The news came as 4 of 8 Palestinian prisoners protesting their Administrative Detention have been on hunger strike for over 70 days [2 of them for 78 days]. There are currently 308 Palestinian Administrative Detainees in Israeli jails.

In addition, some 1600 or so other Palestinian prisoners started their own hunger strike on 17 April, which included support for the Palestinian Administrative Detainees — but which also demanded an end to extensive periods of isolation in solitary confinement for others, and an end to the ban on family visits to prisoners from Gaza, as well as a repeal of punitive measures put in place as reprisal for the conditions that Gilad Shalit was held in, in Gaza, for some five years.

By email from the Israeli Government Press Office tonight came this toughly-worded communication by the Israel Prison Service: “End of the Hunger Strike by Security Prisoners”. [A link was given to a Hebrew-language website, here]. Here is an annotated version of the text:

“1. This afternoon (Monday), 14.5.12, the security prisoners stopped their hunger strike after 28 days. [Note: 99.9 percent of Palestinian prisoner in Israel jails are classified as "security prisoners".  The collective hunger strike action began on 17 April, which Palestinians mark as Prisoner's Day.  But individual hunger strikes to protest orders of Administrative Detention, following the unprecendented example of Khader Adnan, who is now free, began 78 days ago.   And 7 or 8 Palestinians in advanced stages of  hunger strikes, 3 of them over 70 days, 2 on Day 78,  are in the Ramleh prison clinic.]

2. The declaration regarding the end of the strike was made possible in the wake of the understandings that have been formulated in recent days, the main point of which is the security prisoners’ signature on a commitment not to engage in terrorism inside the prison walls in exchange for various easements in several areas, including the return of prisoners held in separation to the prison wings and the possibility of first degree relatives’ visits to prisoners from Gaza. [Note, I personally am bursting with curiosity to know what kind of "terrorism" was going on inside the secure walls of the Israeli Prison System which will now stop, as part of this deal.  Was it the hunger strikes?  Is it the smuggling of sim cards and mobile phones?]

3. Pursuant to the ISA [Israel Security Agency] statement regarding the understandings, following are several additional points [Note: we did not receive the ISA statement, but the New York Times did -- see lower in this post]:

A. An inter-ministerial committee chaired by the Israel Prison Service Commissioner, and with the participation of representatives from the Justice, Foreign and Health ministries, as well as from the IDF (Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories and the Judge Advocate General), the Israel Security Agency, the National Security Council and the Israel Police, evaluated the significance of the prisoners’ requests and issued a serious of recommendations to the political echelon.
B. Before the strike, the Israel Prison Service Commissioner appointed an additional team to evaluate the prisoners’ requests regarding their prison living conditions; in the wake of the halt to the strike, several actions will be carried out regarding which positive decisions have been taken.
C. The decisions of the committee were shown to prisoners who did not strike, thus preventing their joining and expanding the strikers.
D. It should be pointed out that throughout the strike, the strikers were under close medical care and received professional treatment as necessary, including check-ups and hospitalization according to need.
E. Upon the conclusion of the strike, the medical monitoring will continue in order to prevent possible complications from an unsupervised return to eating.
F. Security deployment in the prisons and dialogue with the strikers throughout the period prevented a worsening of the situation including possible violent scenarios.
G. Throughout the strike, the Israel Prison Service took care regarding prisoners’ rights according to law and acted with complete transparency vis-à-vis official oversight agencies”.

Seriously, what could the Israeli Prison Services mean when they said the prisoners had signed a “commitment not to engage in terrorism inside the prison walls”? What terrorism is going inside the prison walls? This we would really like to know.

From the New York Times, we learn that “Israel’s internal security agency, known as the Shin Bet, said in a statement on Monday that the agreement became possible after the prisoners made a commitment ‘to completely halt terrorist activity inside Israeli prisons’, and ‘to refrain from all activity that constitutes practical support for terrorism, including recruiting people for terrorist activity, guidance, financing, coordinating among recruits, aiding recruits’, and related activities”. This is reported here.

The NYTimes also reported that “Israeli officials said they had made no commitment to end the practice of incarceration without formal charges or a trial, known as administrative detention, and that current administrative detainees would serve out their terms. But Issa Qaraqe, the minister of prisoner affairs for the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority, said earlier on Monday that there were understandings that the terms of the roughly 300 prisoners being held without charges would not be extended … Last week, Israel’s Supreme Court rejected appeals for the immediate release of Mr. Diab and Mr. Halahleh, but the judges expressed reservations about any extension of their terms without further investigation and better judicial oversight”.

The 1,600 or so prisoners with the multiple demands are said to be waiting to see if Israel will fulfill its part of the deal.
Then, a bit after midnight, this news started to come in, via Twitter:
Al-Jazeera’s Rana Zabaneh – @RZabaneh:“#PalHunger: #ThaerHalahleh told his father he will end his hunger strike to be released on June 5″

Gaza Youth Break Out – @GazaYBO:
Lawyer Jawad Boulos: Thaer Hlahalh; Bilal Diab Stopped the strike after an agreement 2 end the AD; will be released on #June5.

