The algebraic geometer David Mumford, one of the three winners of the Wolf prize this year, is donating his share of the prize money to Birzeit University – a Palestinian university, and Gisha — an organisation that promotes Palestinian freedom of movement. From the Haaretz article:
“I decided to donate my share of the Wolf Prize to enable the academic community in occupied Palestine to survive and thrive,” Mumford told Haaretz. “I am very grateful for the prize, but I believe that Palestinian students should have an opportunity to go elsewhere to acquire an education. Students in the West Bank and Gaza today do not have an opportunity to do that.”
[…]
“The achievements I accomplished in mathematics were made possible thanks to my being able to move freely and exchange ideas with other scholars,” he said. “It would not have been possible without an international consensus on an exchange of ideas. Mathematics works best when people can move and get together. That’s its elixir of life. But the people of occupied Palestine don’t have an opportunity to do that. The school system is fighting for its life, and mobility is very limited.”
tags: Education author: avileh comments: No Comments
June 14th, 2008
The London Jewish Cultural Centre is running a series of events on Israel at 60. Last night’s was on the theme “One State or Two?” I found it astonishing, not at all what you would expect - certainly not if you go along with the usual right-wing convention that one-state means “pro-Israel” and two-state means “anti-Israel” (for example, remember the recent fuss when the Oxford Union gave in to right-wing pressure to remove Norman Finkelstein from the two-state side of a debate because he’s “anti-Israel”? Really, we should refuse to accept these meaningless terms at all.)
The speakers here were Tony Klug, who started arguing for a Palestinian state thirty years ago (and of course was regarded as deeply anti-Israel for doing so then). He’s been a sharp critic of the occupation ever since, and is a founder member of Independent Jewish Voices. Speaking for one state was Daniel Gavron, a lifelong Zionist who has recently concluded that withdrawal from the Occupied Territories will never happen and that democracy can only be achieved within a unitary state. The meeting was chaired by Jonathan Freedland of the Guardian and of the Jewish Chronicle (when the Board of Deputies permits).
The room was full, with well over a hundred people. In their appearance and in their comments, the audience seemed not to be JfJfP types, but rather part of the mainstream North London Jewish community. Richard Kuper, who is prominent in JfJfP, told me that the last time he had tried to contribute to a discussion in that room, the chair had to intervene to prevent him from being shouted down, but the event last night was totally different in its tone. The background assumptions of all three speakers were the same: that the Israeli government, and often the Israeli people, have completely misunderstood their own situation in the world, and as a result are passing up on a unique opportunity for peace, one which won’t come again. Since all three also expressed affection (or more) for the idea of Israel, there was an air of complete puzzlement and sadness about how so many people could be making such a huge mistake. Of course, there’s no shortage of theories — some were offered here — for why that has happened, but what surprised me was the unanimity of the tone and the fact that these assumptions were shared by virtually everyone who spoke — probably a third of the audience.
The discussion between one and two states did have some of the usual elements, mainly the argument over the feasibility of the two solutions. Each side argues that the solution offered by the other can’t work, for well-rehearsed reasons: two states can’t work because of the settlements, one state can’t work because of the hostility between the people. It may be pessimistic to say this, but I find the arguments against each solution pretty convincing. (But in any case I don’t think it’s up to me to choose what solution other people choose for how they live). Usually, this part of the debate feels very tired because there’s no discussion about the actual-existing Israel - only an argument over whether it should continue or cease to exist. Last night, by contrast there was agreement that in any imaginable future Israel would have to change enormously to remove the injustices and inequalities that currently exist in the treatment ofa quarter of the non-Jewish citizens of the Jewish state.
