Mahmoud Abbas was stunned and enraged by Trump’s Jerusalem Declarations on 6 December 2017

Mahmoud Abbas was stunned and enraged when U.S. President Donald Trump decided to recognize Jerusalem (no coordinates specified) as Israel’s capital last December.

It’s a “reality on the ground”, Trump said – no mention of conquest, annexation, a continuing military occupation, and abandoned negotiations.

Trump also declared, in the same December 6th  speech he delivered, in front of VP Pence and multiple decorated Christmas trees, that he’d move the US Embassy to Jerusalem – in direct contravention of the UN Security Council’s resolution 478 (August 1980).

A consequential part of Trump’s decision is the opening of an interim US Embassy, in the Arnona area of south Jerusalem on May 14, timed to coincide with Israel’s 70th Independence Day anniversary by the Common Era calendar. That’s also the day before Palestinians mark the Nakba, or catastrophe, of their dispossession in 1947-1949, when some 75% of all Palestinians were forced out of their homes, lands, and villages; most have been barred from returning.

The immediate response to Trump’s Jerusalem declaration were calls for “Day of Rage” demonstrations, to “confront the occupation”, sometimes several times each week, in both the West Bank (where protests are prohibited by military regulations) and in Gaza.  These calls were initially backed by all Palestinian factions: Fatah’s deputy leader Mahmoud Al-Aloul was one of the few in the leadership who participated in the first one in Ramallah. The protesters in the West Bank are mostly young, and they go with their friends. The Gaza marchers faced worse conditions.

Three months later, a coalition in Gaza organized a “Great Return March” to take place at Gaza’s perimeterfrom Palestinian “Land Day” on March 30, to Palestinian “Nakba (Catastrophe) Day” on May 15.  Though it wasn’t a Hamas initiative, it was impossible to miss the level of organization and the amount of resources that Hamas has contributed.

Approximately 2/3 of the population of Gaza are refugees from 1948. Return has been the priority demand of Hamas since its founding in 1987.  A number of the marchers would like to march straight across Israel’s security fence.

The “peaceful masses moving forward” strategy was already tried in the West Bank, though on a smaller scale, and without backing from the leadership in Ramallah, in 2011. The call was simply to enter Jerusalem. There were not many marchers, and they didn’t get past Qalandiya Checkpoint. The real drama happened elsewhere: in the heady days of the Arab Spring, on Nakba Day (May 15) and then on Naksa Day (June 5) in 2011.

In May 2011, Nablus millionaire Munib Al-Masri’s grandson, also named Munib, and then 22, was badly wounded by Israeli fire in Lebanon near the border, and has been permanently paralyzed as a result.

In June 2011, Palestinians from Yarmouk Camp near Damascus, Syria were bussed to the Golan and marched across marked mine-fields..  Refugees and their supporters in Lebanon were also bussed down to the Israeli border, and also tried but were unable to cross. Reports say 10 to 14 Palestinians were killed, mostly in the Golan.

However, Israelis adamantly refuse the idea of any return of Palestinian refugees, and say it would pose an existential threat. Just ahead of the Gaza Return March that began on March 30 (Land Day) in 2018, the Israeli military went on war footing, saying they fear an invasion of tens of thousands of protestors from Gaza. IDF Chief of Staff warned in advance – and deployed – 100 snipers at the Gaza perimeter, who have since taken a high toll, especially in the first four weeks of the Great Return March.

Five Israeli and one Gazan human rights groups have petitioned Israel’s Supreme Court to stop the IDF from using snipers and live ammunition to stop the civilian demonstrators in Gaza – the first time this has happened. However, Israel’s Supreme Court prefers to help the Israeli government become better without public confrontation or rebuke.  And there has been an apparent change in the IDF’s rules of engagement.  On May 4, for the first time in six weeks, no killings were reported, and there were fewer than 200 reported injures, rather than thousands.

Almost 50 Palestinians have been killed at the Gaza perimeter since March 30 and over 8,500 people injured, straining Gaza’s health care resources to the limit.  (9 May: Spokesman for the Ministry of Health: 47 Martyrs, including 5 children, and 8536 wounded by IOF gunfire since the start of the return marches on the borders of the Gaza Strip. https://twitter.com/qudsn/status/994268438293041154 ) Some of those injured will be permanently disabled.

Overall, since Trump’s December 6 announcements about Jerusalem, about 100 Palestinians have been killed by the IDF in both the West Bank and Gaza.

Pres Abbas declared a day of mourning on the day after the March 30 Land Day demonstration at the Gaza periphery — but nothing since, other than a statement in his opening speech to the PNC on April 30 saying that children should be kept away from the perimeter.

Jerusalem expert Daniel Seidemann has warned that “we have never witnessed a geopolitical move as potentially shocking and infuriating to the Palestinian sector as moving the embassy. Such a move will tell the Palestinians: ‘Abandon hope. Political processes – negotiations, diplomacy, and the like – will not only not help you, they will harm you.’ Likewise, it will send them a resounding message: ‘It’s official – East Jerusalem and its holy sites are lost to the Palestinians, to the Arabs, and to Islam’.”

Seidemann notes, however, that “geopolitical issues are not generally what trigger violence in Jerusalem; rather, what triggers violence is threats, real or perceived, to the sanctity of sacred places, and most notably to the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif”, link <a href=”http://t-j.org.il/LatestDevelopments/tabid/1370/articleID/878/currentpage/1/Default.aspx“>here</a>

Meanwhile, the Israeli Temple Mount organizations have reportedly put out massive messaging calling – through their media and social networking sites, to their supporters and to the settlers – to go up to the Al-Aqsa Mosque Compound as the Palestinian people are marking the Nakba.. http://www.wafa.ps/ar_page.aspx?id=BrsHQba819586867902aBrsHQb

Other Palestinian media say that calls have gone out for have at least 2,000 Jews to go up to the site on Sunday, May 13 – which, this year, is “Jerusalem Day”.