Linah Alsaafin – @LinahAlsaafin:
“#BilalThiab according to what #ThaerHalahleh’s dad told me will be released August 17 after his administrative detention ends #PalHunger”

Maath Musleh @MaathMusleh :
“AD on hunger strike will end hunger strike in the morning when they receive official papers to confirm their detention will not be renewed!”

No one died. This is a major achievement.

The meeting was held in the Israeli Prime Minister’s Official Residence in Jerusalem.

Photo posted on YNet here and also on the website of the Israeli Foreign Ministry here – it does not look good for the Palestinians hereinvolved — is that why Salam Fayyad and Yasser Abed Rabbo did not attend?

In the morning Fayyad presided over a meeting of the P.A. cabinet in Ramallah.

By midday, as the P.A. Cabinet meeting was drawing to a close, or soon thereafter, there were hints that Fayyad might not head the delegation that delivered a long-awaited letter signed by Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas.

But, there was then total silence for some seven hours.

Sometime between 6:30 and 7:00 p.m., the news broke, via AP [and Tweeted by @diaahadid] that Fayyad had “backed out” of the meeting, and the Palestinian side offered no public explanation.

The first AP report, published on a Seattle news site,  said that “Israeli officials said Netanyahu would accept the letter from whoever arrived”…

The Jerusalem Post reported here that Israeli officials commented: “Fayyad was reluctant to be seen engaging” on day 1000 Palestinian prisoners protested conditions in Israeli jails”.  But, it has been know for a long time that the meeting would be coinciding with the day that is widely marked in Palestinian cities as “Palestinian Prisoner’s Day”… and the hunger strike actions were known in advance as well.

The JPost noted further down in their story that Fayyad’s “last-minute cancellation may cast new light on divisions within the Palestinian political establishment”…

The first AP story, published here, reported that “Shortly before the meeting, Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said only he + security official Majed Faraj would attend”. AP wrote that Erekat said: “‘We are on our way’, he said, giving no explanation for Fayyad’s absence”.

Majed Faraj is later identified as the Chief of PA General Intelligence Service ["mukhabarat", it was later explained, because there are so many security groupings].

[It is not clear who the third man is who's shown in the YNet news photo, above, but it could be Netanyahu's negotiations adviser, Yitzhak Molcho].

The Secretary of the P.L.O. Executive Committee, Yasser Abed Rabbo, was supposed to accompany Fayyad and Erekat. There was no explanation of why Abed Rabbo — like Fayyad — did not go to the meeting.

Wire service reports said that Fayyad had reservations about participating in the meeting because of concern about appearances, and how it would be viewed.  AFP noted that Fayyad had never announced or confirmed he would participate… And Barak Ravid reported in an updated story for Haaretz, posted here, that “The prospect that Fayyad would not take part in the meeting with Netanyahu was a source of major embarrassment on the Palestinian side over the past two days. Abbas had previously announced publicly that Fayyad would attend, in part to underline the importance of the letter that was being delivered to the Israeli prime minister. For his part, however, Fayyad opposed an exchange of letters, contending that it would not produce results”.

[Ravid -- @BarakRavid -- sent out a Tweet on Wednesday morning saying "I heard this from at least 3 sources who spoke to Fayyad"...]

It is equally true that the prospect of Fayyad taking part in the meeting with Netanyahu is also a source of major embarassment for the Palestinian side, and as to what Sa’eb Erekat did.

The Israeli Project, in what is perhaps a litmus test for Israeli reactions, said in an email that it viewed as “preconditions” to negotiations what the Abbas letter called “obligations”: “Palestinian Authority (PA) Prime Minister Salam Fayyad was a no-show Tuesday as a Palestinian delegation presented Fayyad’s Israeli counterpart with a letter outlining preconditions to peace talks”. it said.

Palestinians expressed little interest in the meeting.  It was not covered on Palestinian TV [Yasser Abed Rabbo is the current Director].

UPDATE: Palestinian TV had a 23-minute interview with fast-talking Sa’eb Erekat at the end of its news program on Wednesday, 18 April, a day after the letter presentation. Erekat justified everything he did…

The first report that Fayyad would participate was published in early April, in an AFP story [which suggests that Saeb Erekat was a possible source].  It was then also built up in an advisory sent out by The Israel Project, which we reported on 4 April here.  The DRAFT letter that Abbas signed was leaked to the  Israeli media [Barak Ravid of Haaretz, then AFP + The Times of Israel] — either the Palestinian media did not get it, or they were not interested.

According to Ravid, it was Abbas’ decision that Fayyad should take part.   Then, Abbas himself went on a long tour of unclear imperative to distant spots.  It was earlier announced that any Palestinian government shake-up would not occur until after Abbas’ return…

Ravid’s story in Haaretz also reported that “Fayyad indicated to Abbas, who has been on a tour of Asian nations, that he did not intend to take part in the meeting with Netanyahu. Nonetheless, Saeb Erekat, who heads the Palestinian negotiating team, continued telling journalists, even hours before the meeting, that Fayyad would be there”.

The Times of Israel later noted here that “until the delegation arrived, Netanyahu did not know whether Fayyad would be coming”.

AFP wrote later that “Speaking to AFP shortly afterwards, Erekat expressed satisfaction over the brief encounter. ‘It was a serious meeting’, he said. ‘Netanyahu will study the letter seriously and answer it within two weeks’.”  This is posted here.