Leaving, I could hardly feel cheerful about a debate in which each side had convincing arguments as to why the “solution” proposed by the other would not work. And as Tony Klug said, “We are now in the last chance saloon… the alternative is perpetual conflict”. On the other hand, I couldn’t help but feel a sense of hope that the situation is finally being understood in mainstream British Jewry. That is far from saying that opinion has changed unanimously, but there’s no question in my mind that a decisive change of mood is under way, in London at least. It may be a little while before it makes its way North to our parts.
tags: General author: admin comments: No Comments
May 7th, 2008
Richard Kuper (ex-chair of JfJfP and more recently its publications and policy officer) has posted to the Just Peace UK group a long list of surprisingly sympathetic pieces in the Jewish Chronicle, and ending with the proposition
Opinion within Britain’s Jewish community has shifted massively in recent years and the JC seems to be making an effort to catch up.
tags: General author: admin comments: No Comments
May 4th, 2008
Today I went to Glasgow to hear Mike Marqusee speak about his new book If I am Not for Myself - Journey of an Anti-Zionist Jew. You can read about the book on Mike’s blog, and details of the remainder of his short Scottish tour are here. In his talk, he described the starting-point for the book as his refusal to accept the label “self-hating”–a description of an anti-Zionist which can only make sense if you accept Zionism’s claim to be the sole representative of the Jewish people. To dispute that claim, he brought forward evidence from the prophets, from haskalah (Jewish enlightenment), and from the history of the Bund (the Jewish trade union federation of Eastern Europe and Russia). He emphasised that Zionism was not the inevitable path of European Jewry, but the product of accident and of mistakes (and also, I would add, of ruthless determination by Jews emulating the right-wing nationalists of Eastern Europe). Even though I came in more or less convinced of his arguments, I still found his talk informative and thought-provoking. (Incidentally, in case it worries you too, he gave a pretty good answer to my misgivings about adopting the label “anti-Zionist” in the twenty-first century).
I bought a copy of the book (well, my dad and I bought half a copy each 
) and I’m looking forward no end to reading it. I strongly recommend that you catch one of Mike’s talks if you get the opportunity.
tags: General author: admin comments: 5 Comments
May 4th, 2008
Here’s some armchair activism for you, in protest of the Gaza blockade.
For everyone: sign a petition urging an end to the blockade and a free flow of supplies:
To the United Nations, the European Union, the Quartet, the Arab League & Israel: We demand that you end the blockade and growing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, ensure the free flow of supplies by land, sea or air, and help to broker the ceasefire which civilians on both sides desperately need.
For Scots: there is currently a motion before the Scottish Parliament condeming the fuel blockade:
S3M-1188 Bashir Ahmad (Glasgow) (SNP) : Gaza Strip Blackout— That the Parliament condemns the Israeli fuel blockade of the Gaza Strip; believes that both Israel and Palestine have a right to defend their citizens from aggression within international law; agrees with both UN and EU officials that the fuel blockade, which has led to the shutting down of the Gaza Strip’s power stations, equates to collective punishment; expresses grave concern that hospitals are being adversely affected which will undoubtedly result in the loss of further innocent life, and calls on the state of Israel to resume fuel supplies to Gaza immediately.
Find out if your MSP supports the motion by following the link, or write to your MSP asking them to support the motion.
tags: Blockade, Easy activism author: avileh comments: No Comments
January 24th, 2008
Border crossings into the Gaza Strip have been closed for a week, stopping shipments of all imports except “emergency supplies”, resulting in shortages of fuel, food, and medicines.
A section of the fence at the Rafah crossing was toppled early this morning, and some 200,000 Gazans crossed into Egypt to get supplies.
From the NYTimes article:
Aid officials had warned earlier this week that Gaza, gripped by fuel and electricity shortages, was two or three days from a health and food crisis.
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which provides assistance to Palestinian refugees and their descendants, announced Monday that it would have to suspend its food aid to 860,000 Gaza residents by Wednesday or Thursday if the crossings from Israel into Gaza were not reopened, because the group was running out of the nylon bags it uses to measure and distribute staples, like flour.
Fuel shortages in Gaza will quickly precipitate a health crisis, since electricity is relied upon for pumping water — power cuts mean disruption in clean water supply. At present, 40% of Gazans lack running water.