Trump, however, believes that he’s taken the issue off the table, claiming to have solved this most contentious of issues all by himself – though it’s been internationally agreed since the Madrid Conference in 1991 that Jerusalem is a final status issue that must resolved through Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

Abbas waited for six weeks before convening the PLO’s (Palestine Liberation Organization) Central Council in mid-January, where he exploded in anger at Trump: In a televised speech, Abbas responded furiously to Trump’s assertion that the Palestinians had refused negotiations (“What negotiations?”, Abbas asked, in frustration “When did we refuse to negotiate?”). Abbas then cursed (“yikhrab beitak”, may your house fall into ruin). It made headlines all over the world.

Abbas strategy, based on his calculation of the imbalance of power and the few tools at his disposal, has been to wait. Palestinians are the weaker party, so they must wait. Abbas has himself suggests that this is a manifestation of the traditional Palestinian virtue of sumoud (steadfastness). “We are here and we’re staying here”, Abbas had said on a number of occasions.

Abbas has waited for Prime Ministers to resign, for Presidential elections, for new administrations to read-in on issues, for circumstances to change, for public opinion to move. He waited for President Donald Trump to call (the call came in March 2017), waited for an invitation to the White House (he went on May 3), waited for Trump to come to Bethlehem (that was on May 23), to meet Trump at the UN (September 20) when Trump said to Abbas in front of the cameras: “I certainly will devote everything within my heart and within my soul to get that deal made”.

For months Abbas waited patiently (just as Hussam Zomlot, Abbas’ Strategic Advisor and now PLO representative in Washington, was impatient) to see the “Deal of the Century”, being drafted by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner + long-time legal advisor Jason Greenblatt.  Zomlot said he was “literally nagging” them, since May, “saying we’re ready, we’re ready, don’t waste another day, not another week, we’ve wasted enough time — what are you waiting for?”

Zomlot said in a presentation at the Middle East Institute (MEI) in January that he’d lost count of the many meetings he’d had with Trump’s team, Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt (but Abbas said in September it was “more than 20 times” https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-president-abbas-palestinian-authority-bilateral-meeting/ ). But they were blindsided when Trump announced his Jerusalem decisions.  Zomlot said he felt “backstabbed”, and angrily added that “President Trump reneged not only on the long-held US and international policy but also reneged on his own promises”.

Zomlot said he’d been pressing for a Trump indication of support for previous U.S. policy. The two-state solution – which Zomlot says was not a Palestinian demand but is instead “a Palestinian concession” – was unanimously endorsed (US voted ‘yes’) in UN Security Council resolution 1515 of 2003 (https://www.un.org/press/en/2003/sc7924.doc.htm), honoring President G.W. Bush’s earlier “vision” of creation of a Palestinian State. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/04/AR2005100401410.html

But, Zomlot recounted, Trump avoided doing so.  Zomlot, citing Trump: “I did not endorse the two-state solution because I do not want to impose, I do not want to dictate, I do not want to influence, I do not want to tell the two sides what to do”.  Then, Zomlot said at MEI, as if addressing Trump: “You come all of a sudden and you decide to take the heart of the two state solution out, the core of all issues, the mother of all issues – Jerusalem”.

Months later, Abbas convened the Palestine National Council (PNC) –“the supreme authority of the Palestinian people in all their places of residence” (https://www.palestinepnc.org/en/) – to deal with the challenge in Jerusalem, and also, significantly to “protect Palestinian legitimacy”, under challenge on many fronts.

This PNC 23rd Session was held in the tightly-guarded and secured presidential compound in Ramallah, the Muqata’a, from April 30 to May 4 – convened as a matter of urgency, after several postponements in recent years. The last full PNC session was in Gaza in 1996.

There was a strong but ultimately unsuccessful campaign of opposition to this PNC session, a sign of growing frustration with the worsening of all conditions in the West Bank and a dramatic desperation in Gaza.

Ohio-born American-Palestinian businessman Sam Bahour, who isn’t a member of the PNC, but who is a civil-society advocate for Palestinian development and Palestinian rights, said he was disappointed: “First, its location and the insistence by Chairman Abbas that we are free political subjects while under Israeli military occupation. He knows better and so does every Palestinian. Secondly, the membership continued to be defined and revised in a nontransparent and unrepresentative fashion. Thirdly, the session’s substance was weak at best, regurgitating the same worn out long diatribes. Lastly, the composition and median age of the elected PLO Executive Committee leaves much to be desired for a people whose national liberation movement is being seriously challenged”.

The PNC (established in Gaza in 1948) sets policy for the PLO (established at a meeting of the PNC in Jerusalem in 1964). The PNC also elects (by a show of hands, in open meetings; it’s always been that way) the PLO’s two ruling organs/bodies – the 18-member Executive Committee, and the 100-member Central Council.

The PLO was recognized by the UN General Assembly in 1974 as the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people”, and admitted as an observer organization in the UN General Assembly.  It was the PLO which established, under the Oslo Accords and with Israel’s assent, the Palestinian Authority, in 1994, ostensibly as an interim authority.

Past PNC Sessions have adopted some key decisions.  Under iconic leader Yasser Arafat: there was a deciion to establish a state on any inch of liberated Palestine, with its permanent capital in Jerusalem/Al-Quds (in its 12th Session, held in Cairo in 1974). In Algiers in 1988, the 19th PNC Session approved the Declaration of the Independent State of Palestine with Jerusalem/Al-Quds as its capital.

 

Uri Davis, a PNC delegate who was born to Jewish parents in Jerusalem in 1943 under the British Mandate for Palestine, is a long-time member of Fatah and married to Miyasa Abu Ali, another long-time member of Fatah. Davis firmly believes that Ramallah was the best place to hold the PNC Session, because “There are a number of UN resolutions that demand Israeli withdrawal from this land…Imagine the PLO was still stuck in Tunisia and Trump would make his awful statements about Jerusalem, would the PLO voice have any significant weight?”

As President Abbas said,  “it is our homeland”.

Davis added, with approval and pride: “President Mahmoud Abbas, Abu Mazen, is the only Arab leader to my knowledge in the Middle East who actually said ‘No’ to Trump”.