AP wrote later, in a separate report, that “Erekat said after the meeting that Netanyahu had promised to “seriously consider” the Palestinian president’s letter. ‘We hope that the commitments on both sides will be honored’, Erekat said. ‘The current status quo cannot be maintained’.” This is posted here.

Erekat’s devotion to the negotiations process is evident — even after he resigned over a year ago, following the damaging series of reports on Al-Jazeera about the Palestinian Papers [diplomatic cables and other notes of the negotiations], he still persisted.  He explained a few months ago that Abbas had never accepted his resignation.

What Erekat is going to get out of this singular pursuit is unclear.

Abbas has, in the process of consolidating his hold on the reins of Palestinian political power, also developed great expertise in manipulating people, and in long-term revenge.

In any case, it’s clear that even if Fayyad had gone to the meeting with Netanyahu, there would not have been any resumption of negotiations then and there — despite what several major wire services are writing.  It was never intended as a negotiating session.

In Ramallah yesterday, when I asked a P.L.O. Executive Committee member about the possible letter delivery today, he rolled his eyes, grimaced, then told me: “Our problems are greater than anyone knows”…

After the meeting, a joint Israeli-Palestinian statement said that “both sides are committed to achieving peace and hope that the exchange of letter will help promote it”…

In DRAFT form, as reported by The Times of Israel, here, the Abbas letter said:

“Now, as a result of actions taken by successive Israeli governments, the Palestinian National Authority no longer has any authority, and no meaningful jurisdiction in the political, economic, social, territorial and security spheres. In other words, the P.A. lost its reason d’être. In recognition of the above and in furtherance of the peace process and the agreements we signed with Israel, which were premised on international legitimacy, international law, and internationally-recognized terms of reference, we call on the Government of Israel to do the following:

1- Accept the two-state solution on the 1967 borders with possible minor and mutually agreed upon land swaps of equal size and value;

2- Stop all settlement activities, including in East Jerusalem;

3- Release all prisoners, in particular those imprisoned prior to the end of 1994; and

              4- Revoke all decisions taken since 2000 which undermine agreements signed between Israel and the PLO”.

The AFP report tonight says that the version of the letter that they had seen says: “We stand ready to immediately resume negotiations the minute we receive your positive response on these points”.

That phrase is not included in the DRAFT that the Times of Israel obtained and published on Sunday.

Hamas did not say a word — Did anyone wonder what Hamas might have thought of having Fayyad deliver Abbas letter saying PA has lost its “Raison d’etre” to Netanyahu? [UPDATE: it its later report Tuesday night, AP wrote that "In an interview with the {London-based} al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper, Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar ... said the letter was a 'trick' to fool the Palestinian people that 'something is going on in the so-called peace process'."]

As the NYTimes noted in its report, by Ethan Bronner, posted here that “The Palestinian letter also expresses regret that Israel opposes the Palestinian Authority’s efforts to reconcile with Hamas”.

Yes, and it also notes that the Oslo Accords deliberately enshrined the concept that the West Bank and Gaza are integral parts of the same territorial unit.

Having Salam Fayyad deliver a letter that says “the P.A. has lost its raison d’etre” to Israeli PM Netanyahu sends a strong message that the letter refers only to the West Bank, which is under the control of the P.A. in Ramallah — while Gaza under Hamas is a different matter entirely.

In any case, as the Washington Post reported, “Fayyad has also been vocal recently about the Palestinian Authority’s declining power, holding Israel partly responsible for that. But he has insisted that the body not be dissolved — an idea that, according to some accounts, was raised in early versions of Abbas’s letter”. This is published here.

Palestinian President Abbas, meanwhile, was travelling — he’d been in Japan, then Thailand, then Sri Lanka, and it was announced this evening — about the same time Erekat was rushing to hand the Abbas letter to Netanyahu — that Abbas had decided to open a Palestinian Embassy in the Maldives…

[A communique issued after the P.A. Cabinet meeting said: "The Palestinian Cabinet called today during its weekly meeting, chaired by Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, upon the United Nations to mobilize immediately to exert serious pressure on Israel to release all Palestinian detainees, particularly veteran ones, affirming that at the same time Israel should treat detainees according to international conventions and covenants"... Very tellingly, the Cabinet communique also "welcomed the Quartet’s call to develop the National Authority’s ability to respond to the Palestinian people’s needs, protect its accomplishments achieved by the National Authority institutions and to build on those accomplishments. This is in addition to the necessity to assist the National Authority in confronting its fiscal challenges by fulfilling the needed financial commitments to cover the $1.1 billion in the current year’s budget deficit, as well as the call to speed up the reform of the clearance revenues system. The Cabinet affirmed the importance of having the Quartet actively following-up and creating mechanisms that would guarantee Israel’s compliance to the implementation of these commitments. In addition, the Quartet needs to have Israel commit to a total end of settlement activities including in East Jerusalem and its surroundings"... In other words, while this communique does not give the impression that the Cabinet has lost its "raison d'etre",  it does suggest that the hard work should be done by the UN, and by the Quartet -- not by the PA...]

