Wednesday, August 13, 2014

US Kept Mum for Weeks on Israel’s Civilian Targeting in Gaza

By Gareth Porter

avoidedthreat-a.jpg
A Palestinian searches through rubble of his destroyed home hit by Israeli strikes in Towers Al-andaa - the northern Gaza Strip. (UN Photo/Shareef Sarhan)United Nations officials and human rights organisations have characterised Israeli attacks on civilian targets during the IDF war on Gaza as violations of the laws of war.
During the war, Israeli bombardment leveled whole urban neighbourhoods, leaving more than 10,000 houses destroyed and 30,000 damaged and killing 1,300 civilians, according to U.N. data. Israeli forces also struck six schools providing shelter to refugees under U.N. protection, killing at least 47 refugees and wounding more than 340.
But the Barack Obama administration’s public posture during the war signaled to Israel that it would not be held accountable for such violations.
A review of the transcripts of daily press briefings by the State Department during the Israeli attack shows that the Obama administration refused to condemn Israeli attacks on civilian targets in the first three weeks of the war.
U.S. officials were well aware of Israel’s history of rejecting any distinction between military and civilian targets in previous wars in Lebanon and Gaza.
The administration’s public stance in daily briefings in the early days of the war suggested little or no concern about Israeli violations of the laws of war.During the 2006 Israeli War in Lebanon, IDF spokesman Jacob Dalal had told the Associated Press that eliminating Hezbollah as a terrorist institution required hitting all Hezbollah institutions, including “grassroots institutions that breed more followers”.
And during Israel’s “Operation Cast Lead” in December 2008 and January 2009, the IDF had shelled a school in the Jabaliya refugee camp, killing 42 civilians. The IDF’s justification had been that it was responding to mortar fire from the building, but officials of the United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA) who ran the school had denied that claim.
Given that history, Obama administration policy makers knew that Israel would certainly resort to similar targeting in its Gaza operation unless it believed it would suffer serious consequences for doing so. But the administration’s public stance in daily briefings in the early days of the war suggested little or no concern about Israeli violations of the laws of war.
On Jul. 10, two days after the operation began, State Department spokesperson Jan Psaki was asked in the daily briefing whether the administration was trying to stop the Israeli bombardment of Gaza, as well as the firing of rockets by Hamas.
Psaki’s answer was to recite an Israeli talking point. “There’s a difference,” she said, “between Hamas, a terrorist organisation that’s indiscriminately attacking innocent civilians…in Israel, and the right of Israel to respond and protect their own civilians.”
After four children playing on a beach were killed as journalists watched on Jul. 16, Psaki was asked whether the administration believed Israel was violating the international laws of war. She responded that she was unaware of any discussion of that question.
Psaki said that “tragic event makes clear that Israel must take every possible step to meet its standards for protecting civilians from being killed. We will continue to underscore that point to Israel; the Secretary [of State John Kerry] has made that point directly as well.”
The IDF shelled Al-Wafa Rehabilitation and Geriatric Hospital on Jul. 17, claiming it was a response to launches of rockets 100 metres from the hospital. Psaki was asked the next day whether her failure to warn the Israelis publicly against bombing the hospital had “made any difference”.
She said, “We’re urging all parties to respect the civilian nature of schools and medical facilities….” But she refused to speculate about “what would’ve happened or wouldn’t have happened” had she issued an explicit warning,
On Jun. 16, two days before the ground offensive began, the IDF began dropping leaflets warning the entire populations of the Zeitoun and Shujaiyyeh neighbourhoods to evacuate. It was a clear indication they were to be heavily bombed. IDF bombing and shelling leveled entire blocks of Shujaiyyeh Jul. 20 and 21, citing rockets fired from that neighbourhood.
Kerry was recorded commenting to an aide on an open microphone Jul. 20 that it was a “hell of a pinpoint operation”, revealing the administration’s private view. But instead of warning that the Israeli targeting policy was unacceptable, Kerry declared in a CNN interview that Israel was “under siege from a terrorist organisation”, implying the right to do whatever it believed necessary.
State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf said on Jul. 21 that Kerry had “encouraged” the Israelis to “take steps to prevent civilian casualties”, but she refused to be more specific.
On Jul. 23, Al Wafa hospital was hit by an Israeli airstrike, forcing the staff to evacuate it. The IDF now charged that it had been used as a “command centre and rocket launching site”.
Joe Catron, an American who had been staying at the hospital as part of an international “human shield” to prevent attacks on it, denied that claim, saying he would have heard any rocket launched close to the hospital.
On the same day, three missiles hit a park next to the Al Shifa hospital, killing 10 and wounding 46. The IDF blamed the explosions on Hamas rockets that had fallen short. The idea that three Hamas rockets had fallen short within such short distances from one another, however, was hardly a credible explanation.
The IDF also appeared to target facilities run by the UNRWA. On Jul. 23 and 24, Israeli tank shells hit Palestinian refugees at two different school compounds designated as U.N. shelters, despite intensive communications by U.N. officials to IDF asking to spare them.
An attack on a U.N. refugee shelter at Beit Hanoun elementary school Jul. 24 killed 15 civilians and wounded more than 200. The IDF again claimed a Hamas rocket had fallen short. But it also claimed Hamas fighters had fired on Israeli troops from the compound, then later retreated from the claim.
At the Jul. 24 briefing, Harf read a statement deploring the Beit Hanoun strike and the “rising death toll in Gaza” and said that a UNRWA facility “is not a legitimate target”.
Harf said Israel “could do a bit more” to show restraint. But when a reporter asked if the United States was “willing to take any kind of action” if Israel did not respond to U.S. advice, Harf said the U.S. focus was “getting a ceasefire”, implying that it was not prepared to impose any consequences on Israel for refusing to change its military tactics in Gaza.
On Jul. 25, a reporter at the daily briefing observed that the hospital and schools had been targeted despite reports confirming that there had been no militants or rockets in them.
But Harf refused to accept that characterisation of the situation and repeated the Israeli line that Hamas had used U.N. facilities to “hide rockets”. She said she could not confirm whether there were rockets in “the specific school that was hit”.
The IDF hit another UNRWA school sheltering refugees at Jabaliya refugee camp Jul. 30, killing 10 and wounding more than 100. The IDF acknowledged it had fired several tank shells at the school, claiming again that mortar shells had been fired from there.
That was too much for the Obama administration. White House spokesman Josh Earnest called the attack “totally unacceptable and totally indefensible” and even made it clear that there was little doubt that Israel was responsible.
Even then, however, the administration merely repeated its call for Israel to “do more to live up to the high standards that they have set for themselves”, as Earnest put it.
On Aug. 3, the IDF struck yet another refugee facility at the Rafah Boys Prep School A, killing 12 refugees and wounding 27. The IDF said it had been targeting three “terrorists” riding a motorcycle who had passed near the school.
“The suspicion that militants operated nearby does not justify strikes that put at risk the lives of so many innocent civilians,” said Psaki.
But that criticism of Israeli attacks was far too restrained and too late. The IDF had already carried out what appear to have been massive violations of the laws of war.