In the meantime, the US and Israel are expected to boycott a special meeting of the UN Human Rights Council on the Gaza blockade. I’m not sure how Israel expects to maintain any moral credibility when claiming it has no partner for a negotiation dialogue when they themselves cut off Palestinian supplies and then refuse to engage in a dialogue regarding the humanitarian situation that the blockade precipitates.
tags: Blockade author: avileh comments: No Comments
January 23rd, 2008
An op-ed by Gideon Levy in Ha’aretz raises the question of whether the Isreali government actually wants peace at all. One may or may not agree with his conclusion, but he highlights some important examples of the Isreali government’s double standards and convenient excuses regarding negotiation.
Terror, used as the ultimate excuse for Israeli refusal, only helps Olmert keep reciting, ad nauseum, “If they [the Palestinians] don’t change, don’t fight terror and don’t adhere to any of their obligations, then they will never extract themselves from their unending chaos.” As though the Palestinians haven’t taken measures against terrorism, as though Israel is the one to determine what their obligations are, as though Israel isn’t to blame for the unending chaos Palestinians suffer under the occupation.
Israel makes a point of setting prerequisites and believes it has an exclusive right to do so. But, time and time again, Israel avoids the most basic prerequisite for any just peace - an end to the occupation.
tags: General author: avileh comments: No Comments
April 10th, 2007
In London last week I went to a showing at the ICA of a new film, Forgiveness, made by the Israeli director Udi Aloni (son of Shulamit Aloni, for people who like making connections). Aloni was at the showing and discussed the film with the audience afterwards. “Forgiveness” is a tremendous film, about memory and the repression of memory. Its central setting is a mental hospital for Holocaust survivors that was built on the ruins of Deir Yassin, and which the film pictures as a place where two different kinds of ghosts can meet and reach reconciliation. There’s far more to it than that, of course—the website has a story outline and reviews, if you want to read about it—but really, you should just get out and see it.
tags: General author: admin comments: No Comments
March 10th, 2007
A follow-up to this post: Mick Napier of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign has written a highly critical article on Atzmon. (At the time I’m writing, the SPSC server isn’t working, but you can get a flavour from an extract here). I can’t resist ungraciously pointing out that Mick doesn’t actually mention anywhere that the SPSC recently gave Atzmon a platform, but the main thing is that in this piece he recognises the danger that Atzmon and his allies represent both to Jews and to the Palestinian solidarity movement by bringing genuine anti-Semitism into the campaign. That’s a very welcome statement.
tags: General author: admin comments: 1 Comment
March 4th, 2007
The Palestinian government is constantly being told that it must renounce violence and recognise the state of Israel.
Here’s the thing: Hamas has no incentive to renounce violence as long as Israelis aren’t being told to do the same.
And what does it mean to recognise the state of Israel? It doesn’t mean “acknowledge Israel” because no one is denying Israel exists. What the “hawks” keep claiming is that Hamas/Palestinians/Arabs/insert-term-of-choice-here want to “chase Jews into the sea” and “wipe Israel off the map”.
So “recognise Israel probably means something like “accept that Israelis are here to stay, and that Israel isn’t going to disappear”. In which case, why is no one demanding that the Israeli government “recognise” Palestine? Where are the demands for the Israeli government to accept that Palestinians have a legitimate claim to the places they live in or grew up in, and have a right of return? Where are the demands for the Israeli occupation forces withdraw from the occupied (not “disputed”) territories?
It’s deeply foolish and, dare I say it, naive to place demands on the Palestinian government and expect them to comply, when no parallel demands are being made to the Israeli government.
tags: General author: avileh comments: 3 Comments
March 2nd, 2007
Gilad Atzmon, the famous saxophonist, played in Edinburgh on Nov. 22nd at the invititation of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign. Before the gig, he gave a talk entitled “Zionist Control (The Gatekeepers of the Pro-Palestine Discourse)”–it’s no secret that he doesn’t think much of “Jewish leftist groups”. The Jewish Socialist Group wrote to SPSC (it’s an open letter that I couldn’t find anywhere on the Web, so I have reproduced it below) protesting about the invitation on the grounds of Atzmon’s antisemitism. I also wrote privately, in a personal capacity, to Mick Napier of SPSC, who has promised a considered reply.
Dear Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign,
The terrible situation of the Palestinians today, especially in Gaza, demands the broadest possible unity by those who wish to challenge oppression, racism and human rights abuses. Those who disrupt that unity, or make pro-Palestinian activity vulnerable to charges of antisemitism cannot be friends of the Palestinian people.
