and singled out by professors and students alike.

I spoke about my experiences from the blog and pointed out that videos I've posted have had ten times the audience of my posts. I talked about how effective hasbara must be experiential and visceral, and not merely words. I pointed out that the reason Birthright and Israel semester programs in Jewish high schools are the best way to get people to be pro-Israel because it is not only a logical issue but an emotional one, one that has to reach people on a gut level, and blog posts rarely rise to that standard.

Everything was quite cordial. The only slightly discordant note came from, well, me.

An Israeli pointed out that as much as BDS is a joke in the US, as Noah mentioned, it is regarded as even more of a joke in Israel, so what is the real danger to Israel's existence? How could he convince his fellow Israelis that they should be concerned about any existential threat?

Noah answered that the danger was more in the attempts that BDS and similar initiatives to split the American Jewish community, not in any direct damage they do to Israel.

My answer was that Arabs have a long term strategy to destroy Israel, bit by bit; that they think in terms of centuries and not election cycles and that they will use any combination of military, political and social means to accomplish that. I pointed out that the "right to return" is being downplayed by Westerners but it is an integral part of Arab strategy and while it is not a danger now, it might be in a decade or two as the argument gets strengthened by repetition (legal aspects end up becoming just politics after a while; no international court is going to rule that the "right" of return is invalid even though it has no legal basis.)

The moderator then pointed out that while it might be my opinion that all Arabs want to destroy Israel, not everyone thinks so.

I then quickly said that as soon as I see a single Arabic article that disagrees, I would publicize it far and wide; so far I haven't seen it.

It didn't bother me too much but that small incident shows how far we still have to go. The idea that Arabs still want to see the Jewish state fall should not be considered controversial; it is not a right-vs.-left opinion - it is explicitly said in the Arabic media every day without any dissent at all. (The latest example, from the Western-funded "moderate" PA, can be seen here.) If you want to disagree, fine, but at least show me a single counter-example! Just one!

Althogether, though, I had a lot of fun and it was very nice meeting some of you in person, including  Barbara Mazor who led the fight against the BDSers at the Park Slope Co-op and who was on The Daily Show as a result.

Afterwards I was kicking myself that I didn't even think of doing a quick video interview with Bari and Noah for the blog. D'oh!

Why is Gaza still dark?

Posted: 24 May 2012 05:50 AM PDT

A Welsh activist in Gaza tweeted a number of times overnight that Gaza City was completely dark:
Fuel crisis in gaza is getting worse. This is the first time we've had no electricity and no generator in the middle of the night. 

I look out the window and gaza is in blackout. Total blackout

Streetlights have gone out and cars are creeping along slowly unsure how to continue. Also I banged my knee. Ouch.

On the roof and the only that I can see with electricity is Shifa Hospital.

This is a  horizon during this fuel crisis. That single lit building in the distance = the hospital. 

Of course, he blames Israel (and peripherally Egypt.)

But Israel has been sending lots of fuel into Gaza. Every week the number has been somewhat inconsistent but it has been enough to run the Gaza power plant; yesterday 289,000 liters were sent in - a higher amount than usual.

COGAT's weekly reports lately have been saying "Due to the heavy-duty diesel crisis from Egypt to the Gaza strip in order to operate the power plant, operating the power plant may be problematic and the electricity may temporarily not work in the strip." I don't quite understand this - is the diesel being sent by Israel not the type the power plant needs? That was the entire point of the agreement where Hamas allowed fuel to be transferred through Israel.

As usual, it seems to be that Hamas is artificially creating this crisis. There was one unreported incident last month where Hamas got into a dispute with the local energy office and no fuel was transferred for a day.

But any way you look at it, there is far more fuel going into Gaza now then during the months of the crisis earlier this year, and if Gaza is suffering through more power cuts now than then, it has nothing to do with Israel. Hamas has a history of manipulating the fuel supply to score political points, and this is probably what is happening now.

Egypt's Copts nervous about possibility of Islamist president

Posted: 24 May 2012 03:11 AM PDT

Today is the second day of polling for Egypt's presidential elections, and Egyptian Copts are especially concerned over the possible results.
Many Egyptian Christians felt marginalized under former President Hosni Mubarak and are voting to keep an Islamist from replacing him, out of fear their community would be further sidelined.

In Shubra, a working-class Cairo neighborhood home to many Copts, voting lines were long, and the worry and tension felt by many Christians was palpable.

"I don't want the Islamists. If they come to power and I oppose them, they will say I am criticizing their religion, and who knows what they'll do to me? We can't talk to them," said 57-year-old Sanaa Rateb after casting her ballot.

Dressed in a floral jacket topped with a pearl necklace, Rateb railed against those, including the Muslim Brotherhood, who object to a Christian or a woman running for president.

"It's a mistake. Where is the principle of citizenship in all this? I have the right, as a woman or as a Copt, to stand for the presidency if I want," she said.

Nassim Ghaly, a young man with a cross tattooed on his wrist in the distinctive manner of Egyptian Christians, interjected: "God protect us if the Islamists come to power, and they control Parliament and the presidency at the same time."

Like all the Copts questioned on Wednesday, Rateb and Ghaly voted for Ahmed Shafiq, the last prime minister to serve under Mubarak. Shafiq's campaign posters were the most visible in Shubra.

"Shafiq is a respectable man who can restore the country," said Mary, who declined to give her family name.

The Coptic Orthodox Church, whose patriarch Pope Shenouda III died in March, has refrained from endorsing a candidate. However, Mary insisted that within the community, "everyone is voting for Shafiq."

But she said the community is not looking to Shafiq to protect their rights as Christians.

"We don't want anyone to defend us. We just don't want any problems and to be left alone," she added.

The Coptic community, which makes up between 6 and 10 percent of Egypt's population of about 80 million, is traditionally low-key and fairly absent from the country's circles of power.

Mubarak named Shafiq, a former Air Force chief of staff, as prime minister in the final days of Mubarak's regime.

He is reviled by the youth of the "revolution," Muslims and Christians. They call him "feloul," a pejorative term for those who served in the old regime. But others reject that label.

"If Shafiq is feloul, then we are all feloul," said Ghaly.

Still, the subject is sensitive, and many of those interviewed were unwilling to be identified — most of them whispering as they spoke so they wouldn't be heard by their fellow voters.

Asked about her position on Egypt's Islamists, a young Christian woman responded dryly: "I'm sorry, I don't wish to say anything on that subject."
Notice how institutionalized the dhimmitude of Egypt's Christians is, their psyche so ingrained with the idea that they must not speak out or turn too political which would draw attention to themselves.

The Egyptian Copts have not even formed their own political party in the wake of Egypt's revolution.
פורסם על ידי zoom ב- 0:06

אין תגובות:

הוסף רשומת תגובה

הירשם ל- תגובות לפרסום (Atom)