Gareth Porter is an independent investigative journalist and winner of the 2012 Gellhorn Prize for journalism. He is the author of the newly published Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare

Quiz: Who Said This? Hillary Clinton or Benjamin Netanyahu?

By Glenn Greenwald
Featured photo - Quiz: Who Said This? Hillary Clinton or Benjamin Netanyahu?Photo credit: Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images
Leave your scores in the comment section:
1) “Israel has a right to defend itself. The steps Hamas has taken to embed rockets and command-and-control facilities and tunnel entrances in civilian areas, this makes a response by Israel difficult.”
2) “Israel did what it had to do to respond to the rockets.”
3) On civilian casualties in Gaza: “That doesn’t mean, just as the United States [tries to] be as careful as possible in going after targets to avoid civilians, that there aren’t mistakes that are made. We’ve made them. I don’t know a nation, no matter what its values are — and I think that democratic nations have demonstrably better values in a conflict position — that hasn’t made errors, but ultimately the responsibility rests with Hamas.”
4) Asked about the bombing of UN schools and killing of Palestinian children: “It’s impossible to know what happens in the fog of war. Some reports say, maybe it wasn’t the exact UN school that was bombed, but it was the annex to the school next door where they were firing the rockets. And I do think oftentimes that the anguish you are privy to because of the coverage, and the women and the children and all the rest of that, makes it very difficult to sort through to get to the truth.”
5) On civilian casualties in Gaza: “There’s no doubt in my mind that Hamas initiated this conflict. … So the ultimate responsibility has to rest on Hamas and the decisions it made.”
6) “When I asked [him/her] about the intense international focus on Gaza, [s/he] was quick to identify anti-Semitism as an important motivating factor in criticism of Israel: ‘It is striking … that you have more than 170,000 people dead in Syria. … You have Russia massing battalions—Russia, that actually annexed and is occupying part of a UN member-state—and I fear that it will do even more to prevent the incremental success of the Ukrainian government to take back its own territory, other than Crimea. More than 1,000 people have been killed in Ukraine on both sides, not counting the [Malaysia Airlines] plane, and yet we do see this enormous international reaction against Israel, and Israel’s right to defend itself, and the way Israel has to defend itself. This reaction is uncalled for and unfair.’”
7) Asked about worldwide objections to Israel’s attacks: “You can’t ever discount anti-Semitism, especially with what’s going on in Europe today. There are more demonstrations against Israel by an exponential amount than there are against Russia seizing part of Ukraine and shooting down a civilian airliner. So there’s something else at work here than what you see on TV.”
8)  “What you see on TV is so effectively stage-managed by Hamas, and always has been. What you see is largely what Hamas invites and permits Western journalists to report on from Gaza. It’s the old PR problem that Israel has. Yes, there are substantive, deep levels of antagonism or anti-Semitism towards Israel, because it’s a powerful state, a really effective military. And Hamas paints itself as the defender of the rights of the Palestinians to have their own state. So the PR battle is one that is historically tilted against Israel.”
9) On Iran: “I’ve always been in the camp that held that they did not have a right to enrichment. Contrary to their claim, there is no such thing as a right to enrich. This is absolutely unfounded. There is no such right.”
10) On Israeli efforts to minimize civilian casualties in Gaza: “There is the surprising number and complexity of the tunnels, and Hamas has consistently, not just in this conflict, but in the past, been less than protective of their civilians.”
11) “As a U.S. official, you have to pay attention to anything that threatens Israel directly, or anything in the larger Middle East that arises out of the Palestinian-Israeli situation. That’s just a given.”
12) For a “prime minister of Israel, you’re damn right I would expect to have control over security [on the West Bank], because even if I’m dealing with Abbas, who is 79 years old, and other members of Fatah, who are enjoying a better lifestyle and making money on all kinds of things, that does not protect Israel from the influx of Hamas or cross-border attacks from anywhere else.”
13) “Well, first of all, Hamas is responsible for the deaths of civilians. [Israel is] not targeting a single civilian. [Israel is] responding to Hamas action and [Israel is] telling the civilians to leave, Hamas is telling them to stay. Why is it telling them to stay? Because it wants to pile up their own dead bodies.”
14) “Hamas is making sure that they don’t go anywhere. Let me tell you about the UN school. Secretary General of the United Nations, before this incident took place, admitted that two UN schools in Gaza were used to stockpile rockets. And he condemned Hamas, he condemned Hamas for turning these schools into military targets, legitimate military targets.”
15) “The important thing to understand is that the reason … civilians are killed [is] not because Israel is targeting civilians, but because Hamas is using civilians as human shields.”
16) “I know what efforts the Israeli army takes to minimize civilian casualties, to directly target at terrorists. I think everybody understands that. The United States has been unequivocal in support Israel’s right of self defense and condemning Hamas for using the civilians as human shields. And I think that unequivocal support is necessary if we’re going to have a successful conclusion to this operation.”
* * * * *
Answers 1-12: Hillary Clinton, this week, in an interview with The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg (writes a proud Goldberg: “She offered a vociferous defense of Israel, and of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, as well.” He added that while she previously pressured Israel on growing settlements, “now, she is leaving no daylight at all between the Israelis and herself”)
Answers 13-16: Benjamin Netanyahu, July 29, Meet the Press