UPDATE: On the other hand, this might not happen after all. One of the main recipients of leaked documents, Barak Ravid, has just reported on Haaretz that “Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on Tuesday morning that the meeting between between Benjamin Netanyahu and the Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad is likely to be canceled … In an interview with Army Radio, Barak said that Fayyad is not interested in meeting with Netanyahu, because of differences of opinion over the issue of Palestinian tax revenues. In addition to this, a European diplomat and two Israeli officials confirmed that Fayyad is against the passing of a missive to Netanyahu from PA President Mahmoud Abbas, which was due to take place at the meeting, and that he does want to head the Palestinian delegation meeting Netanyahu in Jerusalem. The time and place of the meeting were still unconfirmed on Tuesday morning. Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said on Tuesday morning that he had still not been notified by Israel of the time the meeting is due to take place. Erekat also insisted that Fayyad would be attending the meeting … If Fayyad does not attend the meeting, Saeb Erekat will head the delegation. If this is the case, it is uncertain whether Netanyahu would actually attend thye meeting, or whether he would prefer Israeli negotiator Yitzhak Molcho to attend in his stead. Saeb Erekat, chief Palestinian negotiator, who is expected to attend Tuesday meeting, told the United Nations envoy to the Middle East, Robert Serry, that the meeting’s goal is merely transferring Abbas’s message and that what is important is what happens afterwards”.

OK.

This situation becomes even more ridiculous.

We have reported about this letter — draft versions in Arabic + English were leaked to the Israeli media — for the past two weeks.

According to these leaked DRAFT versions, Abbas will say that the P.A. has lost its “raison d’etre” — a nice French term, meaning that Abbas is saying the P.A. has lost any meaning or purpose, so there is no reason for it to exist.

Does anyone else remember the late Yasser Arafat saying in Geneva, when he was being pinched to say certain things in December 1988, after his proclamation of Palestinian independence in Algiers in November 1988, and he said that aspects of the PLO Charter were “caduc” [another French word, meaning something like "no longer valid", or maybe "defacto, null and void"].

If this does not mean that Abbas is dissolving the P.A. and turninhe g the keys over to the Israelis — unless of course they immediately recognize the State of Palestine, stop all settlement building, and agree on minor land swaps — I don’t know what it could mean.

It is not clear what the real and lasting significance of this letter will be.

For one thing, it will not bind Hamas.

Perhaps this is part of the Israeli interest in this “pas de deux” [a dance step, as in "it takes two to tango"].

Though Hamas might not mind too much having the P.A. declare itself “caduc”, the way this move is being choreographed will only entrench the division between the West Bank and Gaza.

The DRAFT version of the letter does say that the Oslo Accords have been rolled back in many areas — and in the same text, the letter notes the Oslo Accords’ insistence that Gaza and the West Bank are parts of a single territorial unit…

Al-Arabiya’s website is reporting that independent P.L.O. Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi [who ran in the 2006 Palestine Legislative Council elections on the same ticket as Fayyad] explained that this letter “is a last ditch effort indicating that we’re doing everything possible in order to realize a two-state solution … We hope that there’s a positive response, but we’re sending a message that, without one, we have a strategy for what follows”.

The same post on Al-Arabiya notes that Abbas told the official Palestinian News Agency WAFA last week that “All options are all on the table for Palestinians, with the exception of dissolving the national authority or withdrawing recognition of Israel. We are not seeking the isolation of Israel, but rather to isolate its settlement policy”…

The Times of Israel said that the DRAFT letter from Abbas was “bitter”.

Haaretz’s Barak Ravid first wrote about this letter ten days ago, here, as we reported here — but Haaretz did not publish the full text.

In his article, Ravid noted that “The letter was meant to include a threat to dismantle the PA, although that paragraph was later taken out due to heavy U.S. pressure”.

Ravid also reported the news that at the end of March, “a secret meeting was held between Saeb Erekat and [Netanyahu adviser Yitzhak] Molho. While the two hold occasional phone conversations, last week’s session was the first meeting between the two officials in two and a half months. In the meeting, Erekat relayed the content of the letter Abbas intends to pass on to Netanyahu in the coming days. Molho and Erekat are expected to meet again before the Palestinian delegation arrives for the meeting with Netanyahu”.

Ravid did Tweet the DRAFT letter’s four pages, in Arabic, and the links were included in our post, here.

But, it is likely that the letter that will be delivered is in English, because when Israelis and Palestinians sit together for negotiations, they speak in English, and when they draft agreements [like the Oslo Accords], it is done in English. Really.

In the letter, which is still apparently in DRAFT form, Abbas writes:

“Twenty years ago, we concluded with Israel an agreement under international auspices which was intended to take the Palestinian people from occupation to independence. Now, as a result of actions taken by successive Israeli governments, the Palestinian National Authority no longer has any authority, and no meaningful jurisdiction in the political, economic, social, territorial and security spheres. In other words, the P.A. lost its reason d’être”.

Journalists [including here] are reporting that Abbas has “stopped short” of dissolving the P.A.

