Just look at the kids in these videos:

This one is for Chris Gunness of UNRWA — and the kids: Go Gaza!

And here, too (the kids, in Rwanda):

Where the hell is Matt dot com…

And this is the one with 30 million views — the kids, in South Africa; the dog, in Kuwait; the Bollywood dancers were impervious to his moves so he imitated them rather than vice versa, and more:

It’s the music, the way he dances, with the bottom half of his body moving mechanically, like a pump machine, independently from what he does with his arms and torso … and the sheer exuberance of movement.

In the statement, Human Rights Watch said that this panel “is not a full commission of inquiry as set out in Israeli law and cannot subpoena witnesses or officials. Under its mandate, the panel must instead rely on requests for documents and ’summaries of operational investigations’ conducted by the Israeli military itself to determine what military personnel did or were ordered to do during the May 31 interdiction of the flotilla”. And Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch, stated that “Israel claims the panel is independent, but insists that it accept the military’s version of events”.

The statement also noted that “In late May 2009, the UN presented a proposal to complete US$80 million worth of housing, health, and education projects that had been stalled for two years due to the blockade. The proposal would have allowed Israeli authorities to extensively monitor imported materials, including vetting construction contractors and storage sites for the materials, as well as periodically photographing construction sites; Israel rejected the proposal. After nine months of negotiations, Israel approved only a few UN projects, including recently the completion of 151 housing units”.

The proposals to modify the sanctions that the Israeli military administers against the Gaza Strip via the land crossings include provisions for the UN (UNRWA? UNOPs?) to oversee the use of any construction materials the military may decide to allow in. Does this make the UN complicit in the siege?

The HRW message also noted that the treatment of captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit may constitute torture: “Israel has cited Shalit’s detention as well as Hamas’s refusal to recognize Israel and to renounce violence as justifications for the blockade. Those who have willfully conducted or ordered deliberate or indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israeli civilians are responsible for war crimes, Human Rights Watch said. And Hamas’s prolonged incommunicado detention of Staff Sergeant Shalit is cruel and inhumane and may amount to torture under international law. Shalit is unable to communicate with his family or to receive visits from the International Committee of the Red Cross. However, violations of the laws of war by one side to an armed conflict do not legitimate violations by the other, Human Rights Watch said. Hamas officials refused Human Rights Watch’s request to visit Shalit and check on his conditions of confinement during a meeting in Gaza in May, saying that they would not take the risk that his location could be discovered, even though Human Rights Watch had offered to travel to the site blindfolded and to accept any other security precautions that Hamas wanted”…

It will be the ninth expedition to try to reach Gaza by sea. According to the Free Gaza movement, this time it will be bigger and better than ever.

This time, there will be Turkish involvement.

This raises the stakes.

The Free Gaza movement is calling it “the biggest internationally coordinated effort to directly challenge Israeli’s ongoing occupation, aggression, and violence against the Palestinian people”.

The organizers apparently believe that, even if they don’t succeed in reaching their destination in Gaza, the publicity value alone, highlighting the blockade of Gaza, sufficiently justifies this attempt.

The last attempt to reach Gaza by sea was in June 2009 — then, Free Gaza ships were intercepted by the Israeli Navy off Gaza, and forced to proceed to the southern Israeli port of Ashdod, where the cargo was impounded (some of it was later transferred by land to Israeli crossings and sent into Gaza). The activists aboard were jailed before deportation.

The Government of Bahrain, which does not have formal diplomatic relations with Israel, sent a delegation to receive its arrested activists.

Now, a Turkish relief organization, IHH (Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief, or Insani Yardim Vakfi), is making major preparations to participate in the coming “Freedom Flotilla”. The aim is to reach Gaza’s fishermens’ wharf by late May.

According to the organizers’ plans, the Freedom Flotilla will include as many as 9 boats, including several cargo ships, and perhaps five passenger ships with up to 600 high-profile international personalities, activists, and journalists aboard.

Some of the ships will reportedly be flying the Turkish flag.

This means that any Israeli attack on those ships would be considered tantamount to an attack upon Turkey.

Another one of the cargo ships, refurbished and outfitted in Ireland, has been re-named the MV Rachel Corrie, after the American solidarity activist who died, crushed by an Israeli military bulldozer — the IDF said the driver could not see her — while she was trying to prevent the demolition of a Palestinian home in southern Gaza.

The MV Rachel Corrie is Free Gaza ’s first cargo ship (earlier vessels were rented), and plans to set sail in the coming days, after picking up its aid cargo in Cork. It will then to meet up with the other Freedom Flotilla ship vessels somewhere in the Mediterranean, before they all travel in convoy together to Gaza to deliver some 5,000 tons of humanitarian aid (including cement for reconstruction, which was removed from the cargo list of the last Free Gaza expedition in June 2009). See this Youtube video here.

Free Gaza organizer Mary Hughes Thompson said, “Although we were happy with the first trips, it was bitter-sweet, knowing that our small boats and symbolic amounts of relief paled in comparison to what was really needed in Gaza. Now, we finally feel we are helping to organize a powerful action, one with the potential to translate into a sustained campaign of much more effective challenges to Israel’s brutal siege.”

Israeli activist Jeff Halper, head of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) said that “It seems like it’s a bigger expedition, with more people … and part of the idea is to keep trying … to rachet it up, in a PR sense”. Halper was on the first Free Gaza expedition into Gaza. He said in an interview with this reporter shortly after his return that he was received very warmly, and that many Gazans came up and spoke to him in Hebrew — a result of their long years of working in Israel, where they can no longer go, due to Israel’s policy of near-complete closure of the densely-populated Gaza Strip. Halper was arrested upon his return to Israel via the Erez border crossing from Gaza, but was freed on bail, and has not been summoned to court. (Israel has since declared that no visitors can exit Gaza from Erez if they entered Gaza from Rafah…)

Last year, just before the June 2009 Free Gaza expedition that was intercepted at sea and forced to proceed to Ashdod, Halper told me that he had heard that “UN forces” were a second level of interdiction operating in the Mediterranean Sea. It was impossible to find any clear information about this. Today, he said, “I’m not sure where all that is”.

Halper also said he will not be going this month with the Freedom Flotilla, either. “I was told that ‘We know you, we love you, but it’s still a little too soon for Israelis to come to Gaza’ “– too soon, that is, after Operation Cast Lead.

The Free Gaza website says that “The Freedom Flotilla Coalition is comprised of: Free Gaza Movement (FG), European Campaign to End the Siege of Gaza (ECESG), Insani Yardim Vakfi (IHH), Ship to Gaza Greece, Ship to Gaza Sweden, and the International Committee to Lift the Siege on Gaza, with hundreds of groups and organizations around the world supporting the effort”.

The formation of this coalition was announced in early April in Istanbul.

IHH, the Turkish NGO, was founded in 1995, and has worked in Bosnia, Chechenya, Haiti. It is also, apparently, functioning in the West Bank. It was reportedly very supportive of the efforts to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza via Egypt’s Rafah crossing at the beginning of this year.

IHH says its basic objective is to assist those who are “distressed, victimized by war, disaster, etc, wounded, disabled, homeless and subjected to famine, oppressed”, and “to deliver humanitarian aid to all people and take necessary steps to prevent any violations against their basic rights and liberties”. See their website here.

IHH is calling this attempt “Noah’s Ark”.

What they are up against is a formally-declared Israeli naval blockade of Gaza’s maritime space (as defined in the map attached to the Oslo Accords, which is posted on the website of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, here):

The Israeli naval blockade was announced on 3-4 January 2009, as Israel began the ground offensive phase of its unprecedented military operation, Operation Cast Lead (27 December 2008 to 18 January 2009).

A day or two before the Israeli government finally agreed to international calls for a cease-fire, the U.S. Secretary of State at the time, Condoleezza Rice, signed a formal agreement with Israel’s then-Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni — the consequences of which were not all fully and immediately public — to participate in naval activities as part of a global interdiction of arms shipments that might be used by Israel’s enemies, whether in Gaza or in Lebanon.

On the 8th of January, the UN Security Council adopted resolution 1860 (with a U.S. abstention) that
welcomed “initiatives aimed at creating and opening humanitarian corridors [n.b. at the time, in the middle of Operation Cast Lead, this meant inside the Gaza Strip] and other mechanisms for the sustained delivery of humanitarian aid” — but it also called upon UN Member States “to intensify efforts to provide arrangements and guarantees in Gaza in order to sustain a durable ceasefire and calm, including to prevent illicit trafficking in arms and ammunition and to ensure the sustained re?opening of the crossing points on the basis of the 2005 Agreement on Movement and Access between the Palestinian Authority and Israel…” etc.