Iraq: Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss

Better PR, But Abadi Is Cut From the Same Cloth as Maliki

A long-standing leader in the Islamic Dawa Party who spent decades in exile and returned to Iraq during the US occupation, quickly rising in the fledgling political scene.
Are we talking about Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, or Prime Minister-Designate Hayder Abadi? It could be either, and that’s the big problem with the deal on “regime change” in Iraq, it really doesn’t matter and is leaving roughly the same person in charge.
The primary difference between Maliki and his successor is that Maliki, once the darling of the US and Iran, has fallen out of favor in the face of soaring sectarian tensions and mounting losses against ISIS.
Abadi is basically Maliki circa 2006, an adherent to the same Dawa ideology beholden to the exact same political interests. The primary difference is that he hasn’t got eight years of failures, and thus doesn’t have the public relations problems of the outgoing PM.
All the talk of Maliki’s divisiveness cost him the foreign support critical to remain Iraq’s ruler, but there is no indication at all that Abadi is planning any serious changes to the status quo, and plenty of reasons to believe he’ll go down the same failed path Maliki has.

Egypt is in the grip of a violent tyranny – the west must act

TOPSHOTS Supporters of ousted president
Mohamed Morsi supporters run from teargas near Rabaa al-Adawiya Square. ‘This was no heavy-handed response to an aggressive demonstration, but a planned campaign of terror against opponents of the new regime.’ Photograph: Mohamed El-Shahed/AFP/Getty Images
Just as western countries are complicit in Israel’s attack on Gaza, so they are in just watching while Egypt is ruled by bloodshed
For a westerner, Tiananmen Square instantly conjures up the horror of a tyrannous dictatorship turning its military might against its own people; of the lone man, shopping bags in his hands, standing defiantly against the approaching People’s Liberation Army tanks. I doubt many of us have even heard of the Rabaa al-Aadawiya Square in Cairo, where more than 1,000 protestors were massacred by Egypt’s military and police last August. This indiscriminate and deliberate use of lethal force, according to Human Rights Watch, represents “one of the world’s largest killings of demonstrators in a single day in recent history”, and probably exceeds the horror of Tiananmen.
Human Rights Watch’s report is a frightening indictment of the regime that overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood president, Mohamed Morsi, last July. There were at least five separate incidents of “mass protestor killings” in the two months that followed; “many of Egypt’s public squares and streets were awash with blood.” As well as violating international human rights law, Human Rights Watch judged that these massacres “likely amounted to crimes against humanity” on the grounds of their “widespread and systematic nature”, as well as evidence suggesting these killings “were part of a policy to attack unarmed persons on political grounds”.
This was no heavy-handed response to an aggressive demonstration, but a planned campaign of terror against opponents of the new regime. In a sign that Cairo will not tolerate any scrutiny of its bloody clampdown on dissent, Egypt’s government has responded by claiming that Human Rights Watch’s investigation was illegal and that its activities “constitute a flagrant violation of state sovereignty under international law”. Its plea is to be left to kill without any embarrassment.
The bloodshed in Gaza has understandably exercised western public opinion, not least because of the role of western governments in arming and backing Israel’s administration. But the west is no less complicit in the atrocities committed by Egypt’s regime, now fronted by president Abdul Fatah al-Sisi. Egypt receives $1.5bn (almost £900m) of military aid a year from the US, and in June the Obama administration released $575m worth of aid that had been frozen in the aftermath of the coup. Britain resumed its sale of arms to Egypt in November.
One of al-Sisi’s advisers is none other than Tony Blair, a man whose repeated work for dictators – such as Kazakhstan’s human rights-abusing regime – should surely leave him with the permanent title of “Britain’s disgraced former prime minister”. As Human Rights Watch’s executive director, Kenneth Roth, put it – after he was deported from Egypt earlier this week – “The message sent so far is that Egypt can get away with mass murder.”
Too little has been said about Egypt’s human rights crisis. More than 40,000 people were detained or indicted in the first 10 months after the coup and, according to Amnesty International, the regime is using methods of torture from “the darkest days of the Hosni Mubarak era”. With “rampant torture, arbitrary arrests and detentions”, there has been a “catastrophic decline in human rights”. There have been claims of rape against male political dissidents; the use of electrocution, including on prisoners’ testicles; and in one case, a hot steel rod was inserted in the anus of a dissident who later died.
It is not just members of the Muslim Brotherhood – now banned as a terrorist organisation – who have been repressed. Three prominent leaders of the initial revolution that overthrew Mubarak’s regime in 2011 have been locked up for three years. Left wing activists, such as Alaa Abd El Fattah, have been put on trial for “unauthorised protests”. Despite al-Sisi’s attempts to buttress his regime with democratic legitimacy, just 47.5% of Egyptians voted in the June election.
Egypt is in the grip of a violent tyranny that brooks little dissent. And just as the west is complicit in Israel’s attack on Gaza, it equally shares some responsibility for the actions of Egypt’s regime. The question is surely – how many more corpses until we start holding those responsible to account?