Abbas has been reported to be contemplating just that. His former negotiating partner, Yossi Beilin, called on Abbas to dissolve the P.A. in an article published on FP recently here. Beilin wrote to Abbas, via FP:

“One simply cannot continue with an interim arrangement for almost 20 years. This was not the intention when we spearheaded the Oslo process in late 1992 — you from Tunis and I from Jerusalem — or when we assiduously worked on what subsequently became known as the ‘Beilin-Abu Mazen Agreement’ between 1993 and 1995. You and I both understand that the current situation is a ticking time bomb … Do not hesitate for a moment! Do not accept the request of President Obama, who merely wants to be left undisturbed before election day. Do not let Prime Minister Netanyahu hide behind the fig leaf of the Palestinian Authority — impose upon him, once again, the responsibility for the fate of 4 million Palestinians. Remain as the head of the Palestine Liberation Organization, which will give you the authority to lead the political negotiations if and when they resume. But for the sake of your own people, and for the sake of peace, you cannot let this farce continue”.

The words from Abbas are clear — and it does not seem possible to understand them as saying anything other than the present game is over.

If this doesn’t mean that the P.A. is being dismantled, then the Palestinian people have good reason to want to know why not.

UPDATE: In an informal poll conducted Monday afternoon in Ramallah, four Palestinian men all expressed puzzlement, uncertainty, and thinly-disguised disgust.   One, a former journalist, gave a standard template analysis: “Abbas is just playing for time… he knows nothing will happen until after Obama is re-elected in November”, he said.  One, a senior leader in a small Palestinian faction, said only: “Our problems are more serious than anybody really knows”.

Meantime, the real question is: why will Salam Fayyad be delivering this letter to Netanyahu? [It may happen on Tuesday 17 April in Jerusalem...]

Is it just because Netanyahu prefers Fayyad to Sa’eb Erekat? It’s true that Fayyad and Erekat will be accompanied by the Secretary of the P.L.O. Executive Committee, Yasser Abed Rabbo — but Fayyad’s position is only with the P.A.

All three men are expendable — though all of them have survived strong criticism before.

Fayyad is the Prime Minister and Finance Minister of the Palestinian Authority [P.A.] created by agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization [PLO] as a local temporary and subsidiary body to administer the occupied Palestinian territory during negotiations.

Fayyad was appointed PM in the P.A. by Abbas to replace Hamas leader Ismail Haniyya, after Hamas kicked Fatah/Palestinian Preventive Security out of Gaza in mid-June 2007, and Abbas retaliated to that “military coup”, as he called it at the time, by a political coup dissolving a short-lived “National Unity” Government. This is one reason why Hamas refused to agree to keeping Salam Fayyad as PM in a new “technocratic” government that was supposed to be formed after a reconciliation agreement concluded in Cairo last year.

Fayyad himself has never been formally involved in negotiating, though he has had a couple of official meetings in Jerusalem previously [one was with Condoleezza Rice, during the Annapolis process].  Fayyad is a resident of East Jerusalem, and does not need a permit to travel around Jerusalem [or within Israel, if he wanted...]

We have speculated on this in a previous post [on 7 April], published here.

The DRAFT letter from Abbas, meanwhile, calls on the Government of Israel to do the following:

“1- Accept the two-state solution on the 1967 borders with possible minor and mutually agreed upon land swaps of equal size and value;
2- Stop all settlement activities, including in East Jerusalem;
3- Release all prisoners, in particular those imprisoned prior to the end of 1994; and
4- Revoke all decisions taken since 2000 which undermine agreements signed between Israel and the PLO”.

These are obligations, the Abbas DRAFT letter says [meaning, not "pre-conditions" as the Israellis complain].

If Israel refuses to honor these obligations, the Abbas DRAFT letter says:
“We will seek the full and complete implementation of international law as it pertains to the powers and responsibilities of Israel as occupying power in all of the occupied Palestinian territory.  For the Palestinian Authority—now stripped of all meaningful authority—cannot continue to honor agreements while Israel refuses to even acknowledge its commitments. The P.A. is no longer as was agreed and this situation cannot continue”.

What does that mean — “The P.A. is no longer as was agreed and this situation cannot continue”…

It does not sound like a call to return to the situation before the Camp David talks of the summer of 2000, or to the pre-Second-Intifada situation…

It sounds, in fact, just like a decision to dissolve the P.A. …

Hundreds of tickets were cancelled at the request of Israeli authorities, who circulated the names of those they suspected were flying as part of the Air Flotilla “Welcome to Palestine” campaign.

Here is a copy of the letter sent by Israeli authorities to European airport authorities:

The Air Flotilla participants intend to tell Israeli passport control agents that the purpose of their visit is to go to Bethlehem [in the occupied West Bank].

And, here is a copy of the letter that Israeli authorities intend to distribute, in various languages, to mock Air Flotilla participants:

This was published on Saturday in a post published here by Dimi Reider on +972 magazine [and tweeted on Sunday by @fqadi, here].

With the grammatical mistakes made in the form, one lawyer argued that it is logically impossible for any signer to be accused of membership in a “pro-Palestinian organization” — after all, anyone who signs such a form declares “I can’t be…” Dimi Reider’s post quoted Israeli immigration attorney Yadim Elam as saying that if the person who signed this document “ ‘cannot‘ be a member of a pro-Palestinian organization then I guess she is not…”

More seriously, there is no way of knowing which groups or organizations Israeli considers to be “pro-Palestinian”. There is certainly no way for anyone to have any certainty that anyone else is [or is not] a member of any “pro-Palestinian” organization. Nor, with such a broadly-worded phrase, is there any assured way to discern what Israeli officials might consider to be “pro-Palestinian activities”.

