Printable View
A new book from Raja Shehadeh. The fear, as ever, is the fear of freedom. If freedom has any meaning, everyone must have it.
What Does Israel Fear from Palestine? by Raja Shehadeh review – making sense of senseless violence | Politics books | The Guardian
Roland Oliphant of The Telegraph offers an interesting range of opinions on the ICC, specifically with regard to the Palestinian and Israelis named in the Court's docket, and more generally on international humanitarian law, and the problems of prosecuting people accused of crimes in war.
The argument with regard to starvation and accountability is a problem for Yoav Gallant, because
"Following the devastating attacks by Hamas against Israel on 7 October, Israeli Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant, announced a complete siege of the Gaza Strip: “There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel – everything will be closed.” "
There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel – everything will be closed” | The unlawful siege and starvation of civilians in Gaza | Global Rights Compliance
"Defense Minister Yoav Gallant says he has ordered a “complete siege” of the Gaza Strip, as Israel fights the Hamas terror group.“I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed,” Gallant says following an assessment at the IDF Southern Command in Beersheba.
“We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly,” he adds".
Defense minister announces 'complete siege' of Gaza: No power, food or fuel | The Times of Israel
Gallant is thus the most vulnerable of the Israeli officials the Court wishes to prosecute.
Oliphant's video talk is here-
How the ICC bared its teeth - and caught the West off guard | Defence in Depth (msn.com)
What can be more stupid than to tell a state at war- 'don't cross this red line' -when they go ahead and do it -and there is no response to match the threat? And what happens when you declare a group to be 'terrorists' and therefore determine they must be destroyed, only to find, years and a zillion deaths later, that they still exist, that 'we' are negotiating with them, and they ultimately have their slice of the cake? It might have worked in Northern Ireland, it hasn't worked in Afghanistan, and I doubt a Palestinian state run by HAMAS would be a nice place to live.
But red lines? Nonsense, and dare one use the word, a hostage to fortune, like troubling deaf heaven with bootless cries.
"Benjamin Netanyahu has responded cooly to Joe Biden’s proposal for peace between Israel and Hamas, insisting the Israeli army will continue fighting until it has “eliminated” the Palestinian militant group’s capacity to rule Gaza and pose a military threat.The Israeli prime minister’s comments came after Hamas said it had a positive view of the three-phase ceasefire proposal announced by the US president for a permanent truce in Gaza."
Israel-Gaza war live: Hamas views ceasefire plan ‘positively’ but Netanyahu vows to continue war (theguardian.com)
Reasons to be cheerful -a plan. Reasons not to be cheerful: Netanyahu - he won't agree to anything that leaves HAMAS intact, he being detached from reality -the Blair Govt succeeded in getting the IRA to 'decommission' its weapons (or so we were told), but the political wing, Sinn Fein, became a partner in the Govt of Northern Ireland thereafter. And HAMAS is not going to agree to anything similar to what the IRA agreed to. It is not about to disappear, though I guess it could disband, and re-group under another name.
Note the point Netanyahu made about eliminating HAMAS's "capacity to rule Gaza". In other words, there will not be an election in Gaza, just in case the people decide to vote for HAMAS, or its equivalent, or indeed, any party or person who wants independence or worse, the same rights in Gaza that the citizens of Israel have.
Because ever since Lord Balfour declared the British Govt had no intention of consulting the Palestinians about the Governance of Palestine, the Palestinians have never been asked what they want, let alone given it. When the British left in 1947, the UN made the decisions, not the Palestinians, and since then decisions have been made through war, other than the 1993 Peace Treaty that was rejected by, yes you guessed it, Netanyahu and HAMAS. Even now, Biden and others outside Israel want other Arabs to 'get involved' in the Governance and re-construction of Gaza, in effect to take over and deny Palestinians that once-hallowed phrase made famous by Woodrow Wilson -'National Self Determination'.
But at least Palestinians will be able to go back to their homes, if this is what you call home-
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/80843...0&dpr=1&s=none
"Labour leader Keir Starmer said last month that he wanted to recognise a Palestinian state if he won power, but that such a move would need to come at the right time in a peace process.Foreign Secretary David Cameron, a Conservative, said in January that Britain could formally recognise a Palestinian state if Palestinians had shown "irreversible progress" towards a two state solution, according to reports at the time."
UK's Labour to include pledge on recognizing Palestinian state in election manifesto- Guardian | Reuters
Two statements, both of which are shaped by the British telling the Palestinians what the terms and conditions might be -just as in the period between 1916 and 1921, the British made it clear that the Palestinians were incapable of governing themselves, which is why the British would be doing it, so Lord Cameron imposes his set of rules on them today. As for Sir Keir Starmer, he also imposes Labour Party conditions on the Palestinians, because they can't come up with any of their own? And where is this Palestinian state? Where are its boundaries, and who polices them now, and in the future? What currency will a Palestinian state use? And so on.