“Hamas refused membership in the PLO and in the Palestine National Council on a number of bases, or better say pretenses, one of which is its rejection of the Oslo Accords”, according to Davis. “I first learnt of it when it was published, and I had serious reservations…for the simple reason that it distinguished between an interim state of negotiations (or interim status) and the permanent status”.

“The PLO is the representative of the Palestinian people, there’s no question about it”, Davis said. “Any body, corporate body, that seeks to modify or reject or nullify or reiterate the Oslo Accords has to do it from within the structure of the representative body.  Don’t just condemn the Oslo Accords from the outside.  If you’re serious about it, do it through the by-law + regulations of the PNC”.

Hamas – which had been negotiating its possible entry into the PLO since 2005, if not earlier (it wanted a larger representation in the PNC than Fatah was willing to give) – may have missed a good chance, if it ever actually wanted to join the PLO.  All 132 members of the PLC received identical invitations to participate in the PNC session, a PNC official told this reporter, including the 74 elected Hamas MPs (though some of them are in Israeli jails).  But none showed up, including any of the few who live in the West Bank.

(One Hamas official who accepted Abbas’ invitation to attend the 7th Fatah General Conference, also held in the Ramallah Muqata’a, in late 2016, was treated as a guest-of-honor.)

GAZA

Unexpectedly, there was sustained criticism during the PNC Session of sanctions Abbas imposed against Gaza a year ago – which include non-payment of salaries to employees in Gaza.

Abbas ordered electricity cuts last April, in order to coerce Hamas to return the control of government institutions in Gaza following the June 2007 “split”.  The Abbas sanctions follow ten years of worsening electricity crises, exacerbated by devastated infrastructure only partially repaired after three major Israeli military operations, and with tens of thousands of people in Gaza living in still-unrepaired homes or apartments.

Dr. Mustafa Barghouti is a medical doctor, a politician, and a member of the PNC. “In the conference”, Dr Barghouti said, “everybody, including myself, emphasized the necessity to remove and cancel all punitive acts against Gaza, including cutting the salaries, or reducing the salaries, of PA (Palestinian Authority) employees”.

Dr Barghouti got his start in politics by running against Mahmoud Abbas in the special January 2005 elections to replace the late Yasser Arafat as President of the Palestinian Authority; Barghouti got 19% of the vote. Barghouti then stood in the January 2006 PLC election and won a seat. But, Dr. Barghouti said, this PNC Session was the first for his political party, Mubadara (Palestinian National Initiative) – which he says is the youngest Palestinian movement.  Barghouti said the agreement to allow Mubadara join the PLO was made in March 2015, “ten years after we applied – it took ten years”. How did it happen?  “Oh, I made a speech”, Dr. Barghouti said. “I said, to the (PLO) Central Council ‘We’re celebrating the tenth anniversary of our application, so you have to say either yes, or no’.  I told them, ‘if you are worried about us because we differ with you politically, how will you be able to absorb Hamas and (Islamic) Jihad in the future?’  And, I said, ‘if you think we’re too young, what would you say to the real young people who are waiting without being represented in most leadership structures?’…We also talked to the different groups, to Mr. Abbas and others – and eventually, we finally got in, after ten years”.

Hamas kicked Fatah-led Palestinian Preventive Security forces out of the Gaza Strip in June 2007 after a few weeks of shockingly cruel clashes, amid reports of U.S.-backed Fatah plots against Hamas. Even before, Israel had sealed shut its land crossings to Gaza; after 2007, the IDF were allowed to implement a plan of progressively tightened sanctions that intended to reduce imports to Gaza by 15% each month, to the bare minimum needed to sustain life (at one point, only 13 categories of commodities were allowed in); Egypt allowed supplies to pass through Hamas tunnels for years, but after overthrowing elected Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi, Egypt’s President Sisi still keeps the Rafah crossing largely closed.  Three IDF full-scale military operations have been carried out on Gaza between December 2008 and August 2014. and the codification of an Israeli maritime blockade to stop the arrival of “Freedom Flotillas”.

A reconciliation was announced in June 2014, during which Hamas ministers resigned their posts to allow ministers newly-sworn-in by Abbas to take control. Abbas made it clear at the time that he required complete surrender, and soon complained that a Hamas “shadow government” (some 26 or 27 deputy ministers, he said) was still in place.

There’s another fundamental difficulty: Abbas has insisted that Hamas must put not only its security forces but also its entire military arsenal under Ramallah’s control.

Now, there’s also a tenacious Palestinian financial dispute about who, exactly, should pay the government employees in Gaza their arrears, and going forward.  Unresolved, despite June 2014 declarations that a committee had been formed to start work right away to deal with the evident problem of merging two administrations, little to nothing was done.  So, there’s the matter now of deciding who the government employees are who should be paid: those hired by Hamas in Gaza since the 2007 split, to keep the work of government functioning?  Or, those loyal to Ramallah – some tens of thousands ordered by Ramallah to stay home and not work for Hamas after the 2007 split, but who received their salaries for the following decade?  No vetting has taken place to determine who among them are most qualified and should be retained, who should be removed, and who should be retired. And after unrest followed a few heavy-handed decisions ordering mass retirements, the directives were rescinded, or suspended, it’s not clear. The issue of financial transfers under sanctions placed on Hamas has been only temporarily resolved.

Meanwhile, Donors have lost patience and cut their subsidies to Palestinian institutions in Ramallah, causing looming financial problems.

Mamoun Abu Shahla, Palestinian Minister of Labor since the formation of the June 2014 Government of National Consensus, is from Gaza, but spends part of his time in Gaza and part in Ramallah.  He’s now on the PLO Central Council.  He spoke about Hamas maintaining a “hidden government” Asked about the sanctions on Gaza, at a conference the day before the opening of the PNC Session, he replied: “If you want to rule Gaza, take all the responsibilities, or give it to me: this is the decision of Mr. Abbas, and the government here in total. I am not going to be the cash machine.  If you want me to rule Gaza, give me all the power, and I shall be responsible for everything. If not, go, continue, keep everything in your hands, do whatever you like, pay all the dues for Gaza. But you cannot imagine that every day and night you are shouting against me, and asking me at the end to pay for the life of your government.  So that’s it. It is a political story”.