Against this background, the Jewish Socialists’ Group strongly oppose Scottish PSC’s invitation to Gilad Atzmon to speak and perform on November 22 at an event called “Zionist control”. Apart from the SWP, which has inexplicably invited Atzmon to its annual Marxism events, and to a book launch at its Bookmarks shop (which was picketed by “Jews Against Zionism and other anti-racists), Atzmon is shunned by other progressive, pro-Palestinian organisations. They completely reject his statements - regurgitating world Jewish conspiracy theories and diminishing the crimes of Nazism - which have been widely denounced as antisemitic.
Atzmon’s outbursts have been a gift to Zionist journalists, providing them with an opportunity to discredit and smear those who support Palestinian rights and justice for the Palestinian people.
If you are not familiar with the views of the person you have invited, here are some examples from his article “On antisemitism” December 2003 on his own website (www.gilad.co.uk):
“We must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously…American Jewry makes any debate on whether the ‘Protocols of the elders of Zion’ are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy.”
“Israel’s behaviour throws some light on the persecution of Jews throughout history.”
In 2005 Atzmon approvingly distributed Paul Eisen’s essay “Holocaust Wars” which the Socialist Unity website described as “a full-blooded exposition of
Holocaust denial material and a tribute to notorious neo-Nazi Ernst Zundel.” Atzmon said he had only “slight differences” with Eisen’s article.
In 2006 he wrote an article called “Beyond comparison” for Al-Jazeerah [not the TV station] (August 12) about Israel and Nazism: “Nazis were indeed proper expansionists, they were trying to take towns and land intact…unlike the Nazis who had respect for other national movements including Zionism, Israel has zero respect for anyone including its next door neighbours. The Israeli behavior should be realised as the ultimate vulgar biblical barbarism
on the verge of cannibalism.
“While Nazism was a nationalist expansionist movement with extensive yet limited ambitions, the Jewish State and its Zionist lobbies are trying to revive the spirit of a global crusade in the name of a bizarre religious war.
“It is about time to … say it all loudly… We have to admit that Israel is the ultimate evil rather than Nazi Germany”.
Since the early 1980s the Jewish Socialists’ Group has worked closely with Palestinian organisations and solidarity campaigns and more recently with Jews for Justice for Palestinians, Just Peace UK and European Jews for a Just Peace in the struggle against occupation and for equality and self-determination for Palestinians. We have challenged Jewish communal “leaders” when they denounce opponents of Israel as antisemitic and Jewish opponents of Zionism as “self-haters”.
At the same time we remain vigilant about antisemitism and other forms of racism. We agree entirely with the Britain’s former PLO representative, Afif Safieh, who frequently told pro-Palestinian demonstrations and meetings that antisemitism was an enemy of the Palestinians as well as the Jews.
As Jewish socialists and outspoken opponents of Zionism, racism and fascism, we cannot understand how it benefits the Palestinian struggle to invite and promote an individual who speaks as Atzmon does, regardless of his origins. The Palestine Solidarity Campaign has long had a clause in its aims to oppose antisemitism and all forms of racism. We cannot understand why SPSC seem intent on exposing the pro-Palestinian movement to charges of antisemitism.
We appeal to Scottish PSC to rescind the invitation and we appeal to Palestinian organisations and solidarity organisations to make their views on this
known to Scottish PSC.