There has been no announcement that the Israeli naval blockade has been cancelled.

Attempts today to seek clarification from Israeli Ministry of Defense spokespersons went unanswered.

A European diplomat says that the Israeli naval blockade is still fully in place.

The Freedom Flotilla organizers say that “In the wake of ongoing inaction by our governments to make Israel abide by international law, we – the citizens of the world – are taking action to stand up for justice”.

They report that they have received support from John Ging, Director of UNRWA operations in the Gaza Strip, who said: “We believe that Israel will not intercept these vessels because the sea is open, and human rights organizations have been successful in similar previous operations proving that breaking the siege of Gaza is possible.”

One international commented: “Everyone — certainly everyone in the UN — says that the blockade against Gaza is illegal collective punishment”.

Nevertheless, Ging’s comment that “the sea is open” is puzzling, in light of the declared Israeli naval blockade.

“There’s more to this than meets the eye”, said the international.

The Free Gaza organizers issued a statement quoting Denis Halliday, former United Nations Assistant Secretary General who resigned from a position in Iraq to protest the effects of UN Security Council sanctions on the Iraqi population, as saying: “We welcome Mr. Ging’s statement, which recognizes the responsibility of the international community to oppose the illegal blockade that Israel has imposed on Gaza”.

Denis Halliday is also, apparently, planning to be a participant in the Freedom Flotilla.

“There is a dire humanitarian situation in Gaza”, explains UNRWA spokesperson Christopher Gunness, “and the blockade is disrupting education for thousands of five- and six-year olds in Gaza, while UNRWA has been forced to turn away 39,000 students”.

He said, however, that the UN “doesn’t currently have plans to use the sea route” to try to get supplies into Gaza.

The first Free Gaza expedition was in August 2008, and did arrive safely in Gaza — much to the chagrin of the Israeli military, who were ordered not to provide the activists with a “propaganda victory”. Then, Israel used progressively tougher tactics, ramming one ship which had to limp into a Lebanese port for repairs, and forcefully discouraging other Free Gaza expeditions.

Five Free Gaza expeditions sailed before the launch of Israel’s massive military operation, Operation Cast Lead. A boat in the sixth Free Gaza expedition was rammed by Israeli naval vessels — organizers say it was nearly sunk. The next two expeditions were also prevented from reaching Gaza.

Last June, it was nearly a fiasco. Cypriot authorities tried hard to discourage the Free Gaza organizers from setting sail, in light of the formal Israeli naval blockade, and Israeli warnings conveyed to the Free Gaza participants via various channels. One of the participants in that last Free Gaza expedition, American congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, posted a Twitter message on 25 June (http://twitter.com/cynthiamckinney) saying that “The Cyprus Port Authority has just noticed us [sic] that they will destroy the boats (for our safety, of course) to prevent us from sailing”. A Cypriot diplomat warned at the time that if the Free Gaza expedition tried to trick the Cypriot authorities about their destination (“then change once they’re at sea and head toward Gaza”), they would lose their base of support in Cyprus.

See our earlier reports here, and here, and here.

All previous Free Gaza expeditions took off from, and returned to, Cyprus.

Given the current division of Cyprus, the massive Turkish participation adds another diplomatic complication for is the upcoming “Freedom Flotilla”.

The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center in Israel, a monitoring organization, has posted a map that it says it got from the IHH website, showing a planned boat route from Turkey to Cyprus — and the map seems to suggest that a landing was planned in Cyprus — perhaps in the northern (Turkish-occupied) part of the island:

A Cypriot diplomat in the region said today that “They wanted to stop at Famagusta, but we said no”.

(Jeff Halper said this was “a huge issue”, and now thinks there will now be no stops anywhere in Cyprus — the ships will try to sail directly from Turkey to Gaza.)

The Cypriot diplomat added that “We didn’t stop them, but we don’t encourage them to go — because of what happened last time. We don’t want to see people killed…”

The preparations for the Freedom Flotilla are, of course, being closely tracked in Israel.  The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center in Israel is reporting here that “In the Gaza Strip, the Hamas administration prepares to receive the international flotilla, including deepening and cleaning the local fishing port. The works are carried out jointly by the Hamas administration Labor Ministry and elements in Turkey. The first phase is now nearing completion and works have begun on the second phase (savegaza.eu, the ECESG website, April 28)”.

According to a bulletin issued in early April, the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center said, here, that “the possibility that Israel will try to prevent the arrival of the flotilla has been taken into account. In response, numerous actions have been planned in order to make it difficult for Israel…It appears that the parties involved in the flotilla (‘the ship intifada’, as Jamal al-Khudari said) are taking into consideration the possibility of confrontations with the Israeli navy, creating a provocation that will be used by Hamas and its partners for propaganda and political gains”.

The bulletin added: “We believe that Hamas thinks that the presence of Turkish ships and activists will thwart Israel’s attempts to prevent the arrival of the flotilla, and can be used to (further) compromise Israel-Turkey relations”.

The Turkish government’s regional cooperation with Israel has come under severe strain as a result of the Israel’s Operation Cast Lead. There was a public row over the Israeli military operation in early 2009 at the Davos World Economic Forum in Switzerland. Earlier this year, the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon arranged media recording of petty humiliations he arranged when he summoned the Turkish Ambassador to Israel for a rebuke.

And, the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center bulletin noted, the Turkish relief organization IHH “is banned in Israel”. It also said, without further detail, that “When some IHH activists landed in Ben Gurion Airport, they were denied entry”.

Meanwhile, blogs are reporting here that “Israeli authorities have taken Izzet Sahin, the representative and founder of IHH’s Office in West Bank, into custody on the 27th of April. Izzet Sahin has been taken into custody by the Israeli military while he was passing through the checkpoint in Bethlehem. Sahin was transferred to Ashkelon prison following his stay in the detention center of Israel Security Agency (ISA). Nobody has heard from him since the day he was arrested. No reason has been declared by the Israeli officials for Sahin’s arrest, who has been studying Hebrew in the Hebrew University … Israeli police raided Sahin’s home after the arrest and took some of his personal belongings including his computer”.

IHH reports on its website that “Bulent Yildirim, President of IHH, stated that the reason behind Izzet Sahin’s arrest might be to stop the flotilla campaign to Gaza in the end of May. Yildirim said ‘If Israel wants us to give up on the campaign by doing things like this, they are wrong. We will be taking the humanitarian aid to the people of Palestine by the end of May. We are not doing anything out of legal boundaries’. He went on to say, “Israel has been keeping our friend in custody for 8 days. He is now being interrogated. Israel’s previous actions make us concerned. There are people who lost their lives under Israeli custody, there are those who were subject to torture. The first two days we were not informed of our friend’s location. Apparently, Sahin had two receipts of aid with him when he got arrested, one from IHH, one from another aid organization in Palestine. He supposedly had videos of Sheikh Raed Salah’s [a leader of the Islamic movement in northern Israel] in his house. Israel declares these as their evidence for the crime … It is claimed that Sahin is harmful for Israel’s security. How come a person who studies at Hebrew University and coordinates aid work over there is thought to harm Israel’s security? How could this be the truth? …

Yildirim also mentioned that the Foundation wanted to send 3 lawyers to defend Izzet Sahin, however no response has been received from the Israeli side, ‘This is an insult to Turkey. Turkish state is now obliged to solve this by sending out a diplomatic warning of the highest degree’ he continued. Visa applications have been launched for the lawyers”. This is posted here.

Sahin’s first appearance in an Israel court is expected in the coming days.

Israel unilaterally “disengaged”, withdrawing some 8,000 Jewish settlers and the Israeli troops protecting them. from the Gaza Strip in September 2005. Since then, the Israeli government has argued that its occupation there has ended, and that it has no further responsibility for the people in Gaza. But, international legal experts argue that Israel’s continuing control of Gaza’s maritime and air space, and its ability to act militarily at will on the ground inside Gaza, contradict the Israeli position.

Ma’an added that Falk “said PA officials formally approached him in February asking him to resign, arguing that he is unable to carry out his responsibilities since Israel detained him at Ben Gurion International Airport and deported him in late 2008. But, he stressed in an interview, ‘what they [the PA] say formally and what they say informally are quite different … Informally they say different things, things that are essentially untrue, that my health doesn’t me allow to do the job or that I’m a partisan of Hamas’, Falk added”.