At the end, Abbas made a surprise announcement in his closing speech to the PNC Session, saying that the salaries for Gaza employees and beneficiaries will be paid “tomorrow”.  There had been an unspecified “technical problem”, Abbas said.  But, he was not terribly sympathetic to his compatriots in Gaza:  “We are not an oil-rich state”, he said, and salaries have also been cut in the West Bank on multiple occasions –“Remember 2006?”  Abbas was referring to the sanctions placed on everybody in the occupied Palestinian territory by Israel and the entire donor community after Hamas won the majority of seats in the 2006 PLC elections.

Dr. Barghouti was wary about the Abbas announcement of payment: “The political decisions that were made (in the PNC) were what we wanted, (but) the test is in the implementation…We have to wait and see the results…We have to see if it’s happened or not, because when the general communique came out, that resolution was not in the communique”, although he said many people in the Council “emphasized very much this issue and the need to remove it…Because we think it’s punitive, it’s illegal, and it contradicts the law, it shouldn’t happen. It’s inhuman…I hope this issue will be resolved”.

The Palestinian Finance Ministry reportedly announced on Sunday that 50% of the normal salaries had been deposited to accounts in Gaza, and added that if there were any further instructions, they’d be announced + fulfilled.  https://twitter.com/48nnews/status/993059717680369664

This situation is still not clear.  (Some reports say that ATM machines in Gaza distributed 80% of one month’s salary on May 3, the same day salaries were paid in the West Bank, when two months’ salaries were due in Gaza).  .

++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

..

What Obama said to get Netanyahu to apologize to Turkey for Mavi Marmara "operational errors"

We really don’t know, yet, what U.S. President Barack Obama said, or did, to get Israel’s Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu to offer, finally, an apology to Turkey for the deaths of 9 Turkish men [one of them a 19-year-old Turkish-American high school student]… but the fact that one of the dead was a 19-year-old American high school student Furkan Dogan may have been part of Obama’s leverage.

Israel has needed to resolve this situation, in which its apology was required by clear and repeated Turkish demands, for a long time.

There were hints that a breakthrough might be coming, but nothing solid until last night’s surprise announcement.

Obama’s insistence offered Netanyahu a relatively “face-saving” way to do it. An statement issued by the Israeli Prime Minister’s office said that Netanyahu told the Turkish Prime Minister that “the tragic results regarding the Mavi Marmara were unintentional“. UPDATE: The Israeli Government Press Office has just sent around, by email, a new version, which says Netanyahu “made clear that the tragic outcome of the Mavi Marmara incident was not intended by Israel and that Israel regrets the loss of human life and injury“.

Haaretz reported here that “During the conversation, Netanyahu made it clear that ‘the tragic consequences of the Mavi Marmara flotilla were unintentional, and Israel regrets any injury or loss of life’.”

The Israeli statement also said, with notable pride about its own investigation into the “maritime incident”, that “In light of the Israeli investigation into the incident, which pointed out several operational errors, Prime Minister Netanyahu apologized to the Turkish people for any errors that could have led to loss of life and agreed to complete the agreement on compensation“.
[UPDATE: The new version sent around by the Israeli GPO is almost identical to the original, above, but the word “nonliability” has been added.  It now reads as follows: “In light of Israel’s investigation into the incident which pointed to a number of operational mistakes, the Prime Minister expressed Israel’s apology to the Turkish people for any mistakes that might have led to the loss of life or injury and agreed to conclude an agreement on compensation/nonliability”.]

Turkish and Israeli diplomats engaged in months of negotiations about the wording of the apology itself and the compensation Israel would offer. Israel insisted on limiting the blame to “operational errors”.

There was, reportedly, a three-way phone call between Obama, Netanyahu, and Turkish Prime Minister Recip Tayyip Erdogan, made from a portable trailer set up on the runway at Ben Gurion Airport. Israeli journalists said it was a 30-minute conversation. The New York Times reported here that the call lasted 10 minutes.

The New York Times reported that “senior Turkish government officials said: ‘The Israeli prime minister, in a phone call that lasted 10 minutes, apologized to the Turkish nation for all operational mistakes evident in an investigation that led to human loses, agreed to offer compensation’.”

Obama announced the result either just before or just after Air Force One was in the air, taking off from Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport en route to Amman.

A short while later, a statement published by the Israeli Prime Minister’s office, and sent by email from the Government Press Office [GPO], said:
“…The Prime Minister expressed regret over the deterioration in bilateral relations and noted his commitment to working out the disagreements in order to advance peace and regional stability. Prime Minister Netanyahu said that he saw Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan’s recent interview in a Danish newspaper and expressed his appreciation for the latter’s remarks. The Prime Minister made it clear that the tragic results regarding the Mavi Marmara were unintentional and that Israel expresses regret over injuries and loss of life. In light of the Israeli investigation into the incident, which pointed out several operational errors, Prime Minister Netanyahu apologized to the Turkish people for any errors that could have led to loss of life and agreed to complete the agreement on compensation”.

Turkish officials confirmed that Erdogan had, “on behalf of Turkey”, accepted the apology proferred by Netanyahu.

UPDATE: In the new version sent around by the Israeli GPO, the following is omitted: The Israeli statement claimed that “The two men agreed to restore normalization between Israel and Turkey, including the dispatch of ambassadors and the cancellation of legal steps against IDF soldiers”.

The revised Israeli statement is now posted on the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s website, here

The Times of Israel reported here that Erdogan said, shortly after the announcement of the apology + its acceptance, that “it was too early to cancel legal steps against Israeli soldiers who took part in the raid on the Mavi Mamara”.

As the Times of Israel noted, “four IDF generals stand accused of war crimes over the incident. The indictment, prepared last summer, sought ten aggravated life sentences for each officer ostensibly involved in the 2010 raid — including former chief of the IDF General Staff Gabi Ashkenazi and former head of military intelligence Amos Yadlin”.