Yours,
David Rosenberg
(on behalf of the National Committee of the Jewish Socialists’ Group)
tags: General author: admin comments: No Comments
November 24th, 2006
Two of us went on Friday to meet Alyn Smith, the Scottish Nationalist MEP, who has just got back from a European Parliament fact-finding mission to Israel and Palestine. The mission was announced on a Europa website (a link at the bottom leads to the mission’s programme, which was pretty good, but subsequent news about it seems to have been relayed only through an Iranian news agency, Electronic Intifada, Al-Jazeerah, etc). This may be because the conclusions that the MEPs brought back are uncomfortable, though unfortunately not surprising. Alyn Smith seems to have been brought up to speed on the situation by the five days of meetings and visits, and has come back with an admirable determination to try to find a positive Scottish contribution to the situation. First the very uncomfortable main points that he has brought back:
- The mission saw for themselves what the Palestinian solidarity movement has been saying for months: that the humanitarian situation on the West Bank, and especially in Gaza, is catastrophic. About Gaza they said:
Due to economic sanctions, almost all public institutions have shut down. The hospitals are overcrowded and receive neither money nor sufficient medicine. The public employees have not been paid for months. The doctors told us that some deadly injuries are not caused by traditional weapons but most likely by new experimental chemical weapons. More amputations than ever are necessary. They have not had the time to examine the dead bodies yet as they are busy dealing with the wounds of those who have survived.
(It’s not only economic sanctions that are strangling the PA. Probably more important is the large amount of customs revenue that the Israeli government is still “withholding”.) It’s impossible to imagine a situation so bad continuing indefinitely. But the MEPs didn’t forecast any success for the hopes of the Israeli government and the “international community” that the Palestinians will rise up and throw off the Hamas government. They believe that it is more likely that the situation will solidify support behind Hamas, which they acknowledge as the elected government. More likely is the prospect of civil war or a coup by Abbas, who is importing large quantities of arms into the Gaza strip, a situation that the US is “completely relaxed” about (to quote Alyn). You can’t imagine anything more likely to please Olmert and Bush.
- We couldn’t take any encouragement from his assessment of the political leadership on either (or, more accurately, any) side of the conflict.
- His opinion of EU policy was scathing. The attempt to route part of the PA payroll as aid through Abbas’s office makes no sense at all, either in the context of the Hamas boycott (which it undermines, as far as it is effective at all), or in the context of helping the PA continue to operate (which it is completely ineffective at doing, since the amounts involved are so small). I was particularly struck by his opinion about the Rafah checkpoint, the only route into Gaza that is (supposedly) not under Israeli control. Rafah is open under the supervision of EU monitors, which means that when they can’t reach it it stays closed (this happens often). And where are the monitors living—remember, this is a checkpoint between Gaza and Egypt? Why, in Ashkelon, of course! That way, their access to Rafah is entirely under the control of the IDF. According to Alyn, the head of the EU “Border Assistance Mission” didn’t bother even to try to justify this arrangement to the MEPs
Alyn hopes to call a meeting of “stakeholders” in the Scottish community very soon. I know that before he went he discussed the situation with at least the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities. He plans on a meeting in early December, at which he hopes to be an honest broker in starting a dialogue between the different stakeholders, in the hope that a distinctive Scottish position will emerge. It’s a conscientious and constructive move, but I can’t say I’m wildly optimistic about the chances of the dialogue being very helpful.
tags: General author: admin comments: 2 Comments
November 16th, 2006
I went to a meeting today with this rather discouraging title, half-expecting a wild-eyed and disorganised presentation, even though friends had told me that it would be much better than that. (I can’t be the only one who felt that way, though; we have had two people sign off our mailing lists simply because the meeting was advertised on them.)
In fact, it was very good, with two speakers—one Israeli, one Palestinian— PowerPoint presentations, and a couple of films. I was only there part of the time and didn’t see the films, though we now have them on DVD. The presentation on the wall itself is now sadly routine, but what was new to me was a first-hand description of the non-violent demonstrations that have been regularly taking place at Bil’in (I’ve known about them for some time because of effective publicity from Gush Shalom). Like many villages along the route of the wall, Bil’in will be cut off from much (60%) of its farming land. The demonstrations there are important for several reasons: they are a continuing focus of resistance to the most visible symbol of the occupation; they show how effective non-violence can be, even against a state prepared to use extreme violence at any time; and they provide an opportunity and a practical example of Israelis and Palestinians organising and working together. As the Israeli speaker, Sarah Assouline, said “You can’t tell us that there is no partner for peace!”