A piece published in Haaretz, here makes an attempt at explanation: “The Israel Defense Forces is not allowing vehicles in or out of A-Ram, a Palestinian city of 60,000 northeast of Jerusalem, because of a recent increase in stone and firebomb throwing at army patrols by local youth, the army said. Late Sunday night, soldiers placed large boulders across all four lanes of the road at the city’s main entrance to block incoming and outgoing vehicular traffic. Pedestrians are not restricted, the IDF said”.

Oh.

LATEST UPDATE: Ma’an News Agency is reporting on Thursday afternoon [12 April] here that the IDF has removed the huge square boulders that it petulantly put at the end of the main street of ar-Ram last weekend.The IDF put the boulders on the end of the main street that comes out right across the street from a large IDF military base [8211]. Other than being a graphic expression of petulance, the gesture was empty of significance, as Palestinians found it possible to move around from the other end of the main street, beside The Wall — or, alternatively, from the alternative option of a bumpy dirt track that opened out right next to the blocked main street… The Ma’an report said that the roadblocks were removed “after intervention from the Palestinian Authority, officials [presumably, Palestinian] said Thursday”.

UPDATE: I drove through Qalandiya and into ar-Ram to see for myself, between noon and 1 pm on Wednesday. I discovered that the road along The Wall was open, and cars can pass in and out of ar-Ram through that route. It is at the other, western, end of the main street of ar-Ram, right across from an IDF military base [8211] where the big boulders have been dropped to block the road. But, I also saw, cars have found another way out of that side of ar-Ram, and are using a dirt road in single file to come out just beside the boulder-blocked entrance.

Ar-Ram was once a beautiful garden community in between Jerusalem and Ramallah. It grew exponentially in recent decades, with thousands of Hebronites moving in and opening shops which thrived on commerce, taking advantage of the daily travellers passing in front of their road-side stores and shops.

It is located just before Qalandia. As the Checkpoint was established there at the start of the Second Intifada, new opportunities for roadside commerce developed, without severe disruption of the established businesses along the route between Jerusalem and Ramallah.

But, when the Checkpoint became more of a “terminal” [looking like the entrance to a cattle processing facility, or worse], the IDF’s construction of The Wall began around Qalandia.

No one was informed about the route of The Wall. Palestinian residents of the area watched it take shape, and only learned what path it would take as the construction proceeded.

Qalandia Checkpoint became a gate in The Wall, which was built at both edges of the checkpoint. The Wall then sliced off the Qalandia/Jerusalem Airport, on the very edge of the area [the runway comes right up to the very edge of the Qalandia checkpoint], but on the “Israeli” or “Jerusalem” side of The Wall, and not on the “West Bank” side.

The route of The Wall then extended south, down the middle of the road connecting Jerusalem and Ramallah. Here, it’s path carved out the Atarot industrial zone, so that it is on the “Israeli” or “Jerusalem” side of The Wall. On the other side of The Wall, here, is ar-Ram…

Now, ar-Ram is like an appendix, surrounded on three sides of the Wall. The suburb of Dahiet al-Bariid, on the south side of ar-Ram, is divided by The Wall into two, with part on the “West Bank” side, and the other part on the “Jerusalem” side [as some of its residents had asked the Israeli Supreme Court to order, which the Court did].

Blocking off the main street with large boulders now, easily, cuts ar-Ram off completely for vehicular traffic. But, there are many many people living in the small and encircled area.

See UPDATE above — There is a way in an out of ar-Ram, but it is the only way in and out [plus the dirt track that emerges beside the blocked entrance]. The first Palestinian football/soccer stadium upgraded by FIFA, the Faisal al-Husseini Stadium, is located in ar-Ram. there are already unbearable traffic jams in and around Qalandia … And, there is no hospital in ar-Ram. What if there is a mass medical emergency? How will ambulances be able to operate?

The mayor of ar-Ram noted that “more than 70 percent of A-Ram residents work in Israel proper, while nearly 60 percent of the city’s pupils study in Jerusalem or in schools out of A-Ram”

He said this sudden and shocking move by the IDF was “collective punishment”.

The ar-Ram mayor told Haaretz: “It’s true, there were incidents [rock throwing, etc]. But how many people were there? No more than 20 to 30 little kids who see this as a game. If something like this would happen in Tel Aviv, would they close down the whole city? And why would there be army or police patrols around here anyway? Israelis don’t come here”.

The Palestinian Authority Cabinet recently adopted a set of recommendations following the terrible crash in the road between ar-Ram and the Jaba’a checkpoint, just before [or after] the junction in front of the Adam settlement. In the crash, a fuel truck collided with a bus carrying kindergarten schoolchildren from the Palestinian towns of Anata and the Shuafat refugee camp on an outing, in which five small kids and one of their teachers died. The Palestinian Cabinet recommendations involved establishing of an important civil emergency coordination point inside ar-Ram…

For purposes of the article, and after having been asked by Haaretz, some further explanation was given: “The IDF Spokesman said that during the past few weeks, ‘representatives of the Civil Administration approached area residents and officials of the Palestinian Authority and asked them to stop the violent and dangerous behavior; when there was no response, the obstacles were placed. Placing obstructions in Judea and Samaria is done in accordance with situational and security assessments. The IDF works to assure a normal life for all the residents of the region, while taking all necessary security precautions’.”