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

تقرير "هيومان ووتش" وإمكانية محاكمة السيسي

محاكمة إسرائيل: السلطة الفلسطينية متردِّدة وتاريخ "الجنائية" غير مبشِّر

لندن ــ نواف التميمي
12 أغسطس 2014

منذ اندلاع العدوان الإسرائيلي المتواصل ضد قطاع غزة في يوليو/تموز الماضي، والسؤال يُطرح عن إمكانية محاكمة السلطات السياسية والعسكرية الإسرائيلية أمام المحكمة الجنائية الدولية، ولا سيما أن الجرائم التي ارتكبها الجيش الإسرائيلي ضد المدنيين في غزة ماثلة أمام الرأي العام العالمي وتُنقل على الهواء مباشرةً. ومع سقوط كل ضحية من المدنيين الفلسطينيين، تتعالى الأصوات مطالبةً السلطة الفلسطينية لكي تبذل قُصارى جهدها لتفعيل المحكمة الجنائية الدولية نيابةً عنها، ومقاضاة المسؤولين الإسرائيليين، سياسيين وعسكريين وأمنيين، أمام المحكمة بعد ما ارتكبوه من جرائم حرب بحق حوالي ألفَي مدني فلسطيني.

يقول الباحث في القانون والعلاقات الدولية، والمقرّر الخاص المعني بحقوق الإنسان الفلسطيني في الأمم المتحدة منذ العام 2008، ريتشارد فولك، إن "الأدلة الشاهدة على الجريمة الإسرائيلية تؤيد بقوة المزاعم الفلسطينية الأساسية". ويرى فولك أن "إسرائيل مذنبة إما بالعدوان وانتهاك ميثاق الأمم المتحدة، أو بانتهاك صارخ لالتزاماتها كقوة محتلة، بموجب اتفاقية جنيف لحماية السكان المدنيين". كما أن إسرائيل "مذنبة باستخدام القوة المفرطة وغير المتناسبة ضد مجتمع أعزل في قطاع غزة، فضلاً عن ارتكابها جرائم ضد الإنسانية بفرض نظام الفصل العنصري في الضفة الغربية ومواصلة مشروعها الاستيطاني" على حد تعبيره.
"
ريتشارد فولك: الأدلة الشاهدة على الجريمة الإسرائيلية تؤيد بقوة الاتهامات الفلسطينية الأساسية

"

ويثني أستاذ السياسات الدولية في الجامعة الأميركية في واشنطن، ديفيد بوسكو، على كلام فولك. ويشدد بوسكو على أن الاتهامات باقتراف جرائم الحرب، التي طالما تم توجيه الكثير منها للإسرائيليين، عبر مسؤولين فلسطينيين وبعض المراقبين الدوليين على مدار سنوات طويلة، تقع ضمن اختصاص المحكمة الجنائية الدولية. يُضاف إلى ذلك "سلوك إسرائيل بوصفها دولة احتلال، وهو أكثر ما تخشى الدولة العبرية طرحه أمام الجنائية الدولية، لأن القانون الدولي يفرض التزامات، ولا سيما على الدول التي تحتل أراضي أجنبية".

ويشير بوسكو إلى أن سياسة الاستيطان الإسرائيلية تضع مسؤوليها تحت طائلة القانون الدولي. ويؤكد أن طبيعة صنع القرار في السياسة الاستيطانية الإسرائيلية من شأنها وضع كبار قادتها تحت طائلة المحكمة الجنائية الدولية. كما أن الانتهاكات المرتكبة أثناء العمليات العسكرية تضع الضباط من ذوي الرتب المتوسطة والعليا تحت طائلة المحكمة ذاتها.

أما البريطاني المتخصص في القانون الجنائي الدولي، عضو مكتب المحكمة الجنائية الدولية في لاهاي، توبي كادمان، فيوضح بدوره أن المحكمة الجنائية الدولية ومدعي عام المحكمة، يشرعان بالتحقيق في التهم الموجهة للدولة العبرية، وفي توجيه الاتهام بالجرائم التي يُشتبه وقوعها خلال "حرب غزة"، بناءً على تكليفين: الأول من مجلس الأمن الدولي، وهذا التكليف مستبعد لأن أياً من الدول الأعضاء الدائمين في المجلس قد يستخدم حق النقض "الفيتو" ضد صدور التكليف. أما التكليف الثاني فيكون مباشراً، عندما تقوم الدولة الموقعة على معاهدة المحكمة الجنائية الدولية بتقديم طلباً للمدعي العام للتحقيق في الجرائم الدولية المرتكبة على أراضيها أو بواسطة مواطنيها.
"
يمكن للمحكمة الجنائية الدولية أن تطلب من الدولة المشتكى عليها التحقيق واستنفاد قوانينها لمعاقبة المجرمين

"

وعلى هذا الأساس، تتلخص الخطوات المطلوبة من "دولة" فلسطين، بوصفها "دولة عضو مراقب في الأمم المتحدة" للوصول إلى المحكمة الجنائية الدولية، أولاً باعتماد  قرار سياسي فلسطيني رسمي بالتوجه للمحكمة، ثم تقديم رسالة من قبل رئيس دولة فلسطين للانضمام إلى ميثاق روما وطلب الانضمام للمحكمة. وبعد تقديم أو تسليم الرسالة، فإن الأمين العام للأمم المتحدة يوزعها على كل الأطراف في ميثاق روما، وتتم الموافقة على طلب الانضمام بعد 40 يوماً، ثم تُقدم الشكوى باسم الدولة الراغبة بالتوجه إلى المحكمة الجنائية الدولية. وفي حال تقديم الشكوى للمدعي العام الدولي، فيمكن له أن يؤجل النظر في الشكوى لمدة سنة، وله الحق في تمديد الأمر سنة أخرى. وهناك اتفاق بين المحكمة وهيئة الأمم المتحدة، ممثلةً بأمينها العام، تنص على أن مجلس الأمن الدولي بمقدوره طلب تأجيل النظر في الشكوى لمدة سبع سنوات.