About the violence: Sarah described how terrifying it is to face the police and the army at these demonstrations (adding that it was too terrifying for her!) People have been seriously injured at Bil’in and, in other places, have been killed in non-violent demonstrations against the wall. All the dead were Palestinians—the army doesn’t use live ammunition when Israelis are among the demonstrators, so that is one very important role that they can fulfil. But I still wouldn’t care to face the teargas, rubber bullets, and experimental riot control weapons that the army tries out at Bil’in.
When I talked to Sarah outside the meeting, she emphasised that she is a woman on a mission. The demonstrators are facing huge legal bills, even though they have an advocate who has been working for them for very little pay. They aren’t terribly good at advertising themselves—unlike Gush Shalom (see links) who they work with on the demonstrations. I don’t suppose the associations of their name can help much. But after seeing the presentation, I thought that what they are doing is important, and we should support them. How about doing a benefit for them—we could raise some money, show the films and tell people about Bil’in, and have a good time too?
tags: General author: admin comments: 1 Comment
September 30th, 2006
I’ve collected together the responses mailed to SJJP during the first couple of days after the letter appeared. The mixture ranges, as you would expect, from “shame on you” to “good on you”. There were replies in the Herald in the several days following (here are the letter pages for 18th August and 21st August - I think there were others, but unfortunately the Herald doesn’t index more than two days back).
tags: General author: admin comments: No Comments
August 22nd, 2006
Our letter appeared in full in the Herald today, with no fewer than 20 signatures! It was interesting to see how easy it was to get people’s responses and signatures, compared to previous times. Obviously that’s partly because the Lebanon war has been (and will continue to be) such a sharp crisis, but I think this might be the start of a lasting increase in people’s willingness to speak out for justice in the Middle East.
A number of factors combine to silence Jews in Britain who want to say “not in my name”, including (at least) a sense of loyalty, discomfort with the idea of being identified, a feeling of powerlessness, and fear of the reaction from within our own community. These form a powerful combination, but we’ve seen over the past week that if we can overcome our isolation we can get a lot of strength from one another. It would be nice to think that this is the beginning of a sustained campaign.
tags: General author: admin comments: 6 Comments
August 17th, 2006
We only started organising for the demonstration a few days beforehand, so it was very gratifying to have a good turnout, a speaker (Barrie Levine, who gave an excellent speech), a banner, placards and leaflets. People joined the SJJP group from Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee, and the far North. One supporter, in her eighties, made a 17-hour round trip to join us! She said, like many other people there, that sometimes you just have to act, and this war in Lebanon is such a time.
There was a lot of enthusiasm among the people behind our banner. Protesting against the Lebanon war has given us focus and energy, which have been hard to sustain in the last year in the face of the Gaza withdrawal and the remorseless grinding down of the OPT. No matter what the short-term results of the negotiations over the ceasefire resolution, there’s going to be a need for sustained campaigning for a long time to come. The response to today’s demonstration is a hopeful sign that we can do that.
tags: General author: admin comments: 5 Comments
August 13th, 2006
So I’ve been putting off posting this, because I couldn’t figure out what to say about it. My first reaction was a sigh, “it goes on.” At some point, I almost stop being surprised. Almost.
I cannot grasp what anyone thinks they have to gain from this. All explanations of the Middle Eastern conflict stop making sense. There is no explanation that I can see anymore.
Shortages in Gaza continue, a ceasefire collapses, a soldier is kidnapped, dozens if not hundreds of Gazan civilians will die for that, a Hezbollah raid, IDF forces in Lebanon…where did it begin? Where will it end?
This didn’t begin with a soldier being kidnapped. This didn’t begin with a crisis in Gaza. This didn’t begin with Hamas being elected, or the intifada, or the collapse of the Camp David agreement, or with 1967. We can go back and back and back and talk about provokations and responses and never get anywhere.
What I will say is that this game of “capture a soldier, and we’ll starve 1.4 million civilians” is grossly mismatched. This game of “illegally occupy a land and a people for 40 years and expect them to be on good behaviour” is stupid. And goodness only knows what Hamas thinks it can stand to gain by blowing stuff up.
And the rest of the world…well, doesn’t really care. We carry on with our lives. We worry instead about oil prices, and maybe, just maybe, you’ll stop to think for a minute about why on earth the BBC is calling it an Israel crisis. I mean, the Isrealis aren’t the ones starving. No media bias there, of course.