As Ma’an said in its article, “Falk’s mandate is narrowly defined to include only the human rights record of the occupying power, Israel, in the occupied West Bank and Gaza – he does not report to the UN on the “actions of the PA or the Hamas government in Gaza”.

The Ma’an report noted that “Falk did raise hackles in Ramallah when he publicly criticized the PA for delaying UN action on Judge Richard Goldstone’s report that accused Israel and Palestinian militias of committing war crimes during the 2008-2009 Gaza war … President Mahmoud Abbas’ decision, under US pressure, to delay a vote in the UN Human Rights Council on Goldstone’s report provoked a political crisis, including calls for Abbas to step down, or even for the dissolution of the PA”.

Falk, a professor emeritus of International Law at Princeton University, was appointed to succeed John Dugard as Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 in the late spring of 2008. He made one trip to Israel and the West Bank a few weeks later, and irritated government officials [Foreign Ministry spokesperson Yigal Palmor basically said that one of the main problems was that Falk told Israeli officials he was coming in his personal capacity, then allowed himself to be introduced at a meeting in Ramallah as the UN special rapporteur...] When he returned in mid-December 2008 on an official UN mission, he was denied entry, detained in very uncomfortable conditions overnight at Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport, and then deported. He has not been allowed to visit Israel or the occupied Palestinian territory since then.

Ma’an also reported that Arabic-language news reports surfaced last week, which Falk confirmed in an interview, that “the Palestine Observer mission to the UN in Geneva also delayed consideration in the UN Human Rights Council of his [Falk's] most recent report detailing Israeli abuses of Palestinians’ rights … He says the PA-appointed ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Ibrahim Khreishah, put forward a resolution in a recent plenary session of the Human Rights Council which delayed a discussion of his own report on Israeli rights violations from March until June. The resolution passed unanimously. Falk, a Princeton international law expert, said he is ‘not happy’ about the PA’s actions, but has no plans to resign. ‘I feel that it’s very important not to succumb to this pressure …We’re supposed to be independent’, he added”.

Ma’an said that its “repeated phone calls to the Palestinian mission at the UN in Geneva were not returned”. The Ma’an story can be read in full here.

The Ma’an story made reference to an article written by Nadia Hijab, an independent analyst and a senior fellow at the Institute for Palestine Studies, in which she said that the PA was more discrete than Israel in its attacks on Falk, and “has quietly suggested to Falk himself that he resign. One reported reason is that Falk can’t do his job because Israel will not allow him into the country”.

Hijab’s also reports in her article, published on the Agence Global website, here that “Palestinian human rights advocates … have acted as a group to support the implementation of the Goldstone Report and to protect Falk and his role … Last month, 11 Palestinian human rights groups wrote to the High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay expressing dismay at the PA actions against Falk … More recently, 19 Palestinian groups wrote to PA president Mahmoud Abbas criticizing Falk’s treatment and pointing out the repercussions for the Palestinians’ internationally recognized human rights”.

Hijab states that “The attacks on Falk and Goldstone are hard for the two men to bear. And they tear at the very fabric of international law and the mechanisms put in place to uphold it. The Human Rights Council has stepped on a slippery slope by agreeing to postpone Falk’s report. Instead of listening to the PA (and Egypt) the Council should have backed its special rapporteur. If it does the unthinkable and relieves Falk of his duties because the PA does not want him, the system of independent special rapporteurs would be undermined … Undermining the Goldstone Report would be an equally harsh blow to the human rights system”.

An informed source at the UN in Geneva clarified today that “1) the Palestine Mission did ask for postponement of consideration of the Fall report about which they had disagreements on certain terminology and methodology etc. In my view this was a mistake since a) the differences are not critical b) they had the option of publicly taking him to task on them c) Palestine should not be making a precedent of governments interfering in UN reports and d) its good for them to have problems with Falk as it makes him all the more credible in his criticism of Israel. 2) They did not ask him to relinquish his post, though making as much fuss about him as they did adds up to the same outcome”.

What were the Palestine Mission’s specific problems with Falk and his report? The source in Geneva explained that “Their ‘formal’ reservations were to do with Falk implying in his report that Hamas was the government authority that should investigate war crimes on their side (which upsets the PA which pretends to be the legitimate government authority), and something about him exceeding his mandate by referring to possible Palestinian violations of human rights (since the report is supposed to be about Israeli practices) and some other relatively inconsequential point. Bottom line, they never liked him, he was never pliable enough for them, he is too independent and outspoken and the REAL reason is of course his Jazeera interview last October”.

Meanwhile, the source in Geneva said that UN Human Rights Council has scheduled a debate on 22 March, in a follow-up to the Special Session on Gaza that was held in October, and four resolutions are to be considered: one on follow-up to the Goldtsone report, one on Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory, one on self-determination, and one on Israeli practices (which normally would have been shaped by the Falk report) and which will concentrate on Jerusalem, which will be informally distributed later this week — and which will include a paragraph concerning the on-going desecration of the Mamilla Cemetary in West Jerusalem.

In remarks to journalists in Hebron, Fayyad accused Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and his government of “expropriating” or “annexing” the Ibrahimi (Abraham) Mosque and several other sites important to the three monotheistic religions, including Rachel’s tomb in Bethlehem. Agence France Presse reported that Fayyad said: “The Palestinian people understand extremely well that this decision has a political dimension, and that it is aimed at Israel expropriating sites that are part of an occupied territory … These sites belong to a future Palestinian state”. According to AFP, Fayyad also reaffirmed “the inalienable right of the Palestinian people on their soil”. AFP also reported that “the head of the United Nations cultural body UNESCO ‘expressed her concern” at the plan and the ‘resulting escalation of tension in the area’. UNESCO chief Irina Bokova endorsed a statement by Robert Serry, UN coordinator for the Middle East peace process, that the sites have ‘historical and religious significance not only to Judaism but also to Islam and to Christianity’.” She also “reiterated UNESCO’s long-standing conviction that cultural heritage should serve as a means for dialogue”. This AFP report is posted here.

The Jerusalem Post reported that “Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad visited Hebron on Friday and prayed at the Cave of the Patriarchs on Friday afternoon, criticizing Israel’s decision to add the site and Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem to the list of Jewish heritage sites marked for renovation and preservation. Speaking to reporters after prayers, Fayyad accused Israel of ‘annexing’ the Cave of the Patriarchs. ‘[Prime Minister Binyamin] Netanyahu’s decision is dangerous and political in nature. The site is an inseparable part of the occupied Palestinian territories’, [Israeli] Channel 10 quoted Fayyad as saying”. The JPost added that “US State Department spokesman Mark Toner said the administration viewed the move as provocative and unhelpful to the goal of getting the two sides back to the table. Toner said US displeasure with the designations of the Cave of the Patriarchs in the flash point town of Hebron and the traditional tomb of the biblical matriarch Rachel in Bethlehem had been conveyed to senior Israeli officials by American diplomats”. This JPost report is published here.

The declaration, last Sunday, by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, and endorsed by his Cabinet, did not announce any legal annexation of the sites. But, this is what the Palestinians fear is the logic.

Palestinians also fear, not without justification through experience, that the allocation of large sums of Israeli money for the maintenance and preservation of these sites as part of Israel’s heritage is likely to entail preferential Israeli access and denial of Palestinian access.

Major-General (Res.) Giora Eiland, Israel’s former National Security Adviser who is now an analyst at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv (and an advocate of extensive “territorial swap” involving Israel’s neighbors Egypt and Jordan), noted during the week in a press conference in West Jerusalem that Rachel’s tomb, in Bethlahem, was “on the Israeli side of the Clinton maps [of 2000-2001]“, meaning that it was considered an area that would be assigned to the State of Israel in a final peace settlement. But, Eiland noted, “I cannot say the same about the Hebron mosque” …

Rachel’s tomb it is now surrounded by The Wall in its 8-meter-high concrete block manifestation, and accessible only to Jews and Israelis who enter in guarded buses escorted by Israeli security forces. The visitors’ busses pass through a huge gliding metal gate that opens for their arrival. Under the Oslo Accords, Israel guaranteed freedom of worship and access to all holy sites under its control. In practice, I have not heard of Christian groups visiting Rachel’s tomb, though it is not as important in Christian worship. Palestinian Muslims, however, revere not only Ruth, but important historical Muslim figures from a later era who are buried there. And, there is a Muslim mosque on the site. In theory, at least, Palestinian visits are now supposedly to be allowed through permits, though I do not know of any Palestinian who has ever requested such a permit… Maybe Fayyad can ask for one for next Friday’s prayers…

[Once, in June 2004, I made a spontaneous visit to Rachel's tomb -- before it was completely surrounded by The Wall -- with two UNRWA colleagues, both female, one was Palestinian. As it happened, because we hadn't planned the visit, we were all wearing jeans (not well viewed at all by Orthodox Jews, who think long skirts are more appropriate for modest women). We parked the official UN-marked vehicle a few hundred meters away, but directly visible to the Israeli military in the control tower. As we walked forward, one Israel soldier emerged and pointed his automatic weapon straight at us. We explained we just wanted to visit Rachel's tomb, and moved forward. He waved his rifle menacingly. Then, another soldier emerged from the control tower and ran towards us, while motioning to the one with the pointed weapon to move aside. He told us we were allowed to enter. But he said to hurry, because a bus of Jewish worshippers was due to arrive any minute from Jerusalem, and they wanted the streets absolutely clear in case of any sniper fire. He went inside with us, and stopped anyone from interfering with us. We were able to spend about 30 minutes in meditation and observation on the womens' side of the tomb, without even a cross look, and we left in peace. It was a rare and actually wonderful experience -- thanks in particular to that one Israeli soldier who enforced his government's official policy that, in theory at least, and on paper, allows people of all faiths to enter all holy sites under Israeli control.]