ويُمكن للمحكمة الجنائية الدولية أن تطلب من الدولة المشتكى عليها التحقيق واستنفاد قوانينها لمعاقبة المجرمين، استناداً إلى قوانين تلك الدولة. وفي حال فشلت أو تقاعست عن فعل ذلك، فإن المحكمة الجنائية الدولية تقوم بهذا الأمر من تلقاء نفسها. وبعد هذه الخطوات والتحقق من سلامتها، تبدأ الإجراءات الفنية، بما في ذلك تحديد الوقت المطلوب والإبلاغ عن القضية وإيداعها لدى المدعي العام الدولي.

وتعليقاً على قائمة الإجراءات التي تعمل بموجبها المحكمة الجنائية، يقول بوسكو إن الشروع في تحقيق الجنائية الدولية يُمكن أن يمثل من الناحية النظرية عنصراً رئيسياً في المعادلة الدبلوماسية، وقد يُعرّض مسؤولين إسرائيليين كباراً للمثول أمام المحاكمة في جرائم حرب. إلا أن بوسكو يُشكك، في مقال نشرته مجلة "فورين بوليسي" الأميركية، في جدوى التحرك الفلسطيني بالانضمام للجنائية الدولية، ويعتبر أنه "قد لا يُثمر مثل هذا التحرك عن تحقيق شامل في كل ما تقدم، فضلاً عن توجيه الاتهام للقادة الإسرائيليين، إذ أن لا أداء الجنائية الدولية ولا موقفها من القضية الفلسطينية يشيران إلى توفّر الرغبة لديها في إقحام نفسها في مثل هذا النزاع الشرق أوسطي الخطير". ويذكّر بوسكو بأن سجل المحكمة الجنائية الدولية، في ما يتعلق بالقضية الفلسطينية، يرجّح ميلها إلى عدم التدخل.
"
سجل المحكمة الجنائية الدولية في ما يتعلق بالقضية الفلسطينية، يرجّح ميلها إلى عدم التدخل

"

ويعيد الرجل الى الأذهان ما جرى إبان حرب غزة في 2008 ــ 2009 عند احتدام القتال في القطاع، عندما طلبت السلطة الفلسطينية من محكمة الجنائية الدولية التحقيق الرسمي في القضية، فقرر المدعي العام للمحكمة آنذاك، لويس مورينو أوكامبو، أنه ليس من اختصاص المحكمة تحديد هوية الجهات المتقدمة إليها من حيث كونها دولاً أم لا. ويرجح بوسكو ألا يختلف موقف المدعية العامة الحالية للمحكمة، فاتو بنسودا، عن موقف سلفها من فلسطين.

ويشير إلى موقف بنسودا عندما صوّتت الدول الأعضاء في الأمم المتحدة في نوفمبر/تشرين الثاني 2012 بالغالبية على الاعتراف بدولة فلسطين، إذ كان من الممكن أن تعلن بنسودا وقتها عن قبول المحكمة النظر في الدعوى الفلسطينية ضد إسرائيل، إلا أنها أعادت الكرة إلى ملعب السياسيين، وأصرت أن تتقدم فلسطين بدعوى جديدة.

ويَخلص الكاتب إلى أنه إذا اختارت فلسطين سلوك طريق المحكمة الجنائية الدولية، فقد لا تصل في نهاية المطاف إلى ما تصبو إليه، فليس ثمة ما يدفع إلى الاعتقاد بأن المحكمة قد تنظر بجدية وتصدر أحكاماً ناجزة في القضية الفلسطينية.