Lip service for the general public, I assume, but no less pathetic for all that. As for Netanyahu being invited to speak to Congress toward the end of July -is it the case that he is more popular in the US Congress than he is at home? And why will those Senators and Representatives who disagree with him just not attend, rather than heckle this madman to his face?
Why are Democrats blindly embracing Netanyahu? | Jo-Ann Mort | The Guardian
Two stand out moments: the military raids that rescued four hostages, with stunning collateral damage; and Benny Gantz leaving the Coalition. The former would not have been possible without Palestinian informers who have been paid by Israel for years. The Telegraph behind a paywall has an article saying British intelligence helped out with electronic surveillance, as if Israel needed that, being pioneers in the technology, while Israel says it had undercover guys in Gaza pretending to be Arabs and that is plausible. HAMAS regularly -or used to- execute informers, but it is not a subject much talked about. The British had an informer inside the high command of the IRA, but we only knew that after the Troubles ended.
As for Gantz, his departure has consolidated the hard liners around tough guy Netanyahu -not good for Gaza or the remaining hostages. So the UN Security Council can pass as many resolutions as it likes, the war goes on.
Prospect of Israeli hostage deal recedes as far-right minister signals opposition | Israel-Gaza war | The Guardian
Another day, another step towards a reality that has existed since 1967. Belazel Smotrich, the kind of politician who would not normally make it to Government in a decent, open democracy, is pleased to find that changes in Israeli law give the 'Settler movement' on the West Bank of the River Jordan the powers to, in effect, annexe the territory-
"As the Guardian revealed last week, the Israeli military recently quietly handed over significant legal powers in the occupied West Bank to pro-settler civil servants working for Smotrich.
An order posted by the Israel Defense Forces on its website on 29 May transferred responsibility for dozens of bylaws at the Civil Administration from the military to officials led by Smotrich at the defence ministry."
Israeli far-right minister speaks of effort to annex West Bank | Israel | The Guardian
Smotrich sees this is being both the means whereby Israel can annexe the West Bank and prevent the creation of a Palestinian State.
But whatever the de jure situation, in international law, the de facto situation is that the West Bank, and Gaza have been part of Israel since 1967, not least because Israel has never accepted UN decisions as binding, though one simply gasps at this comment in the article linked above when referring to Smotrich's proposal -
"Annexation and the acquisition of territory by military conquest is forbidden as one of the founding principles of international law including the UN charter."
Because it means the creation of Israel in 1948 was a violation of International Law, simply because though the Jewish Agency accepted the United Nations Partition Plan of 1947, it then ignored it to acquire through military force considerably more territory than was in the Plan, this being one of the roots of Israel's hostility to the UN, along with the formation of UNRWA because Israel denied there were Palestinians to begin with and thus no Palestinian refugees. The rest, as they say, is history.
The core problem is this, as it has been forever: if Palestinians are to live in Israel, are they to be equal, to have exactly the same rights as every other citizen of Israel? One can imagine what Smotrich would say if asked the question, but that does not mean it is not the most reasonable to ask. But until people accept that there is one single state between the River and the Sea, most of the discourse will be distorted, passionate, soaked in loathing, and of no practical use to anyone who lives in this part of our world.
An interesting interview with the former head of Shin Bet that exposes the divisions within Israel, but while he acknowledges the 'endless war' Netanyahu is committed to, on the one hand, and Palestinian aspirations on the other, he does not really address the 'day after' scenarios in either Gaza or the West Bank going beyond some concept of a 'two state solution' so that he himself for all his bitter condemnation of Netanyahu has no long term plan that is practicable. Also, given that Iran has few friends in the Region and thinks it is in their interests to disrupt the MSB agenda of 'normalization' with Israel, this aspect also suggests that unless and until Iran ceases to have the traction it has, then it remains a potent force -though this also begs the questions about the internal politics of change in Iran. Lastly, Lebanon is in deep crisis, the south is likely to become part of a 'buffer zone' strategy that Netanyahu and the IDF think will improve Israel's security -another buffer zone will be created in northern Gaza, but we always come back to the hard question -what happens to the Palestinians? Where will they live, how will they live?
The war has made it all worse, not better, the logical madness of HAMAS and Likud, locked in a deadly embrace.
Netanyahu’s ‘toxic leadership’ will lead to end of Zionism, says former Shin Bet chief (yahoo.com)
A fairly long read, but one that looks favourably on the idea of a single state, or the Confederation argument that I have proposed as well as Dahlia Scheindlin -because until the paradigm changes and politicians inside and outside Israel stop whirling around the 'two state solution' and telling Palestinians who is to represent them, this misery will continue.
The Palestine-Israel nightmare won’t end until we accept these basic truths (yahoo.com)
Protestors who, according to him “stand with HAMAS” should be ashamed of themselves can answer to nobody but themselves. But as for you, Mr Netanyahu, when are you going to make yourself accountable for supporting HAMAS since it started? Have you no shame?
The US Congress should be ashamed to give a platform to such a squalid mass murderer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ku1g1CwrCU