Clashes continued for a fifth day between stone-throwing Palestinian youths and Israeli troops in Hebron about the Israeli government decision to declare the Ibrahimi Mosque an Israeli heritage site.

Ma’an News Agency reported that Jewish settlers, accompanied by Israeli soldiers, marched through downtown Hebron on Friday in support of the Israeli government decision.

Separately, a group of about 300 Israeli, Palestinian and international activists marched in the rain to call for an opening of part of central Hebron which has been locked down under Israeli military pressure for several years in favor of a Jewish settler presence in the neighborhood.

Jewish (they may not all be Israeli citizens) settlers immediately moved into those three homes, guarded by their own private security organization — and by the Israeli national police and Border Police. The situation in this area is now very tense, but violence has been astonishingly limited.

There have been some verbal confrontations, but the two sides generally make enormous efforts to ignore each other’s presence.

There seems to be no actual threat to the Jewish settlers, other than legal challenges by the Palestinians, and now the protests organized by a new coalition of Israeli activists.

Israeli anti-occupation demonstrators have begun holding Friday afternoon protests there, on a weekly basis over the past several months, in support of the threatened Palestinian families. Last Friday’s arrests may have marked a turning point.

Here is a photo of Didi Remez (from his Facebook site) at the 15 January protest demonstration organized by Israeli anti-occupation activists in solidarity with threatened Palestinian families in Sheikh Jarrah.  In this now-iconic image, Didi Remez is objecting to the arrests made by the Israeli police, and telling them to “Arrest me, too!”.   The police complied -  he was arrested.

After all the commotion, a bigger demonstration is expected today.

UPDATE: Here is a photo of the start of today’s demonstration just tweeted by CNN’s Kevin Flower

After last Friday’s arrests, in which the head of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), Hagai Elad, was among those taken into custody when he simply approached police to attempt to mediate, the demonstrators spent over 36 hours in jail during the Israeli weekend and the Jewish sabbath, before an Israeli judge ruled that the arrests were not warranted.

This Friday demonstration in Sheikh Jarrah has now become the talk of the town — and of elsewhere in the region.

One of the organizers of the weekly Friday Israeli anti-occupation demonstration in Sheikh Jarrah, Didi Remez, has posted a notice about today’s demonstration, saying that “Police have refused to grant license for [this] Friday procession; refusing to provide reasons. The vigil, unequivocally ruled legal and not requiring licence by Jerusalem Justice of the Peace, will take place at 15:00, as usual. Police, however, have warned organizers that, ruling or no ruling, they will forcibly break up the demonstration”.

Didi Remez was one of those arrested last Friday.  He was also reportedly one of the first of some 20 demonstrators arrested today.

Another photo of the Didi Remez at the Friday 15 January 2010 demonstration in Sheikh Jarrah, East Jerusalem.

UPDATE: True to their word, the Israeli police broke up the demonstration.  They arrested some 20 Israeli demonstrators, including veteran Israeli politician Yossi Sarid, who told the Ynet website that the arrests were “arbitrary and unruly”. Sarid also said: “I have been following the developments here for the past few months and I have read about what the police did over the past week. I became nauseous and wanted to vomit.”  YNet reported that former Knesset speaker Avraham Burg and Hadash MK Mohammad Barakeh also participated in the demonstration, and that protesters “waved signs reading, ‘Free Sheikh Jarrah’ and chanted, ‘Cowardly settlers, leave the homes at once’.  The YNet story can be read in full here.

UPDATE: Ben Lynfield has just reported in The Scotsman that “Yehuda Shaul, an activist in the former soldiers’ group Breaking the Silence was dragged away after he led the crowd in a chant of ‘democracy is not built by evicting people from their houses’.” Ben’s article can be read in full here.

Another 25 Palestinian homes are under challenge in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, where a Jewish settler organization has plans to build a large residential complex to house some 200 Jewish families.

A Jewish settler organization has claimed a swathe of property in that key East Jerusalem neighborhood around a newly-important tomb that Jews believe holds the earthly remains of a priest in the Second Jewish Temple, Shimon HaTzadik (Simon the Just). The settler organization is claiming some 28 UNRWA-built homes in which Palestinian refugee families have lived for over 50 years.

In what looks more like “victor’s” justice than Solomonic or any other kind of wisdom, Israeli courts have upheld claims by Jewish settler organizations that land in East Jerusalem, which did not become part of Israel at its founding in 1948, but which previously belonged to Jews, either in the late Ottoman period, from around 1875, or under the post-First World War British Mandate period.

The Turkish Government — successor to the Ottoman Empire which ruled the area for some 500 years prior to the end of World War I — turned over copies of its records to both the Israeli Government and to the Palestinian Authority in recent years. At the beginning of 2009, the Turkish Government sponsored its own search through the Ottoman Archives in Ankara and provided Palestinian lawyers with an attestation saying that there is no proof of Jewish ownership of the land in question.

It is possible, the Turkish authorities have reportedly suggested, that the previous Jewish claimants rented, rather than owned the land in question — but they certainly didn’t own the houses, which were built by UNRWA.

In an agreement concluded during the early years of the Jordanian administration, the houses would be turned over to the Palestinian refugee families if they agreed to forego UNRWA-provided food rations for three years. The Palestinian families did so. But the Jordanian authorities apparently failed, somehow, to register the properties as belonging to those families. They have also declined to appear in Israeli court to testify on behalf of the currently-threatened Palestinian families. In case after case, the Israeli courts have ordered the eviction of the Palestinian families, and have given the homes to the Jewish settler organization.

Didi Remez said, in his posted statement, that “Barring last minute intervention by the Attorney General, we will be illegally arrested. Because of the Sabbath, this means incarceration for 36 hours before release. Sheikh Jarrah is a unique juncture, in that embodies the both the struggle for basic justice and the defense of democracy … A police that ignores the judiciary and the rule of law is a partisan militia. A country that silences protest on the streets of its capital is not a democracy. Older Israelis who do not support the dedicated, value-driven youngsters (not me) on the street are not Elders. Jewish-Americans who remain silent are not ‘pro-Israel’. US journalists who will not connect the dots and cover the issue have forgotten who and what they are. We will not be intimidated. We will not be silenced“.
See Didi Remez on Facebook for full coverage.

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel, ACRI, sent a letter posted here to Israel’s Attorney General in the middle of this past week, dated 20 January, arguing that “The protests at Sheikh Jarrah, like any public protest, can not and should not be forcefully suppressed. Freedom to demonstrate and freedom of expression are basic principles of Israeli democracy, and there is no justification for denying them at Sheikh Jarrah … The Israel Police has the important task of preserving both the public order and the public’s right to protest … It appears that this task has been accomplished in Sheikh Jarrah in a manner that is discriminatory, all too often departs from police authority, and fails to provide the necessary protection for Palestinian residents”.

The ACRI letter also asks the Israeli Attorney General to investigate its specific complaints of police restrictions on the right to demonstrate, of unlawful arrests, and of unfairly blocking streets and preventing movement in a discriminatory manner. It also calls for “prevention of violence toward Palestinian residents in the area”, and asks the Israeli Attorney General to. “provide the Jerusalem District Police with clear policy directives that illuminate the objectives of the police in a democratic society – with the aim of ensuring the fundamental rights of every person in Sheikh Jarrah to demonstrate, to speak, and to move freely, protecting their right to bodily integrity and property”.