صناعة تفريخ الدواعش

لميس أندوني
لميس أندوني
في الصورة الكبيرة، لا يمكن تصديق أنه ليس هناك من يستغل داعش لتفتيت العالم العربي، وتشريع جرائم إسرائيل. لكن، يجب أن نرى، أيضاً، حقيقة أن نظامنا التعليمي مصنع تفريخ لدواعش جاهزة للتحويل إلى آلات قتلٍ تمشي على الأقدام.
والأهم، إذا كانت لدينا الشجاعة، يجب أن نواجه الدواعش داخلنا، في عقولنا وقلوبنا، لأننا نتاج تربية استبدادٍ، نعيد إنتاجها في مواقفنا وعلاقاتنا، ولا أتحدث عن دواعش المعتقدات الدينية المغلقة، بل عن كل تفكير إقصائي، ينفي كل "آخر"، مبرراً ذلك بمقولاتٍ، دينية أو علمانية، أو مدفوعاً بذعر طائفي، أو طبقي مشروع وغير مشروع.
داعش هي الوحش الواضح، في حجم وحشيتها، التي تمارسها من دون تجميل، والتي تعكس تربيةً إقصائية ظلامية، استعملت الدين أبشع استعمال، حتى يبقى السلاطين فوق الرؤوس، وتبقى الرؤوس منحنيةً، لا تطالب بل لا تحلم بتغيير.. فالأنظمة استخدمت الدين أداة تطويع، من خلال الخطباء في جوامع المناهج التعليمية، حتى لا يخرج "الرعايا" عن الطاعة. والأنظمة، بدعم أو حتى بتمويل أميركي أحياناً، استخدمت الدين ومنظماتٍ لمحاربة الحركات العلمانية المعارضة وتطويقها، خصوصاً اليسارية منها، بما ذلك تكفيرها لعزلها عن المجتمع والشارع.
المؤسسات الدينية، خصوصاً المرجعية منها، فشلت أو تواطأت بالكامل مع السلطات الحاكمة، لترسيخ حكم الأفراد، وطاغوت الأجهزة الأمنية. فالفكر المستنير يمثل، دائماً وأبداً، خطراً على الاستبداد، لأنه يحرّض على رفض واقع الإذلال والظلم على الأرض، والفكر الظلامي يوهم الناس بأنهم لا يستطيعون الحلم بحياة أفضل على الأرض والوعد في الجنة في الآخرة.
في مجتمعاتنا، اعتمدت الأنظمة على مناهج دينية، والأهم تفسيرات الخطباء والمدرسين، وتعليمات وزارات الأوقاف، لإبقاء الناس والمجتمع تحت السيطرة، ومنعه من الانخراط في العمل السياسي، وفي سنواتٍ مختلفةٍ، شجّعت "الإخوان المسلمين" وحتى السلفيين، لكن اللعبة انقلبت عليها، فالفقير في النهاية، حين لا يخاف شيئاً على الأرض، ينقلب ضدها وبتطرف.
في كل المجتمعات، يدفع العوز والتهميش الناس إلى التمرد، وتتبع الأنظمة، حتى الديمقراطية منها، وسائل احتواء الغضب لمنع ثورة شعبية. لذا، ليس مصادفةً أن تنتشر المخدرات في الأحياء الفقيرة في أميركا، تحت أعين الأمن والشرطة. وفي مجتمعاتنا، تحاول الأنظمة احتواء الغضب بالتجهيل والتخويف، لكن استعمالها الدين انقلب عليها، وعلينا جميعاً.
وتتحمل جماعة الإخوان المسلمين جزءاً غير قليل من المسؤولية، فلم تدع إلى إصلاح اجتماعي، أو اقتصادي، خارج إطار التزمت الديني، فحتى في طرحها بشأن القضية الفلسطينية، اختارت خطاباً دينياً ضد اليهود، بدلاً من إنشاء وعي ضد الاستعمار. ولا يعفي تحميل جماعة الإخوان مسؤوليتها، الأنظمة التي تحاربها من وزر الإقصائية، وما يقوم به النظام في مصر مثالٌ على إلغائيةٍ تحرض وتشرع القتل والسجن والتعذيب والمجازر باسم مكافحة الإرهاب والظلامية، لأن الإرهاب والظلامية لا يقتصران على أصحاب التزمت الديني.
داعش مرآة مكبرة لما أنتجه نظام ثقافي متخلف ومستبد، انتعش في أجواء القمع وتقاليد المجتمع السلطوي الأبوي، ليهددنا، ويقتل أحلامنا بالحرية، فأصبح كثيرون يستجيرون بأنظمةٍ، هي جزء من البلاء، خوفاً من همجيةٍ، لا تحاول تجميل وحشيتها.
لكن داعش قد تكون أقبح تمثيلٍ للتطرف باسم الدين. لكن، لنكن واضحين مع أنفسنا، فمصنع تفريخ الدواعش لم ينتج دواعشَ تتغطّى بالدين فحسب، بل دواعش تتغطى بالتقدم والعلمانية، وتؤيد القضاء نفسياً وجسدياً على كل من يخالفها، فالمصيبة أكبر وأوسع من داعش التكفير والنفي والتطهير الطائفي.
ولنسأل أنفسنا: هل أيدنا الثورات العربية، لأننا أردنا، ونريد، الحرية والعدالة، أم ما زلنا رهائن القيم الاستبدادية؟ فلا يمكن أن نقود عملية تغيير إلى دولة المواطنة، ووضع أسس العدالة الاجتماعية، من دون القضاء على الدواعش في نفوسنا.

History Repeating Itself? U.S. Bombing Iraq While Jockeying to Oust Leader It Once Favored

Democracy Now!

"As a U.S. bombing campaign in northern Iraq enters its fifth day, Baghdad is in a state of political crisis. Eight years ago, Nouri al-Maliki rose to prime minister with the help of the United States. Now the United States has helped pick his replacement. But al-Maliki is refusing to go — deploying his forces around Baghdad and accusing critics of staging a coup. The political crisis is worsening as U.S. airstrikes continue on Islamic State militants in the north. President Obama authorized the strikes last week in what he called an effort to halt the militants’ advance on Erbil, where the U.S. has a consulate and military personnel, as well as to prevent a massacre of the Yazidi minority. U.S. officials have confirmed the CIA is also secretly sending arms and ammunition directly to Kurdish forces known as the Peshmerga. We are joined by Spencer Ackerman, national security editor at The Guardian...."

As U.S. Strikes Continue in Iraq, Yazidis Still Need Safe Passage to Flee ISIS "Cleansing" Attacks

Democracy Now!

"As we continue our coverage of the crisis in Iraq, we turn to the plight of the Yazidi religious minority fleeing a jihadist advance in the north. Thousands of Yazidis remain trapped without food or water on Mount Sinjar near the Syrian border. They have taken refuge there under the threat of attack from the Islamic State, which has branded them as "devil worshippers." Iraq’s human rights minister, Mohammed al-Sudani, says the Islamic State has killed at least 500 Yazidis in recent days. Some victims were reportedly buried alive. Around 300 women were also reportedly kidnapped as slaves. In addition to its airstrikes targeting the Islamic State in northern Iraq, the United States has also carried out air drops of relief aid onto Mount Sinjar. We go to the northern Iraqi city of Erbil to speak with Joe Stork, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa program at Human Rights Watch. Stork has been meeting with Yazidis fleeing Islamist fighters in northern Iraq...."