Bowen [@jfjbowen] also Tweeted this:
Concert soon to 11541 empty red chairs, one for every person killed during siege of #Sarajevo #Bosnia:

And, here’s another photo taken and Tweeted by Jenan Moussa [@jenanmoussa]

The International Committee of the Red Cross has reportedly made arrangements to bring her family — from the West Bank, a significant Israeli concession — to say a brief goodbye as Hana is sent through the frightful Erez locked gates and long corridors devoid of any human presence except through remote Israeli security cameras.

Reuters reported in the evening that “Shalabi arrived in Gaza before nightfall in an ambulance, after a tearful farewell with family members who saw her at Gaza’s Erez crossing with Israel before she was deported, medics who escorted her said”.   This report was posted here.

Her crossing apparently took place just before sunset, sometime between 17h00 and 18h00.

This Reuters photo is now posted on the Ma’an News Agency website:
.

Ma’an reported here that officials said Shalabi’s “Relatives were allowed to meet with her for an hour”.

Hana Shalabi — who Israeli government spokespersons say is a member of Islamic Jihad — was already jailed for about three years under Israeli Administrative Detention rules.   She was released in October in the recent prisoner swap that returned captured IDF soldier Gilad Shalit from Gaza after five years.  Then, she was suddenly re-arrested by the IDF and taken in a pre-dawn raid at her father’s home in the West Bank in early February.

In Israeli Administrative Detention, a military judge issues an order for periods that are usually six months long and renewable.  The only evidence is discussed in private between the Israeli military judge and Israeli security personnel, who provide supposedly secret evidence that neither the person under arrest nor his or her attorney will see.  Without knowing the evidence,  no defense is possible.  The only charges that are made public are “posing a threat to the security and peace of the region”.

Highlighting another aspect to this story, Ali Abunimah wrote here, on his Electronic Intifada website that “I have already noted that while Hana was being held without charge or trial, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s official spokesman Ofir Gendelman was using Twitter to defame and smear her – while she is denied any right to respond to these or any other accusations”. Something similar happened earlier, with Khader Adnan. But Ofir Gendelman has taken a lead on the Hana Shalabi case. Just today, Gendelman [@ofirgendelman], who works for the Prime Minister of Israel, Benyamin Netanyahu, and has identified his Twitter account as “official”, wrote the following Tweets: “#HanaShalabi is a terrorist who planned to kill innocent people” … “#HanaShalabi, an Islamic Jihad terrorist, was arrested because she planned terrorist attacks against Israelis. This is a war crime” … “Israel will not compromise on the security of its citizens. This is why Islamic Jihad terrorist #HanaShalabi was deported to Hamas in Gaza“. In his enthusiam for the task, Gendelman also Tweeted that “After she relocates to Gaza, she will not endanger any Israelis anymore” … “#HanaShalabi has committed to relinquish violence. If she does resume her terrorist activities w/ the Islamic Jihad, she will be re-arrested“. And, in a handly little description of Israeli Administrative Detention, Gendelman Tweeted that “evidence against #HanaShalabi came from intel, hence admin detention: a tool against terror when evidence is intel“. All of this is based on “intel”, Gendelman writes — suggesting that he has had privileged access to it. And, though none of this information has been made public, and Hana Shalabi therefore has no way to answer these accusations, Gendelman is using his official position to make accusations based on information that he implies is privileged, and that cannot be refuted because it is secret.

If Gendelman has had priviliged access to “intel” presented to an Israeli military court in the West Bank, this would appear to be a serious misuse of official position. Or, is there no separation of powers in the Israeli system of government?

If Gendelman is merely repeating what he has been told, without any checking to see if it might be accurate or not, then he is indulging in propaganda in a way that is unworthy of an official working in the office of the Prime Minister of a democratic country that runs by rule of law.

And, there is a serious logical [and propagandistic] flaw in his argumentation: seriously, how can @OfirGendelman, adviser to PM Netanyahu, use his Twitter “official account” to claim secret “intel” proves someone plots war crimes? And then, at the same time, after #HanaShalabi enters Gaza, @Ofirgendelman writes: “After she relocates to Gaza, she will not endanger any Israelis anymore”…

The agreement that requires Hana Shalabi to go to Gaza for three years was previously proposed and rejected by her weeks ago.

The sudden announcement that she had reconsidered and accepted going to Gaza was made on 28 March — after several days when neither her lawyers nor the independent medical doctor

This morning, Addameer said that that it learned Shalabi would be sent to Gaza today.