Among other points it raised, the letter told the Attorney General that “It seems that the police tried to deter the protesters and used arrests as a form of punishment and a means of deterring any future protests at the site … The seriousness of the police actions demands an investigation by your office, as well as a directive clarifying that this sort of policy is illegal and must not be repeated in the future … The police used caustic pepper spray, wore black masks, disguised themselves as civilians, and employed other means to suppress a legitimate protest activity taking place in an area that caused no public disturbance … [S]ome 70 protesters were arrested over three Fridays and remained incarcerated for the entire following day. The condition for their release was a restriction on their freedom to participate in future protests. The police actions in these instances indicate that the Israel Police is misinterpreting both the laws regarding demonstrations and the conditions for arrest. There is a clear need, therefore, for your involvement and guidance in these matters”.

The letter, written by ACRI attorneys Tali Nir and Dan Yakir, requests the Israeli Attorney General to issue clear and specific “legal guidelines” to the police on these matters. It was also copied to the Israeli Minister of Internal Security and to various police officials.

An interesting article on the situation, written by Amos Harel, is posted here: “There are very few events in Israel today which are more indicative of the complexity of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and which reflect better the shortsightedness of contemporary Israeli policies in Jerusalem than the recent events in Sheich Jarach [sic - spelled here phonetically according to the Hebrew-language pronunciation]. These events include the forceful displacement of Palestinian families living on that land since 1948 and the violence inflicted on peaceful demonstrators protesting against the forceful removal of Palestinians from their homes … For many years the Israeli government and the Israeli public as a whole has rejected almost unanimously ‘the right of return’ of Palestinian refugees to their pre-1948 land. The opposition to recognizing the right of return is based on the recognition that such a right would undermine the identity of the state of Israel as a Jewish state. It is also based on the view that the cost of trying to redress all past injustices may be too high. Houses, land and villages owned by Palestinians before 1948 have been transformed so radically that an attempt to restore ownership would generate new injustices and would trigger violence. Yet, this reasonable rejection of the right of return has been based on mutuality and reciprocity. It has been understood that (the very few) Jewish refugees of 1948 ought also to renounce their own rights. It is only this mutuality and reciprocity that legitimates the confiscation of Palestinian land in Israel after 1948. How can an Israeli court restore ownership of a Jew over land in Sheich Jarach while denying at the same time the claim of the displaced Palestinian refugee to restore her ownership of her house in Jaffa? Is not it absurd that the very same Palestinian whose property was confiscated in 1948 finds that his new home is confiscated on the grounds that it was owned previously to 1948 by Jews? What is it precisely that distinguishes the claim of the Jew from that of the Palestinian? Is it mere racism disguised under layers of legalistic distinctions? Let me at this point leave the legalisms and examine the realities. The Jewish settlers in Sheich Jarach are not innocent refugees trying to make a living on a land previously owned by them. The settlers in Sheich Jarach are fanatics who bought the rights from its previous owners with the aim of establishing Jewish presence in the heart of the Palestinian city and expelling its Palestinian residents. To substantiate this claim, it is sufficient to walk into the neighborhood, watch the provocative flags and racist graffiti or, if this is too inconvenient, just follow the weekly news about the violence of the settlers against their Palestinian neighbors. The process of settling Jewish fanatics in the heart of a Palestinian city was the process which destroyed the heart of the Palestinian city of Hebron. The tours conducted by left wing organizations into Hebron expose the visitor to a ghost city deserted by its Palestinian inhabitants. The few remaining Palestinians living in the Jewish part of the city are subjected to humiliating restrictions imposed on them by the security services. The violence perpetrated by few hundreds zealots left thousands of people homeless and destroyed what used to be a rich and flourishing city. The fear of Hebronizing Jerusalem led large groups of Jerusalemites to join the peaceful demonstrations conducted every week in Sheich Jarach. These demonstrations united members of the Israeli academy, professors and students with left wing activists of various groups including Taa’yush and “Anarchists against the Wall”. Yet, for some reason this union was perceived as highly dangerous by the Israeli police which decided to use extreme violence against these peaceful demonstrations. Israeli prisons have seen in recent weeks many young men and women put into custody for no reason other than their will to protest against the policy of ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem“…

Worse than ever.

Reconstruction materials have not been allowed in.

The politics of the situation involve a cat-and-mouse game between Israel and Hamas: if Hamas can exert its authoritiy over all factions and military sub-groups in the Gaza Strip, and prove itself a more effective “address” to which Israel can address any grievances, then Israel would be inclined to deal with Hamas on a government-to…. well, authority basis.
If this cuts out the Palestinian Authority based in Ramallah, so what? Only a few officials in Israel care about sustaining that structure, which resulted from an agreement between the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. If Hamas can assert effective rule in Gaza, Israel will go along with it — despite the fact that it is Israeli pressure on the U.S. that keeps the rest of the world from dealing with Gaza at the moment.

There must also, of course, be a solution to the continuing captivity in Gaza of IDF soldier Gilad Shalit. Hamas says that negotiations through mediators with Israel are continuing.

A year ago, the then-Israeli government, led by then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said that it would keep Gaza’s border shut tight until Shalit comes home. This policy is continuing.

The Israeli military keeps Gaza on a short lease — and allows in only a few dozen items which it deems “essential”.

What is really essential is coming in — at great risk to the lives of a number of young desperados — through tunnels dug under the Egyptian-Gaza border, mostly near Rafah. But this channel risks imminent cut-off by an “Iron Wall” that Egypt is installing, at a depth of 20 to 30 meters underground, with American assistance, and to Israel’s great satisfaction.

Egypt is also constructing a wall out into the sea from its border with Gaza. This zone, according to a map that was delineated under the Oslo Accords, says that 1 km from that point and going south is not under Palestinian control. It is not really under Egyptian control either — except to the extent that Israel allows.

Israel has declared — and is enforcing — a kind of “sterile zone” that starts at the Israel-Gaza perimeter and now intrudes some 300 meters inside Gaza on all three sides, cutting off some of Gaza’s prime agricultural lands.

Israel is unilaterally imposing Kerem Shalom as one of the major transit points for all goods going into and out of Gaza. This is what Israel has wanted for years. But the Palestinian Authority opposed it before the Hamas rout of Fatah/Palestinian Preventive Security Forces in mid-June 2007, and has intermittently opposed it since.

Israel has unilaterally shut down the expensive and extensive Nahal Oz installation built to transfer fuel (diesel, industrial diesel, and gas) from Israel into Gaza from Israeli trucks to a pipeline and tank installation under ground inside Gaza. The private Israeli company Dor Alon paid for the construction of this installation on the Israeli side, while the Palestinian Authority paid for the construction of this installation on the Gaza side. It cost many millions, if not more. For this reason, I was told in Ramallah two years ago, the Palestinian Authority could not easily terminate the contract that it had concluded with Dor Alon for exclusive rights to provide fuel to Gaza — it would simply cost too much to buy Dor Alon out, including providing reimbursement for the Nahal Oz installation. Now, this is all shut down. And all fuel must go in through Kerem Shalom, which cannot handle the capacity that Nahal Oz could provide — not enough fuel, not fast enough.

There have been only three days since October 2007 — when a deliberately-tightened Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip began, administered on an exclusive basis and without any oversight by the Israeli military, in a policy that was eventually approved by the Israeli Supreme Court with the sole proviso that it must not e allowed to bresult in a “humanitarian crisis” — that more than 200 truckloads a day of “essential humanitarian supplies” have been allowed into Gaza from Israel.

There are regular electricity brown-outs and black-outs in various areas of Gaza.

Tens of thousands of people are living in tents beside the rubble of their former homes.

Perhaps as many have unreliable water supplies.

The sewage system is in catastrophic collapse – and many millions of liters of untreated, or partially-treated sewage water is simply flowing into the Mediterranean Sea every day.

Gaza’s fishermen are being confined closer and closer to shore, limiting their catch — which is itself limited because of the pollution in the water, and the fact that the larger fish are further out from shore, where the Israeli Navy does not allow the Palestinian fishermen to operate.