Airstrikes in Iraq Deja Vu

Monte Wolverton, Cagle Cartoons



Hashtag Genocide: Why Gaza Fought Back

Al-Qassam mosque of Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza, destroyed in Israeli strikes. (Ahmed Al-Tawil)
Al-Qassam mosque of Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza, destroyed in Israeli strikes. (Ahmed Al-Tawil)
By Ramzy Baroud
My old family house in the Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza was recently rebuilt by its new owner, into a beautiful three-story building with large windows adorned by red frames. In Israel’s most recent and deadliest war on Gaza, the house sustained significant damage. A large hole caused by Israeli missiles can be seen from afar, in a part of the house where our kitchen once stood.
It seems that the original target was not my house, however, but that of our kindly neighbor, who had spent his entire working-life toiling between manual jobs in Israel, and later in life as a janitor for UN-operated schools in Gaza. The man’s whole life savings were invested in his house where several families lived. After “warning” rockets blew up part of his house, several missiles pulverized the rest.
My entire neighborhood was also destroyed. I saw photos of the wreckage-filled neighborhood by accident on Facebook. The clearance where we played football as little kids was filled with holes left by missiles and shrapnel. The shop where I used my allowance to buy candy, was blown up. Even the graveyard where our dead were meant to “rest in peace” was anything but peaceful. Signs of war and destruction were everywhere.
My last visit there was about two years ago. I caught up with my neighbors on the latest politics and the news of who was dead and who was still alive underneath the shady wall of my old house. One complained about his latest ailments, telling me that his son Mahmoud had been killed as he had been a freedom fighter with a Palestinian resistance movement.
I couldn’t fathom the idea that Mahmoud, the child I remembered as running around half-naked with a runny nose, had become a fierce fighter with an automatic rifle ready to take on the Israeli army. But that he was, and he was killed on duty.
Time changes everything. Time has changed Gaza. But the strip was never a passive place of people subsisting on hand-outs or a pervasive sense of victimhood. Being a freedom fighter preceded any rational thinking about life and the many choices it had to offer growing up in a refugee camp, and all the little kids of my generation wanted to join the Fedayeen.
But options for Gazans are becoming much more limited than ever before, even for my generation.
Since Israel besieged Gaza with Egypt’s help and coordination, life for Gazans has become largely about mere survival. The strip has been turned into a massive ground for an Israeli experiment concerned with population control. Gazans were not allowed to venture out, fish, or farm, and those who got even close to some arbitrary “buffer zone,” determined by the Israeli army within Gaza’s own borders, were shot and often killed.
With time the population of the strip knew that they were alone. The short stint that brought Mohammed Morsi to power in Egypt offered Gaza some hope and a respite, but it soon ended. The siege, after the overthrow of Morsi became tighter than ever before.
The Palestinian leadership in Ramallah did very little to help Gaza. To ensure the demise of Hamas, Mahmoud Abbas’ Palestinian Authority carried on with its “security coordination” with Israel, as Gaza suffered a Draconian siege. There was no question, that after all the failed attempts at breaking the siege and the growing isolation of Gaza, Gazans had to find their own way out of the blockade.
When Israeli began its bombardment campaign of Gaza on July 6, and a day later with the official launch of the so-called Operation Protective Edge, followed by a ground invasion, it may have seemed that Gaza was ready to surrender.
Political analysts have been advising that Hamas has been at its weakest following the downturn of the Arab Spring, the loss of its Egyptian allies, and the dramatic shift of its fortunes in Syria and, naturally Iran. The “Hamas is ready to fold” theory was advanced by the logic surrounding the unity agreement between Hamas and Fatah; and unity was seen largely as a concession by Hamas to Abbas’ Fatah movement, which continued to enjoy western political backing and monetary support.
The killing of three Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank in late June was the opportunity for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to test the misleading theory on Hamas’ weakened position. He launched his war that eventually mounted into a genocide, hoping that Hamas and other resistance groups would be forced to disarm or be completely eradicated – as promised by various Israeli officials.
But it didn’t. From the very first days of the war it became clear the resistance could not be defeated, at least not as easily as Netanyahu had expected. The more troops he invested in the war on Gaza, the more Israeli army casualties increased. Netanyahu’s response was to increase the price of Palestinian resistance by inflicting as much harm on Palestinian civilians as possible: He killed over 1,900, wounded nearly 10,000, a vast majority of whom were civilians, and destroyed numerous schools, mosques, hospitals, and thousands of homes, thus sending hundreds of thousands of people on the run. But where does one run when there is nowhere to go?
Israel’s usual cautious political discourse was crumbling before Gaza’s steadfastness. Israeli officials and media began to openly call for genocide. Middle East commentator Jeremy Salt explained:
“The more extreme of the extreme amongst the Zionists say out loud that the Palestinians have to be wiped out or at the very least driven into Sinai,” he wrote, citing Moshe Feiglin, the deputy of the Israeli Knesset, who called for “full military conquest of the Gaza strip and the expulsion of its inhabitants. They would be held in tent encampments along the Sinai border while their final destination was decided. Those who continued to resist would be exterminated.”
From Israeli commentator Yochanan Gordon, who flirted with genocide in “when genocide is permissible,” to Ayelet Shaked, who advocated the killing of the mothers of those who resist and are killed by Israel. “They should follow their sons. Nothing would be more just. They should go as should the physical houses in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise more little snakes are raised,” he wrote on Facebook.
References to genocide and extermination and other devastatingly violent language are no longer “claims” levied by Israeli critics, but a loud and daily self-indictment made by the Israelis themselves.
The Israelis are losing control of their decades-long hasbara, a propaganda scheme so carefully knitted and implemented, many the world over were fooled by it. Palestinians, those in Gaza in particular, were never blind to Israel’s genocidal intentions. They assembled their resistance with the full knowledge that a fight for their very survival awaited.
Israel’s so-called Protective Edge is the final proof of Israel’s unabashed face, that of genocide. It carried it out, this time paying little attention to the fact that the whole world was watching. Trending Twitter hashtags which began with #GazaUnderAttack, then #GazaResists, quickly morphed to #GazaHolocaust. The latter was used by many that never thought they would dare make such comparisons.
Gaza managed to keep Israel at bay in a battle of historic proportions. Once its children are buried, it will once again rebuild its defenses for the next battle. For Palestinians in Gaza, this is not about mere resistance strategies, but their very survival.