The Times of Israel added that, according to the Hurriyet daily, Erdogan also said the exchange of ambassadors between Israel and Turkey would not take place immediately…Erdogan said that, in the past, Israel had ‘expressed regret several times, refusing to offer a formal apology’ over the killings of nine Turkish citizens of the Marmara in 2010 — the incident that led to the freezing of Israeli-Turkish ties. However, Ankara had ‘insisted on an apology’, he said. That apology had finally been delivered by Netanyahu on Friday, he said. ‘All our demands have now been met with that apology which was offered the way we wanted’.”

The Times of Israel also reported, in the same story, that “Erdogan also announced plans to visit Gaza, possibly next month. Hamas’s Gaza prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh, calling Netanyahu’s apology ‘a diplomatic victory for Ankara’, confirmed Erdogan would visit ‘in the near future’, and said this trip would mark ‘a significant step to ending the political and economic blockade’ of the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip”. According to this report, Erdogan may visit both Gaza and the West Bank in April, “in the context of a general effort to contribute to the resolution process”, Erdogan is quoted as saying.

Other Hamas sources were less enthusiastic about the apology, however.

The Israeli statement said that “Prime Minister Netanyahu also noted that Israel has already lifted several restrictions on the movement of civilians and goods to all of the Palestinian territories, including Gaza, and added that this will continue as long as the quiet is maintained”.

But, this rang a bit hollow a day after four rockets were reportedly fired from Gaza, with two hitting Israeli areas, after which the Israeli Defense Forces announced that they were reinstating crippling restrictions on Gaza’s fishermen that were lifted in a cease-fire agreement with Hamas brokered by Egypt after Operation Pillar of Clouds last November.

In a separate but related development, Hamas “complained to Egypt Friday after Israel suspended part of a Cairo-brokered truce agreement by halving Palestinian access to fishing waters in response to a rocket attack from the Gaza Strip”. This is reported here. It was also reported, in another story, here, that “Gaza’s Hamas rulers have arrested two Salafist militants, sources close to the Palestinian Islamist hardliners said Friday, after a Salafist group claimed a rocket attack on Israel. A coalition of Salafist groups in Gaza, which oppose the Hamas regime, claimed responsibility for the firing of two rockets at southern Israel on Thursday while US President Barack Obama was visiting…”

Reuters reported here that “Ankara expelled Israel’s ambassador and froze military cooperation after a UN report into the Mavi Marmara incident, released in September 2011, largely exonerated the Jewish state. Israel had previously balked at apologizing to the Turks, saying this would be tantamount to admitting moral culpability and would invite lawsuits against its troops. Voicing until now only ‘regret’ over the Mavi Marmara incident, Israel has offered to pay into what it called a ‘humanitarian fund’ through which casualties and their relatives could be compensated. A source in Netanyahu’s office said opening a new chapter with Turkey ‘can be very, very important for the future, regarding what happens with Syria but not just what happens with Syria’.”

UPDATE TWO: Laura Rozen wrote on Al-Monitor here that “Once close Israeli-Turkish ties have been deeply strained since Israel’s 2008 Cast Lead operation against Hamas, and more broadly as Erdogan’s ruling Islamist Justice and Peace (AKP) party has moved against the country’s once dominant secular military commanders. Military ties formed the backbone of the Turkish-Israeli alliance at its height, said Dan Arbell, a former Israeli diplomat studying the relationship as a visiting fellow at the Brookings Instition. Even the restoration of formal diplomatic ties now–as well as brisk economic trade–is not likely to return Israel and Turkey to the level of rapport they enjoyed in the past, given the reduced role the Turkish military plays in the country under Erdogan and the AKP, he said. ‘This begins a process of normalization, but I do not see it bringing the countries back to the level of relations they had between them in the 1990s’, Arbell, Israel’s former Deputy Chief of Mission in Washington, told Al-Monitor in an interview Friday, adding that there has been, however, a growing “’convergence of interests’ between Ankara and Jerusalem, including on the Syria conflict and Iran. Though Turkish-Israeli reconciliation was certain to be on the agenda for discussion during Obama’s conversations in Israel this week, Arbell said he was pleasantly surprised at the speed of the diplomatic breakthrough”.

The Haaretz report noted that “Over the past few months, Israel and Turkey have been trying to reach an agreement over the wording of an apology, in an attempt to end the bilateral crisis. Just a few weeks ago, Turkey’s Undersecretary of the Foreign Ministry Feridun Sinirlio?lu met in Rome with Israel’s National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror and envoy Joseph Ciechanover. But during this meeting the parties failed to reach a magic formula to bring the crisis to an end. Part of the reason the reconciliation talks between Turkey and Israel encountered difficulties was because of Erdogan’s inflammatory comments a few weeks ago. During a United Nations Conference in Vienna, Erdogan called Zionism a ‘crime against humanity’, and compared it to fascism. Erdogan’s comments caused great anger in both Jerusalem and Washington”.

Perhaps Erdogan said something placatory today, too.

[Israel’s former Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, now chairman of the Knesset Foreign Relations + Defense Committee, said that unless Erdogan apologized as well, in today’s phone call, for his “crime against humanity” accusation, Israel’s dignity would be compromised”. Brent Sasley wrote here a blog post today saying that “It’s hard to avoid noticing that the apology was only realized with Avigdor Lieberman gone from the Foreign Ministry. Blustering and belligerent, Lieberman was never the right choice for the position. If Bibi’s apology can warm his relationship with Obama, reset the relationship with Turkey, and lead to the inclusion rather than exclusion of Israel in global and regional forums, conferences, and exercises, then it’s hard to argue bringing Lieberman back is a good thing. In fact, the obvious conclusion is the opposite one: Israel can accomplish much with Foreign Minister who’s pragmatic and has a broader sense of Israel’s position in the world”.]

Now, back to the opening question: what did Obama do to get Netanyahu to take this step?  Here’s one strange theory, from The Washington Institute’s Robert Satloff: “It is no coincidence that Netanyahu spoke by phone with Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan just as President Obama was departing Israel for Jordan, opening the door to a mutual return of ambassadors. Mending ties between the two leaders has long been a U.S. objective. The fact that Obama delivered a highly symbolic (if indirect) rebuke to Erdogan by visiting the tomb of Theodor Herzl — implicitly endorsing the ideology that the Turkish leader recently called a “crime against humanity” — almost certainly gave cover for Netanyahu to reach out to Ankara”... This is posted here.