Amnesty International has issued a new report today saying, according to a press release, that “An estimated 280 of the 641 schools in Gaza were damaged and 18 were destroyed. More than half of Gaza’s population is under the age of 18 and the disruption to their education, due to the damage caused during Operation ‘Cast Lead’ and as a result of the continuing Israeli boycott, is having a devastating impact. Hospitals have also been badly affected by the military offensive and the blockade. Trucks of medical aid provided by the World Health Organization have been repeatedly refused entry to Gaza without explanation by Israeli officials. Patients with serious medical conditions that cannot be treated in Gaza continue to be prevented or delayed from leaving Gaza by the Israeli authorities – since the closure of crossings leading into and out of Gaza, patients have been made to apply for permits, but these permits are frequently denied. On 1 November 2009, Samir al-Nadim, a father of three children, died after his exit from Gaza for a heart operation was delayed by 22 days”. Amnesty International added that “Unemployment in Gaza is spiralling as those businesses that remain struggle to survive under the blockade. In December 2009, the UN reported that unemployment in Gaza was over 40 per cent”. And the Director of Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Program, Malcolm Smart, said that “The blockade is strangling virtually every aspect of life for Gaza’s population, more than half of whom are children. The increasing isolation and suffering of the people of Gaza cannot be allowed to continue. The Israeli government must comply with binding legal obligation, as the occupying power, to lift the blockade without further delay.” This press release is posted on the organization’s website, here.

UPDATE: The Jerusalem Post noted that “The release of the report comes only days after the Defense Ministry presented figures showing improvements in Gaza’s humanitarian situation, noting that even during Cast Lead some 1,400 trucks carrying supplies were allowed to enter. The Defense Ministry cited an overall 28% rise in humanitarian goods entering the Gaza Strip in 2009 over the previous year, and an increase of 125% in the number of foreign nationals allowed entry to the Strip. The findings were presented at a conference held last Thursday by the Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration, which brought together representatives from major international organizations operating in Gaza … When contacted by The Jerusalem Post Sunday, Amnesty did not deny the figures presented by the Defense Ministry. Instead, it cited a report they released last month that stated that since the end of Cast Lead, only 41 truckloads of construction materials have been let in”. This JPost report can be read in full here.

On Wednesday, the United Nations humanitarian coordinator, Maxwell Gaylard, has announced that he will hold a press conference outside the dialysis unit at Gaza City’s Shifa Hospital. The announcement of this press conference, sent out by email, cited one example of the break-down in health care in Gaza: “19 year old Fidaa Talal Hijjy, suffering from Hodgkin’s disease, received a referral to an Israeli hospital for a potentially life saving bone marrow transplant in 2009. Fidaa applied for a permit to cross into Israel for her scheduled transplant, and waited. Fidaa died waiting. Thousands more are still waiting”.

In a fascinating report released yesterday, the Israeli security agency known as GSS or Shabak — which is responsible for interrogating those in Gaza who apply for entry into Israel for medical treatment — released a report on what happened during 2009 (a marked decrease in Palestinian “terror” against Israel), in which Shabak also stated that “It should be noted, that Palestinians who enter Israel with false documentation for allegedly personal needs, also constitute a risk potential since they are illegal aliens, and might be taken advantage of by terrorist organizations in order to execute attacks. The meticulous screening performed by Israel makes possible the spotting of these individuals using false medical documentation and preventing their entry”. This is posted here.

And, Akiva Eldar, in today’s edition of Haaretz, has written: “Who said we are shut up inside our Tel Aviv bubble? How many small nations surrounded by enemies set up field hospitals on the other side of the world? Give us an earthquake in Haiti, a tsunami in Thailand or a terror attack in Kenya, and the IDF Spokesman’s Office will triumph. A cargo plane can always be found to fly in military journalists to report on our fine young men from the Home Front Command. Everyone is truly doing a wonderful job: the rescuers, searching for survivors; the physicians, saving lives; and the reporters, too, who are rightfully patting them all on the back. After Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon became the face we show the world, the entire international community can now see Israel’s good side. But the remarkable identification with the victims of the terrible tragedy in distant Haiti only underscores the indifference to the ongoing suffering of the people of Gaza. Only a little more than an hour’s drive from the offices of Israel’s major newspapers, 1.5 million people have been besieged on a desert island for two and a half years. Who cares that 80 percent of the men, women and children living in such proximity to us have fallen under the poverty line? How many Israelis know that half of all Gazans are dependent on charity, that Operation Cast Lead created hundreds of amputees, that raw sewage flows from the streets into the sea?
The Israeli newspaper reader knows about the baby pulled from the wreckage in Port-au-Prince. Few have heard about the infants who sleep in the ruins of their families’ homes in Gaza … The disaster in Haiti is a natural one; the one in Gaza is the unproud handiwork of man. Our handiwork. The IDF does not send cargo planes stuffed with medicines and medical equipment to Gaza … A few days before Israeli physicians rushed to save the lives of injured Haitians, the authorities at the Erez checkpoint prevented 17 people from passing through in order to get to a Ramallah hospital for urgent corneal transplant surgery. Perhaps they voted for Hamas. At the same time that Israeli psychologists are treating Haiti’s orphans with devotion, Israeli inspectors are making sure no one is attempting to plant a doll, a notebook or a bar of chocolate in a container bringing essential goods into Gaza … True, Haiti’s militias are not firing rockets at Israel. But the siege on Gaza has not stopped the Qassams from coming. The prohibition of cilantro, vinegar and ginger [n.b. please note: a very big irony alert here] being brought into the Strip since June 2007 was intended to expedite the release of Gilad Shalit and facilitate the fall of the Hamas regime. As everyone knows, even though neither mission has been particularly successful, and despite international criticism, Israel continues to keep the gates of Gaza locked. Even the images of our excellent doctors in Haiti cannot blur our ugly face in the Strip” … This Akiva Eldar article can be read in full here.

Michael Sfard, an Israeli attorney who represents human rights organizations and serves as legal advisor to the Yesh Din and Breaking the Silence organizations, wrote at the end of 2009, during the first anniversary of the IDF’s Operation Cast Lead, that: “Looking back, Operation Cast Lead was a turning point in the way Israeli society expresses its values. There, in besieged Gaza Strip, we exposed ourselves to a crystal-clear, shameless, and unmasked truth that we had thus far avoided by using repression and self-deceit methods that became more complex and clever with every war and operation we waged … we came out of the closet. We are who we are and we are proud of it! … For three weeks, during Operation Cast Lead, we sent fighter jets to drop bombs on one of the world’s most densely populated areas. We aimed our guns at clearly civilian targets. We used [white?] phosphorous bombs. We deliberately and systematically demolished thousands of private houses and public buildings, and all the while we maintained a tight siege on the Gaza Strip, preventing civilians who wanted to from fleeing the war zone. We did not erect a temporary refugee camp for them. We did not create a humanitarian no-mans’-land corridor for them. We did not spare hospitals, food repositories, or even UN aid agencies’ buildings. At the same time, we did not express fake regret. We did not argue we made tragic mistakes. We did not even take wounded children to Israeli hospitals … Now, we decided that enough is enough. No more playacting and lying to ourselves and the world. As of today, we shall speak the truth: The Jewish State believes that the rules of war should be altered so that the threats that soldiers face are diminished, even at the expense of increasing threats to civilians. The Jewish state believes that in modern warfare, civilian targets are sometimes legit; that it is fine and even required that we bomb power stations that supply electricity to thousands of civilians, to destroy the food infrastructures, to eliminate schools and mosques. What is more, the state of the Jews will no longer tolerate criticism, domestic or foreign. These new liberties were immediately implemented against the Israeli opposition. In unprecedented moves, the Israel Police arrested hundreds of anti-war demonstrators. The IDF spokesman, an officer in uniform, launched a smear and delegitimization campaign against organizations that criticized the army’s policies and actions, while the foreign minister made efforts to cut them off their financial resources. Everything became rotten:
the officers who issued orders, the soldiers who carried them out, the lawyers who approved them, the judges who sent protesters to prison, the academics who kept silent, and the media that fanned the flames of war and surrendered to the IDF spokesman until it turned into a unit under his command”. This commentary by Israeli lawyer Michael Sfard can be read in full here.

A WHO “Call to Action” published a week ago stated that the pandemic is spreading rapidly, but its future evolution cannot be predicted. It advised governments to “plan for an additional 30 percent buffer stock of medical supplies to treat pneumonia such as paracetamol, antibiotics, and oxygen, at the outpatient and inpatient levels” and to “Inform and educate the community about home-care of symptoms of non-severe influenza-like illness including diarrhoea and dehydratation”. This Call to Action can be viewed here.

Most cases in which there have been deaths have been in North and South America, according to this WHO graphic:

The map shows no fatalities in Russia, or in Alaska.  Is this due to the fact that this is the summer season in the northern hemisphere?