There is the expected statement from Washington saying nothing much, just before the US pulled out their veto on regard for human rights a UN resolution condemning Israel’s Gaza incursion (Can’t link to the article because the Haaretz page is down).
Now Israel is “back” in Gaza. The scare quotes are because they were never really “out”. Unsurprising, given the support they get.
So call me a pessimist, but I don’t see an end. It just goes on.
More by Johann Hari, columnist for the Independent.
There’s a Parliamantary Early Day Motion (EDM 2568) that calls for a cessation of violence in the Middle East:
‘That this House expresses grave concern about the escalating crisis in the Middle East that has now spread to Lebanon; notes that Israel’s disproportionate military actions in Gaza and Lebanon, including an air and sea blockade of Lebanon, attacks on the airport in Beirut on 13th July and the killing of at least 35 Lebanese civilians within the first 24 hours, risk provoking further regional conflict by seriously jeopardising the fragile political landscape in Lebanon; condemns Hizballah’s rocket attacks on Israel and the abduction of Israeli soldiers; urges the British Government to call for an immediate cessation of violence from all parties and to condemn the killing of all civilians on all sides; and calls on all sides to respect the other’s sovereignty and international law and to release all prisoners held illegally without trial as a means to end the current crisis.’
Write to your MPs and urge them to support EDM 2568.
Technorati tags: Middle East, Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Politics
tags: General author: avileh comments: No Comments
July 17th, 2006
Jews for Justice for Palestinians published a full-page advert in the Times on Thursday, in a statement titled “What is Israel doing?”, expresses opposition to the Israeli response to the capture of Gilad Shalit, and which calls for opposition to the blockade. The statement was signed by 300 Jews in Britain, and you can view the formateed statement with a full list of signatories at their webpage. Here is the text of the statement.
See also Gideon Levy’s Haaretz op-ed piece, and the BBC article.
Technorati tag: Gaza
tags: Blockade, Solidarity author: avileh comments: No Comments
July 9th, 2006
The Gaza blockade continues. The UN warns that the Isrealis are will be worsening a humanitarian crisis if they do not restore the fuel and electricity supplies to Gaza that have been suspended for the last four days, depleting emergency supplies. Electricity and fuel are necessary to power water pumps, so failure to restore them will result in thirst and disease due to lack of clean drinking water. The Red Cross is negotiating with Israel to pursuade Israel to allow humanitarian aid, especially medicines and food into Gaza.
‘Under international law, Israel has the obligation to allow humanitarian supplies into Gaza. It also has the duty to ensure that the vital supplies for the population, including food and medicine, are adequate’
Yesterday, Israeli troops seized a third of the Palestinian cabinet and a further 23 legislators, (democratically elected, remember) all of whom are members of Hamas. The Israelis claim that this is the response to a captured Isreali soldier and Hamas’s declaration of the end of a ceasefire.
Why don’t the Israelis and the international community see how disproportional and unjustified this response is? The blockade has created a situation where Gazans access to food, drinking water, medicine, electricity, and their salaries, has been cut without justification, as collective punishment for the election of Hamas. As predicted, the crisis that the Israelis caused did not result in “security”, but in a Hamas response to the occupation.
To put the Hamas response in perspective, the raid that the Isrealis are citing as cause for this latest closure of Gaza resulted in the death of one soldier and the capture of another. Compare this to the number of people who have died and will die as a result of malnutrition and illness that are directly caused by the blockade. For all that the Israelis cry “security reasons”, they are killing far more civilians than Hamas is, and all as part of illegal collective punishment.
Technorati tags: Hamas, Israel, Gaza
tags: Hamas, Blockade author: avileh comments: No Comments
June 30th, 2006
Despite the opposition to NATFHE’s motion on boycotting Israeli academics who do not publicly declare opposition to the occupation of Palestine, the motion passed narrowly at the NATFHE conference this past weekend. The motion has sparked some strong reactions.
Technorati tags: NATFHE, academic boycott
tags: General author: avileh comments: No Comments
May 30th, 2006