Guest Post: There are people who are hurting in Gaza

British humanitarian health workers
barred entry into Gaza

By Peter Smith and Catherine Thick

Although passage to and from Gaza via Israel’s crossing points is severely restricted by the Israeli military, until now we have been fortunate to be granted entry permits. But, our recent request for entry has been refused – without explanation — despite the Israeli general claim that restrictions are easing.

As osteopaths and acupuncturists we have volunteered in Gaza and the West Bank over the last five years, treating those with limited access to health care. We have made eight trips to Palestine since 2008 , and worked three times in Nablus before concentrating more on Gaza. Our motivation is neither political nor religious, but rather simply to help relieve suffering.

We are, however, strongly opposed to the inhumane treatment of the people of Gaza, and concerned at media under-reporting of the lives of the Palestinian people.

This leaves room for virtually-unanswered parodies about the high life lived by some of Gaza’s rich and privileged – a life which the international media sees and even shares during their visits to the Gaza Strip. These parodies have been devised and promoted by Israeli government officials whose responsibilities include dealing with the media. Pro-Israeli organizations working to influence the media have also produced similar pointed commentaries.

But, the existence of this apparent paradox does not in any way negate the reality facing many of Gaza’s 1.6 million Palestinian residents who are poor and suffering and struggling.

Waiting once at the Erez crossing, we spoke to a foreign journalist who explained that Israel banned all its journalists from working in Gaza after Israel’s “disengagement” in 2005.

While Israelis are now barred from personally witnessing what is going on in Gaza, the vast majority of Palestinians in Gaza, meanwhile, have no way to move in or out of Gaza, from which Israel carried out its unilateral “disengagement” of some 8,000 Israeli settlers and the Israeli forces protecting them in September 2005. The “protection” the Israeli forces offered in Gaza, however, was only for the Israelis; the Palestinian population living under Israel’s military occupation suffered from severe clamp-downs on their own internal movement, and the military firing that constituted much of that “protection”.

We witnessed life in Gaza under the sanctions imposed in mid-2007 by the Israeli government and administered by the Israeli military, when Hamas took control in Gaza after its rout of Fatah/Palestinian security services. There have been recurring hostilities ever since, including two large-scale Israeli military operations against Gaza.

The sanctions include denying millions of Palestinians the right to travel to and from Gaza, and are still in effect, although they were “adjusted” after the international outcry following Israel’s May 2010 interception of the Freedom Flotilla and boarding of the large Turkish passenger ship, the Mavi Marmara, during which 9 Turkish men were killed.

These sanctions, however, are collective punishment – which is forbidden under international law.

On one visit, we walked through the Israeli crossing at Erez and out through a long cage in “no-man’s land” inside Gaza, and were waiting for a car to take us to the Hamas border control, when a bomb exploded uncomfortably close. An old man sitting on the ground looked up at us and said “bad”. That pretty much sums up life for many, as we saw it, who are now locked inside Gaza.

During our work in Gaza, we treated a 65 year old man with very painful advanced osteoarthritis of the knees. He was a qualified accountant but could not get a job in his profession and works as a builder’s labourer for 12 hours every day which exacerbated his pain. He was desperate for relief so that he could continue working to support his family. “Those of us who are fortunate to have a job often have to support an extended family which puts us under great pressure”. he said. “Hourly wages are very low so we have to work long hours. We Palestinians are hard-working but we cannot use our skills. We used to manufacture and export furniture to many countries.” But now, he said gloomily, “We can do nothing.”

Another patient drove a truck, delivering and collecting goods at the commercial crossing[s]. “The catastrophe in Gaza is not an earthquake or a flood, it’s man-made,” he said. Shutdowns were frequent and truck drivers are angry about the exorbitant prices exacted by the export companies and Hamas. “They operate like a mafia,” he shouted, “Israel, Egypt, and our government, everybody, are all restricting movement at the crossing and the people of Gaza are paying the price.”

Continue reading Guest Post: There are people who are hurting in Gaza

World Press Photo 2013 – Photo of the Year First Prize – by Paul Hansen for Dagens Nyheter

Israeli’s Operation Defensive Pillar a/k/a Operation Pillar of Clouds was the source of a number of prize-winning news photos this year.

The World Press Photo of the Year, [Spot News, 1st prize singles, 2013] announced on 15 February is “Gaza Burial – 20 November 2012”, by Swedish photographer Paul Hansen who has worked for the daily newspaper Dagens Nyheter since 2000. One of the judges said that he’d looked at “a lot of powerful material” from Syria and Gaza among this year’s entries.

The winning photo was published by Le Nouvel Observateur here.

"Gaza Burial" - 20 November 2013 - World Press Photo of the Year by Paul Hansen
Gaza Burial” – 20 November 2013 – World Press Photo of the Year taken by Swedish photographer Paul Hansen of Dagens Nyheter

The light and color of Paul Hansen’s winning photo is extraordinary — it almost looks like a theater or stage set.

The NYTimes wrote here that the image draws some of its power “from its striking — almost stylized — lighting and tones. Mr. Hansen, 48, said the unusual look resulted when light bounced off the walls of the alley for just a few moments”. It added that “Santiago Lyon, vice president and director of photography for The Associated Press, was chairman of the jury … Mr. Lyon said the jury carefully examines the winning images for post processing. He said they decided Mr. Hansen’s photo was ‘within the acceptable industry parameters’. He added: “Everybody has different standards about these sorts of things, but as a group we felt that it was O.K.”

Here’s how the photo is identified on the World Press Photo website

Gaza Burial
20 November 2012
Gaza City, Palestinian Territories
Photo caption: “Two-year-old Suhaib Hijazi and  older brother Muhammad [three or four years old] were killed, along with their father Fouad, when their house was destroyed in an Israeli missile strike. Their mother was put in intensive care. Fouad’s brothers carry the children to the mosque for the burial ceremony and his body is carried behind on a stretcher“.