Guidelines sent out today by the World Heath Organization (WHO) in Geneva on the use of antivirals state that “In areas where the virus is circulating widely in the community, clinicians seeing patients with influenza-like illness should assume that the pandemic virus is the cause. Treatment decisions should not wait for laboratory confirmation of H1N1 infection.  This recommendation is supported by reports, from all outbreak sites, that the H1N1 virus rapidly becomes the dominant strain …

The Guidelines continue: “Evidence reviewed by the panel indicates that oseltamivir, when properly prescribed, can significantly reduce the risk of pneumonia (a leading cause of death for both pandemic and seasonal influenza) and the need for hospitalization.  For patients who initially present with severe illness or whose condition begins to deteriorate, WHO recommends treatment with oseltamivir as soon as possible. Studies show that early treatment, preferably within 48 hours after symptom onset, is strongly associated with better clinical outcome. For patients with severe or deteriorating illness, treatment should be provided even if started later. Where oseltamivir is unavailable or cannot be used for any reason, zanamivir may be given.  This recommendation applies to all patient groups, including pregnant women, and all age groups, including young children and infants … Worldwide, around 40% of severe cases are now occurring in previously healthy children and adults, usually under the age of 50 years.  Some of these patients experience a sudden and very rapid deterioration in their clinical condition, usually on day 5 or 6 following the onset of symptoms. Clinical deterioration is characterized by primary viral pneumonia, which destroys the lung tissue and does not respond to antibiotics, and the failure of multiple organs, including the heart, kidneys, and liver. These patients require management in intensive care units using therapies in addition to antivirals.  Clinicians, patients, and those providing home-based care need to be alert to warning signals that indicate progression to a more severe form of illness, and take urgent action, which should include treatment with oseltamivir.  In cases of severe or deteriorating illness, clinicians may consider using higher doses of oseltamivir, and for a longer duration, than is normally prescribed …  Clinicians, patients, and those providing home-based care need to be alert to danger signs that can signal progression to more severe disease. As progression can be very rapid, medical attention should be sought when any of the following danger signs appear in a person with confirmed or suspected H1N1 infection:
* shortness of breath, either during physical activity or while resting
* difficulty in breathing
* turning blue
* bloody or coloured sputum
* chest pain
* altered mental status
* high fever that persists beyond 3 days
* low blood pressure.
In children, danger signs include fast or difficult breathing, lack of alertness, difficulty in waking up, and little or no desire to play”.

The guidelines recommends “the use of oseltamivir and zanamivir to prevent severe illness and deaths, reduce the need for hospitalization, and reduce the duration of hospital stays.  The pandemic virus is currently susceptible to both of these drugs (known as neuraminidase inhibitors), but resistant to a second class of antivirals (the M2 inhibitors).  Worldwide, most patients infected with the pandemic virus continue to experience typical influenza symptoms and fully recover within a week, even without any form of medical treatment. Healthy patients with uncomplicated illness need not be treated with antivirals”.  The WHO guidelines can be read in full here.

According to the WHO, it is possible that some 2 billion people will become infected in the next two years.  Some 1,800 people have died around the world from the “Swine Flu”.

A weekly update issued by the WHO today reports that “Many countries including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the U.S. have noted that their indigenous peoples appear to be at increased risk of severe disease related to pandemic influenza. While it still has not been clearly determined how much of the increased risk observed in these groups is due to issues related to access to care, high rates of chronic medical conditions that are known to increase risk, or other factors, countries with indigenous and other vulnerable populations should carefully evaluate the situation and consider ways to mitigate the impact of the pandemic in the coming season in these populations. WHO has also been notified of 12 cases of oseltamivir resistant virus. These isolates have a mutation in the neuraminidase (referred to as H275Y) that confers resistance to oseltamivir, though the viruses remain sensitive to zanamivir. Of these 8 have been associated with oseltamivir post exposure prophylaxis, one with treatment of uncomplicated illness, and two have been from immunocompromised patients receiving oseltamivir treatment”. This weekly update can be read in full here.

According to a report today by the Associated Press, WHO’s Western Pacific director, Shin Young-soo, said at a conference today in China that “swine flu cases double every three to four days for several months until peak transmission is reached, once cold weather returns to the northern hemisphere … ‘At a certain point, there will seem to be an explosion in case numbers‘, Shin told a symposium of health officials and experts in Beijing. “It is certain there will be more cases and more deaths’.”  This report can be read in full here. Here in Israel, where there have been 11 fatalities attributed to the virus to date, heath authorities are predicting some 700-1000 fatalities this coming winter.

The statement, issued by UNRWA spokesperson Christopher Gunness, informs us that “UNRWA remains concerned about the other refugee families in the area and the possibility of more evictions which will cause further unacceptable humanitarian suffering. We will continue monitor this situation closely The families, evicted in the early hours of Sunday from the homes where they have lived for more than half a century, continue to suffer distress and shock. The children are particularly traumatised. The lasting humanitarian impact on the 53 people directly affected including 20 minors cannot be over-estimated. Seeing settlers being escorted into the houses in which some family members were born, was particularly distressing for these refugees.

Not only were they surrounded by Israeli police and security personnel at dawn, their homes broken into and their families thrown onto the streets, they have had to endure the indignity and humiliation of their personal effects being loaded onto trucks and dumped in scrub land at the edge of Jerusalem’s Route One. UNRWA has assisted the families in recovering their belongings and will store them until the issue is resolved. ”

The UNRWA statement added that “We are raising these cases with the Israeli authorities as a matter of urgency. The evictions violate the rights of the refugees and international law. We call on the Israeli authorities to refrain from taking any further measures to evict other members of the Palestine refugee community in Sheikh Jarrah and to reinstate the evicted families as the United Nations Special Co-ordinator has demanded”.

The homes that the Hanoun and Ghawi families were removed from by force on Sunday were built for them by UNRWA in the 1950s, on land authorized by the Jordanian Government which was then administering East Jerusalem and the West Bank in the aftermath of the war surrounding the creation of the State of Israel in May 1948. Jordan was expelled from East Jerusalem and the West Bank by conquering Israeli forces in the June 1967 war.

Decades later, Jewish settler organizations filed claim to a number of properties in East Jerusalem (and probably elsewhere) on the grounds that they had been owned by Jews from the late 1850s, under purchases purportedly authorized by the Ottoman Empire, but who fled either in intercommunal conflicts in Palestine during the British Mandate period between the First and Second World Wars, or in the 1948 war. The Turkish government has recently — following Israel’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza — assisted lawyers for a number of East Jerusaleem Palestinian families to search the Ottoman archives for records of Jewish ownership, and a report document was submitted to the Israeli Supreme Court saying that no such ownership records could be found in the Ottoman archives. However, the Israeli Supreme Court refused to accept this report. Earlier, a Palestinian filed claims that he owned the land on which some of the houses were built, but the Israeli Court has rejected his claim as well. The Jordanian Government has not been very forthcoming, according to Palestinian sources, in explaining the process and the legal basis for its designation of those lands to UNRWA for the construction of housing for Palestinian refugees who lost their own original homes in the 1948 war.

U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile, has strengthened her initial weary oh-there-they-go-again response of Monday (the first working day in Washington after the evictions of the Hanoun and Ghawi families in the Sheikh Jarrah area of East Jerusalem during the early hours of Sunday), and has since said that these evictions are both “provocative” and “unacceptable”.

The Israeli Ambassador to Washington was reportedly called into the State Department to hear the Secretary’s complaint.

UPDATE: As reported earlier here, Maher Hanoun said again today that his furniture had been dumped in a lot which belonged to his Aunt, and which was located near the British Consulate in Sheikh Jarrah. The Israelis demanded legal proof that his aunt owned the land, and written confirmation of her willingness to have the furniture put there. But, he said, his furniture was not important. According to Maher Hanoun, it was the furniture of the Ghawi family that was dumped on the road near UNRWA, [After all, the family are UNRWA-registered refugees!] The UNRWA statement saying that the family possessions were “dumped in scrub land at the edge of Jerusalem’s Route One. UNRWA has assisted the families in recovering their belongings and will store them until the issue is resolved”.

UPDATE TWO. The Hanoun family was seated on the sidewalk today, in the shade of an olive tree, across the street from the police barricades that stood in front of their former home, which is now occupied by Jewish settlers. The mattresses they sleep on were piled up on the side of the sidewalk. A plastic bag hung from the tree, with plastic cups and other utensils inside that they use for eating and drinking. Two boys were playing a board game. They have been living that way for the past six days, since last Sunday morning. Their household possessions are still in an otherwise-empty lot near the British Consulate. Maher Hanoun said. The Ghawi family are sleeping outside their former home, too, he said, across the street and down the hill.