In a joint statement in the afternoon, Addameer and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel (PHR-Israel) said they were

“alarmed at the announcement that Hana Shalabi will be expelled to the Gaza Strip today, only three days after purportedly ending her 43-day hunger strike. Addameer and PHR-Israel condemn the Israeli Prison Service (IPS)’s denial of access to both parties to visit Ms. Shalabi in the days leading up to the deal for her release and expulsion to the Gaza Strip and since the deal was reportedly finalized on 29 March…

“Addameer and PHR-Israel fear that, given her grave medical condition, the restriction of access of Ms. Shalabi’s physician and lawyers, in addition to the prevention of family visits, were used as methods of coercion. Furthermore, serious concerns exist regarding the availability and arrangement of adequate medical care matching Ms. Shalabi’s urgent needs in light of her swift transfer … Ms. Shalabi’s release is contingent upon her expulsion for a period of three years to the Gaza Strip, which, although part of the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt), has been hermetically sealed off from the rest of the oPt by Israel. Therefore, with no guarantees that she or her family will be permitted to travel, her expulsion could essentially become an extension of her previous isolation from her home and family while in prison. There are numerous examples of similar agreements made by Israel regarding the forced transfer or deportation of Palestinian political prisoners or ‘wanted’ persons. Most recently, in the October 2011 prisoner exchange deal, 18 West Bank prisoners, including those from East Jerusalem, were expelled to the Gaza Strip for a period of three years while an additional 146 were forcibly relocated there on a permanent basis as conditions of their release. An additional 41 prisoners were deported outside of the oPt. In past deals, individuals who were expelled to the Gaza Strip for short-term periods were not necessarily allowed to return home after completing the agreed upon period. The terms of these expulsions violate Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits forcible transfers and deportations of protected persons, a proscription that is part of customary international humanitarian law. Unlawful deportation or transfer also constitutes a grave breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention (GC IV) and qualifies as one of the most serious war crimes. Given the stark asymmetry in power, resulting from the belligerent occupation, between the Palestinian and Israeli parties involved, neither the potential ‘consent’ of the prisoners nor the fact that these deals have been negotiated by a Palestinian authority can serve as justification for the deportations as this contravenes the spirit of articles 7, 8 and 47 of the GC IV concerning the inviolability of the protections afforded by the Convention.  In Ms. Shalabi’s case, further concerns are raised when considering her fragile medical condition after such a protracted hunger strike. The transfer of Ms. Shalabi from Meir Hospital to the medical center of the IPS in Ramleh Prison on 28 March throws into doubt whether considerations of her medical care were given appropriate weight. A 43-day hunger strike causes a clear threat to the life of the hunger striker, and requires close and professional medical observation, which is not provided by the IPS medical center. The attentive follow-up to such a long hunger strike is also essential to the sustained health of the individual. The fact that Ms. Shalabi was transferred to the IPS medical center while still on hunger strike, without informing her independent physician, and that she began eating without being under observation by a hospital casts additional doubts on the decision-making process of the IPS and the non-medical considerations that might have influenced the decision to discharge her from the hospital. Moreover, the IPS has created obstacles that have made it nearly impossible to adhere to the instructions provided by the Malta Declaration regarding medical care of hunger strikers, mainly by denying access of an independent physician to the hunger strikers. In the cases of both Khader Adnan and Ms. Shalabi, the first visit by an independent physician was enabled only after court intervention”.

Palestinian + Israeli Christians and tourists from around the world are now going to a procession following the path that Jesus is believed to have taken some 1,979 years or so ago, when he entered Jerusalem on a donkey and was greeted by followers carrying palm fronds…

The procession will start in the shadow of the Wall that divides Bethany [Eizariyya] from the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Shayyah, lying on the Bethlehem side of the Mount of Olives, and will continue down the hill [Suwaneh] and into the Old City of East Jerusalem.

This photo of today’s procession is posted with the AP story that is published on the Times of Israel website, here: [p.s. - that's Mordechai Vanuni marching just under and to the right of the white megaphone in the photo's upper center]

The AP story that the Times of Israel used for its coverage reported that “Israel’s Tourism Ministry said it expects 125,000 visitors during Holy Week and 300,000 throughout April, when Jews celebrate Passover — a 5 percent increase from last year”.

While Christians from around the world make the Israeli Tourism Ministry happy, not every Palestinian Christian is able to participate in these religious rites.

UPDATE: Akiva Eldar reported in Haaretz on 4 April here that “The dwindling Christian community in the territories and East Jerusalem is considered a relatively moderate group. Few of its sons and daughters commit the sin of violence, and few occupy Israeli prison cells. Hence, the palm frond procession that marched from the Mount of Olives to the Old City on Sunday may provide a barometer for the Palestinian mood, in light of the current freeze in diplomatic negotiations between Israel and the leadership in Ramallah, and the reconciliation talks underway between the leadership in Ramallah and the leadership in Gaza. For the first time ever, clergymen violated the permits they received to hold the annual religious march, when they added a political tone to the event by holding up placards denouncing restrictions on freedom of worship in Jerusalem…”

We have reported previously on the difficulties for Palestinian Muslims living in the Ramallah-controlled West Bank or Gaza to enter Israeli territory to worship at the Haram as-Sharif.

Now, here are some of the difficulties for the dwindling communities of Palestinian Christians, as explained by a fact-sheet sent around by the P.L.O. Negotiations Affairs Department [as I wrote, a series of five Tweets, this morning]}