UPDATE: Yousef Munayyer of The Palestine Center and The Jerusalem Fund wrote here that, based on a Human Rights Watch account,  “On November 19 at around 7:30 p.m., a single munition struck the house of the Hijazi family in Block 8 of the Jabalya refugee camp. The small, two-story cinderblock house was mostly demolished while 10 family members were inside. The strike killed Fouad Hijazi, a 46-year-old janitor at the Hamad secondary school, along with two of his children, Mohamed, 4, and Sohaib, 2. His wife, Amna, was wounded, as were three of their sons and a daughter”.

Munayyer indicated his information is based on a HRW account posted here, which said this was the result of an aerial bomb strike, one of 18 Apparently Unlawful Airstrikes During the November 2012 Fighting [with no apparent military objective>].

Munayyer picks up HRW’s material that adds this: “The surrounding buildings in the densely packed area were only lightly damaged, except that there was slightly more substantial damage to one side of one adjacent house. The damage suggests that an Israeli aircraft dropped a bomb at the site. Human Rights Watch found no munition remnants at the site.  A neighbor who lives across a very narrow street – too small for a car – from the Hijazi home said he heard no shooting of rockets from the area at the time or at other times during the 8-day conflict. There were no other explosions in the area that night, he said. He and other local residents said they did not know or understand why the Hijazi family home had been hit, saying that the family had no connection to any of Gaza’s armed groups. One of Fouad’s other sons had been killed by an Israeli strike about five years earlier, one neighbor said, but he was a civilian who was killed accidentally.  The IDF did not make any announcements about specific strikes in Jabalya at the time. The Israeli Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center stated that the three victims were ‘non-involved’ civilians”.

The NYTimes noted that “World Press Photo is a 56-year-old nonprofit foundation with headquarters in Amsterdam, where the announcement of this year’s winners was made on Friday morning”.

On 9 February, Paul Hansen won First Place as Newspaper Photographer of the Year [one of two portfolio honors awarded each year by POYi] for a photo he took in Afghanistan for Dagens Nyheter. This winning photo is posted here.

Photo of the Year international – First Place General News – "Last Kiss"

Picture of the Year - First Place General News - Last Kiss - Gaza 18 Nov 2012
Last Kiss - First Place - Photo of the Year international - General News

This is a gorgeous and moving photo.  The composition, the color, the gesture, the hands — gorgeous, and immensely emotional.  It was taken in Gaza, during the IDF’s Operation Pillar of Defense or Pillar of Clouds last November.

“Last Kiss” won First Place in the General News Category of the Photo of the Year International [POYi] contest.

Its caption reads: “A Palestinian man kisses the hand of a dead relative in the morgue of Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, Sunday, Nov. 18, 2012”

The photo was taken by Spanish photographer Bernat Arnangue, of Associated Press, currently based in the Middle East covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“Last Kiss” was announced as the First Place winning photo in the General News category today, and it’s published here.

H/T to journalist Ana Cardenes, currently based in Jerusalem, who Tweeted the announcement of the winning photo:
@AnaCardenesPicture Of the Year. General News. First Place @BernatArmangue´s Last Kiss. #Gaza #POY pic.twitter.com/ohvE6CJJ

Winning photographs in all categories judged during the first session are posted on the POYi Web site at www.poyi.org.

The POYi website days that “Photographs are posted without credits until judging is complete. This is to protect the anonymity of entrants across all categories because many images are entered in multiple categories. Once judging has concluded and POY has verified all winning entries, final results will be announced”. Judging judging of all categories will be concluded on 27 February. The Photo of the Year International contest [POYi] is a program of the Donald W. Reynolds Journalism Institute (www.rjionline.org) at the Missouri School of Journalism.

Yes, Hamas leadership does support Mahmoud Abbas' UNGA move to upgrade Palestine status

In a report from Amman, the official Palestinian news agency WAFA said today that “President Mahmoud Abbas Monday received a phone call from Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal in which he confirmed his support for the Palestinian bid to the United Nations General Assembly to gain a non-member state status”. This is posted here.

There has been confusion about this since last week, when WAFA published something similar, just after the cease-fire announced from Cairo. But some Hamas people denied the report.

This time, there is no denial.

Ma’an News Agency then wrote a corroborating report, posted here, saying: “Hamas chief-in-exile Khalid Mashaal telephoned President Abbas on Monday to confirm the Islamist movements’ support for the upcoming UN bid, the official news agency Wafa reported”.

UPDATE: On Tuesday, Ismail Haniyeh told reporters in Gaza that he supported the move in the UNGA:  “nobody is against statehood, and (my government) supports any political movement to establish a Palestinian state on the occupied Palestinian territory…Our vision is to have a state based on inalienable Palestinian principles, and a state on the pre-1967 borders does not mean ceding the rest of Palestinian land”. This is published here.

We reported this Hamas position last week — see our earlier report here.

Reflections on the Gaza war [Operation Pillar of Clouds]: Giora Eiland says Gaza is a de facto independent state, so its "national infrastructure" could have been hit harder [to deter Hamas]

This man’s remarks deserve a separate entry all to themselves.

Giora Eiland, a retired Major-General in the Israeli Defense Forces, and former head of Israel’s National Security Council, has written a piece published by YNet, here, in which he attempts to justify attacks on what he called “national infrastructure targets” – in Gaza, in this case.

Eiland — apparently trying to amend longstanding principles of international war — wrote that that national infrastructure targets should be considered more military than civilian targets. “Such targets, which include government buildings, fuel caches, communication centers, bridges and the power system, are legitimate in the event of a military conflict between two countries, and this was the exact situation between us and Hamas”.

Eiland’s new argument depends on seeing Gaza as a state. As he wrote today, “Israel is not fighting terror organizations but a state. Gaza became a de facto independent state in as early as 2007, and that’s a good thing. Israel is always better off facing a political entity which serves as a clear address, both for deterrence purposes and for an agreement, than a situation in which the government is formally in the hands of one body but the ability to use fire is in the hands of others”.