In an interview with Haaretz, Klein explained, basically, that she would not have come if the boycott committee had asked her not to.

The Haaretz article said that Klein and her publisher “carefully planned Klein’s itinerary in Israel to avoid the impression that she supports institutions connected to the State of Israel and the Israeli economy. ‘It certainly would have been a lot easier not to have come to Israel, and I wouldn’t have come had the Palestinian Boycott National Committee asked me not to’, said Klein in an interview before her arrival, at her Toronto home. ‘But I went to them with a proposal for the way I wanted to visit Israel and they were very open to it. It is important to me not to boycott Israelis but rather to boycott the normalization of Israel and the conflict’.”

She then gave several hair-splitting justifications about her visit to Israel, but was at the same time critical of the Israeli and pro-Israeli boycott of the UN’s Durban Two follow-up conference against racism held in Geneva not too long ago.

The Haaretz article quickly gets bored of the boycott issue, and veers into other areas, and can be read in full here .

In a conversation this afternoon a propos the demand from various quarters that Leonard Cohen  cancel his performance in Tel Aviv [apparently still scheduled for 24 September], an Israeli friend and admirable activist said to me that there is actually not a boycott of Israel at the moment.

But there is.  It is understandable that somebody could be confused, especially because there seems to be several different boycotts, and several different boycott committees, and the whole thing is unclear.

In any case, it was reported today by PACBI, the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel [apparently launched in Ramallah in April 2004] that “We are now pleased to announce that we have received confirmation from the Palestinian Prisoners‘ Club Society that they will not be hosting Leonard Cohen in Ramallah. A strong consensus has emerged among all parties concerned that Cohen is not welcome in Ramallah as long as he insists on performing in Tel Aviv, even though it had been claimed that Cohen would dedicate his concert in Palestine to the cause of Palestinian prisoners. Ramallah will not receive Cohen as long as he is intent on whitewashing Israel‘s colonial apartheid regime by performing in Israel. PACBI has always rejected any attempt to ‘balance’ concerts or other artistic events in Israel–conscious acts of complicity in Israel‘s violation of international law and human rights–with token events in the occupied Palestinian territory”.

We reported on the Leonard Cohen dilemma earlier here. In that earlier post, we mentioned that the decision was put into the hands of Fatah “Young Guard” leader Qaddura Fares, who is head of the Palestinian Prisoner’s Club Society, and who told us that “his suggestion was that Leonard Cohen should come if he would agree to sing for the release of Palestinian prisoners (there are over 11,000 of them, including several hundred children) — and for the release of the Israeli soldier who is believed to be still held captive somewhere in Gaza, Corporal Gilad Shalit. ‘Yes, why not?’, Qaddura Fares said, and smiled. ‘All of them are prisoners, and they have the right to be free …. Maybe if he [Leonard Cohen] comes for such a sensitive issue, it will be useful for Palestinians and for Israelis”.

A call to Qaddura Fares for confirmation this evening went unanswered.

In an informal poll I’ve been conducting in Ramallah the last two days, I didn’t find any Palestinian who knew who Leonard Cohen was.

On the other side of the coin, I have been wondering who would brief Leonard Cohen about what he would encounter on the other side — that is, in Ramallah — should he actually perform there. If he allowed himself to be booked into Tel Aviv without realizing that there might be a reaction, and without apparently thinking very much about the Palestinians penned into the West Bank (and Gaza), what would it take to brief Leonard Cohen about this alternate reality [which Haaretz's Gideon Levy aptly calls the "Twilight Zone"]? Would Leonard Cohen know how reach out to the Ramallah audience?

It’s not clear that the last act of this boycott drama has played out yet, but today’s PACBI statement argued that “Those sincerely interested in defending Palestinian rights and taking a moral and courageous stance against the Israeli occupation and apartheid should not play Israel, period. That is the minimum form of solidarity Palestinian civil society has called for. We feel that this is an occasion to reaffirm our position first articulated two years ago in relation to visits to the occupied Palestinian territory by artists, performers, and academics who wish to show solidarity with Palestinians while primarily coming to Israel to perform or participate in academic or artistic activities. As we noted then, Palestinians have always warmly welcomed solidarity visits by international visitors; however, most Palestinians firmly believe that such solidarity visits should not be used as an occasion to organize performances, film screenings or exhibits in mainstream Israeli venues or to give lectures at Israeli universities; collaborate in any way with Israeli political, cultural or academic institutions; or participate in activities sponsored or supported — directly or indirectly — by the Israeli government or any of its agencies”. This statement is published in full here ,

The boycott success story par excellence is supposed to be South Africa — though there was as much evasion as compliance [including certain well-connected Palestinians, with connections all the way to the top, who had fun and helped finance the revolution by selling oil from countries in the Persian Gulf to South Africa, avoiding the boycott by changing the flag of the tanker ship while at sea, or substituting new bills of lading, or new ports of destination... ]

And if we’re going to talk about sanctions, did either Saddam Hussein or Hamas “change their stripes” after heavy-hitting international sanctions? (Even more importantly, did those sanctions avert war?)

However, a new Israeli Cellcom that nonchalantly uses The Wall as a prop, and just-fun-loving Israeli soldiers and Border Police-persons as the actors, is so extraordinarily insensitive that it merits a boycott call.

Adam Horowitz has an unsettling post on Mondoweiss here contrasting what we see in the Cellcom ad with how Israeli soldiers and Border Police usually behave at The Wall [even when it is a fence as it is in Bil'in and Nil'in].

CORRECTION: The video referred to just above was of Friday’s demonstration in Ni’lin, not Bil’in.

The video of Friday’s demonstration in Nil’in in the Mondoweiss post is particularly creepy because it shows that at least ten undercover Israeli agents were pretending to participate as demonstrators, before they revealed themselves as uniformed Israeli forces rushed through the hole that had been cut in the fence to seize two of the Palestinian demonstrators and carry them off in army vehicles. Was this the first time that this Trojan-Horse tactic has been used at these weekly demonstrations in the two villages about 20 minutes drive east of Ramallah? 

(One savvy Palestinian commentator said last evening that these weekly demonstrations had done much more to explain and advance the Palestinian position than the current Palestinian government).

The Cellcom ad is posted here on Youtube  (as are videos of the Bil’in and Nil’in demonstrations).

It seems that the ad agency that produced this Cellcom ad did not use the real Wall, but built a set with a small section of identical 9-meter-high concrete slabs. What shows it’s not the real thing? First of all, section in this set ends abruptly, instead of extending as far as the eye can see (in later shots, an extension seems to be Photoshopped into the film). Secondly, the “soldiers” in the ad are patrolling next to an area decorated with grafitti. In reality, most of the graffiti is on the Palestinian side of the Wall, while the side that the Israelis usually patrol is much more bare concrete (in the Jerusalem area there is some graffiti on both sides, but the Palestinian side is definitely much more decorated).

The Wall is a Wall in residential areas, which is not what is shown in the ad. In a rural or uninhabited area, The Wall becomes a fence.

And, all those high kicks over what the ad calls a 10-meter-high wall are not so credible, either.

The English-language Israeli-centered blogosphere is going wild on this Cellcom ad — here and here, with excellent comments from a journalist for Maariv; as well as here and here.

Anyway, why arent’t we hearing immediate calls for a boycott of Cellcom (Israeli cellcom mobile phone numbers begin with 052, or, from abroad, 972 52 …). There are plenty of Palestinians (and radically progressive Israelis) who have Cellcom sim cards or subscriptions, so there could be a real impact in boycotting Cellcom until this truly offensive ad is pulled, and The Wall is torn down — and why not until the Israeli occupation is ended, as well.

And, why not also boycott the advertising agency too (McCann Erickson) — until it Repents? At the very least, it should take its account executives, and art directors, and other creative types out on a tour of The Wall and some of the most infamous (and still there) Israeli checkpoints in the West Bank. They should also be called on to replace this lousy ad with a public service announcement discussing the real impact of The Wall on the lives of millions — yes, millions — of Palestinians, and debunking the self-serving myth that The Wall [still open in many areas, so any determined attackers could easily get through if they wanted] has stopped suicide attacks within Israel.

So, boycott Cellcom!

Or, is it that boycotts are only as good as they are convenient, and the minute they start really pinching, we’ll start hair-splitting and justifying why and how we are not obliged to comply, though we really do support their goals — we really, really do.