By this line of argument, the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority is not a “clear address”, as the IDF rules the West Bank.

Eiland continues: “Because Gaza is a state which initiated ongoing rocket fire on Israel, in a military conflict the right thing to do is to hit all the targets serving the rival regime and allowing it to continue controlling and conducting a war against us“.

Therefore, Eiland writes, “The operation can and should be expanded against the state of Gaza, yet not necessarily through a ground offensive but by causing much greater damage to the infrastructure there”.

“Had there been an ongoing shortage of water and fuel in Gaza, had the power system been seriously damage, had the landline communication system gone out of order, had the roads connecting the different parts of the Strip been
destroyed, and had the government buildings and police stations been destructed, we could have estimated with greater confidence that deterrence had been achieved. This is an important lesson ahead of the next war, and as important in regards to Lebanon. If we conduct the ‘Third Lebanon War’ exclusively against Hezbollah’s military targets, we may lose it”.

Eiland’s argument ignores the Israeli Supreme Court ruling in late January 2008 saying that because Israel has a “historical responsibility” for Gaza, the Israeli military must ensure that it does not cause a humanitarian crisis in Gaza. [The Supreme Court, however, did not define “humanitarian crisis”…]

There it is: the reason to attack “national infrastructure” is to ensure winning a war. The justification is created separately, by merely inventing a new category in which targets, it will be argued, are not civilian [but maybe “dual-use? A lot of mileage can be gotten by trotting out a “dual use” justification.]

Eiland writes: “Hamas is the establishment in the state of Gaza … [and] we missed an opportunity to extensively damage Hamas’ ruling abilities, guaranteeing even greater deterrence, which was the main goal of the operation”.

Reflections on the Gaza war [Operation Pillar of Clouds]: Sara Roy [Boston.com] + Rashid Khalidi [NPR]+ Eyal Weizmann [LRB] + a JPost editorial

Sara Roy, a economist who’s done extensive work on Gaza over years, now senior research scholar at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Harvard University, wrote an article entitled “Where’s our humanity for Gaza”, which is published here on Boston.com. In it, she reports that:

“The Gaza Strip is now in its 46th year of occupation, 22nd year of closure, and sixth year of intensified closure. The resulting normalization of the occupation assumes a dangerous form in the Gaza Strip, whose status as an occupied territory has ceased to matter in the West; the attention has shifted — after Hamas’s 2006 electoral victory and 2007 takeover of the territory — to Gaza’s containment and punishment, rendering illegitimate any notion of human rights or freedom for Palestinians. The Israeli government has referred to its siege policy as a form of ‘economic warfare’ … which was achieved through an Israeli-imposed blockade that ended all normal trade”.

Continue reading Reflections on the Gaza war [Operation Pillar of Clouds]: Sara Roy [Boston.com] + Rashid Khalidi [NPR]+ Eyal Weizmann [LRB] + a JPost editorial

Reflections on the Gaza war [Operation Pillar of Clouds]: Adam Shatz [in LRB] + Daniel Levy [The Daily Beast]

Adam Shatz has just written an article entitled “Why Israel didn’t win” in the current issue of the London Review of Books, in which he says:
“The ceasefire agreed by Israel and Hamas in Cairo after eight days of fighting is merely a pause in the Israel-Palestine conflict. It promises to ease movement at all border crossings with the Gaza Strip, but will not lift the blockade. It requires Israel to end its assault on the Strip, and Palestinian militants to stop firing rockets at southern Israel, but it leaves Gaza as miserable as ever … The fighting will erupt again, because Hamas will come under continued pressure from its members and from other militant factions, and because Israel has never needed much pretext to go to war” … This is posted here.

Daniel Levy [Senior Fellow and the Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations and a Senior Research Fellow at the New America Foundation — and the real drafter for Yossi Beilin + the Israeli team of the Geneva Initiative] wrote in an article titled “Seven Takeaways from the Gaza Ceasefire”, published in The Daily Beast:
“At times, operation Pillar of Defence and the lessons being taken from its conclusion sounded like déjà-vu all over again: featuring an Israel that addresses political problems with military solutions and that wastes whatever quiet is achieved by refusing to take diplomatic initiatives…the Netanyahu-Lieberman axis does have its own thinking on the Palestinian question, and…Israeli politics has significantly shifted. [Netanyahu + Lieberman] have no interest in pursuing a solution that would seem decent or realistic to any neutral observer. They are not two-staters in any recognizable way”. Daniel Levy’s analysis is posted here and here.

Continue reading Reflections on the Gaza war [Operation Pillar of Clouds]: Adam Shatz [in LRB] + Daniel Levy [The Daily Beast]

Reflections on the Gaza war [Operation Pillar of Clouds]: B'Tselem

B’Tselem [summary executions are categorically prohibited]: “International law categorically prohibits the extrajudicial killing of civilians – regardless of the allegations against them”.  This is written in a statement concerning the public killing of 7  men during the IDF’s Operation Pillar of Clouds who were accused of being “collaborators” with Israel.  Some senior Hamas officials, including deputy politburo chief, Mousa Abu Marzook, condemned these executions. [See here.] It is not clear whose idea these executions were. This B’Tselem statement is posted here.

B’Tselem [media sites are not legitimate military targets]: “international humanitarian law is very clear on the subject: Neither reporters nor any other civilians may be intentionally targeted, and every feasible precaution must be taken to protect them from the impact of hostilities. Additionally, the media – including those belonging directly to the parties to the conflict – are not legitimate military targets, even if they are used to disseminate propaganda. Where there exists any doubt as to whether or not a target is military or civilian – that target is to be presumed to be civilian … In a statement issued by the IDF Spokesman immediately following the first attack, on the a-Shuruk Building, the Israeli military stated that the attack had been directed at ‘antennas used by Hamas for military operations against the State of Israel in the northern Gaza Strip’. In a later statement, the IDF Spokesman clarified that both attacks were directed against the communications infrastructure of Hamas, which it claims Hamas uses to communicate operational instructions and disseminate propaganda …

Continue reading Reflections on the Gaza war [Operation Pillar of Clouds]: B'Tselem