52% of UK voters believe Israel acted disproportionately over Gaza – poll

Guardian/ICM survey, which also found greater opposition to Israel than Palestinians, appears to support Lady Warsi who resigned over the issue

A Palestinian flag flutters as a man searches the remains of his house
A Palestinian man searches the remains of his house in Khan Younis during the ceasefire. More than 1,900 Palestinians have died in the conflict, against 64 Israelis. Photograph: Ibraheem Abu Mustafa/Reuters
A majority of British voters believe that Israel acted in a disproportionate manner during the recent Gaza conflict, according to the latest Guardian/ICM poll, which lends support to the arguments which persuaded Lady Warsi to resign from the government.
Amid hopes that the month-long conflict between Israel and Hamas could be ending as a ceasefire continued to hold, the poll also found greater opposition to Israel than to the Palestinians.
The poll found that 52% of voters believe that Israel acted disproportionately when it responded to the firing of rockets by Hamas by launching air strikes against the Gaza Strip. It found that 19% thought Israel had acted proportionately while 29% of those polled did not know.
The findings will lend weight to the argument of Lady Warsi, who resigned last week as a senior Foreign Office minister after criticising David Cameron for his "morally indefensible" failure to describe the Israeli action as disproportionate.
More than 1,900 Palestinians, most of whom were civilians, have died in the conflict in which 64 Israeli soldiers have also been killed. Three civilians have been killed in Israel - two Israelis and a Thai agricultural worker.
Nick Clegg endorsed some of Warsi's criticisms as he called for the suspension of arms export licences to Israel after he also described Tel Aviv's military response as disproportionate.
The poll found that the conflict has hardened opinions against Israel, though the findings suggest there is unease about the actions of Hamas. According to the poll, 41% of voters say their opinion of Israel has worsened during the recent conflict. A larger number of voters (48%) say their opinion of Israel has remained the same. A fraction of voters (2%) say their opinion of Israel has improved while 8% say they do not know.
A fifth of voters (21%) say their opinion of the Palestinians has worsened while just 9% say their opinion has improved despite widespread international condemnation of the Israeli actions and support for the plight of Palestinian civilians killed in the Israeli air raids. A clear majority of voters (60%) say their opinion of the Palestinians has not changed while 9% do not know.
The poll asked voters about their views on "the Palestinians" – not distinguishing between Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, and the Fatah faction of the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, which controls the West Bank. A unity government was agreed in June. Hamas is condemned by Tel Aviv and the US as a terrorist group bent on the destruction of Israel.
The belief among a majority of voters that Israel acted in a disproportionate manner is likely to be highlighted by critics of Cameron, who believe the prime minister was wrong to prevent Tory ministers from using such language. In his letter to Warsi after her resignation, the prime minister described the situation in Gaza as "intolerable" as he raised concerns about "the heavy toll of civilian casualties". But he said Israel had the right to defend itself. Hamas is estimated to have launched 3,000 rockets from Gaza in recent weeks.
ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1,002 adults aged 18+ on 8-10 August 2014. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.

Out of the carnage of Gaza a new spirit: we are all Palestinians

The world has witnessed the daily brutality of Israel’s collective punishment and our cause is now stronger

A rally for peace in Gaza, in Santiago, Chile.
A rally for peace in Gaza, in Santiago, Chile. Photograph: Ivan Alvarado/Reuters
On this bloody international battlefield over truth, where thousands of Palestinians now die, Israel has lost. It is in possession of the most powerful and entrenched lobby in America that terrorises its now abject political class – most recently frightening the senate into unanimously voting in favour of its current aggression. In Britain, the BBC and a prime minister that have shamed and revolted the citizens they serve. It has tireless advocates and apologists manning editorial desks and television producers’ offices. It is ranked among the world’s top military powers.
Yet with all of this, it has lost, and the Palestinian cause has been made that much stronger. This is because the entire world has been able to grasp, very precisely and intimately, exactly what Palestinians have been facing day in day out for decades. The temporary safety of an Unrwa girls’ school in an overcrowded refugee camp, with its pile of children’s clothes and mattresses blood-soaked from long-range missiles; dusty roads filled with the debris of collapsed residential buildings, under which entire families groan and fall silent.
We learn what will happen immediately after Israeli soldiers die, or a ceasefire is about to come into force; the harbinger of new massacres. People shelled as they flee, exhausted ambulance workers murdered as they come to assist those wounded and dying; boys killed watching the World Cup in a beachside cafe, or simply fooling with a ball in the dunes by a hotel; overflowing makeshift mortuaries, where parents hold their children’s hands and kiss their foreheads one last time. In Gaza, as in Jenin, Karameh or Beirut, wherever the Palestinian people have been on their feet from 1947 to 2014, you will find this same story.
Today with images, eyewitness reports and videos sent direct from the killing fields of Gaza, anyone in the world with a phone, a laptop or even just a neighbourhood cafe with a television can experience the hourly atrocities that a high-tech occupying army is capable of imposing. They can experience the effects that the latest warships, tanks, drones, fighter aircraft, heavy artillery, endless American money, and British and US armaments can have on a hostage people.
Following the second world war, in revulsion at the suppression of civilian populations by occupying armies, the international law of armed conflict (the fourth Geneva convention) banned outright many of the practices being meted out with impunity in Gaza – shelling residential neighbourhoods or refugee camps and villages; the mass destruction of civic infrastructure, industry, essential utilities, schools, mosques, churches, hospitals, churches, ambulances, cemeteries, entire neighbourhoods. In Gaza, such things are now laid to waste. People watching are brought to the history they learned at school, when heroes fought against military occupation, when they were educated to celebrate the valour of resistance to military rule. So they understand collective punishment as the war crime that it is, and its sinister purpose.
The shocking ability for anyone and everyone to witness much of the merciless carnage as it happens has also made crystal clear its logic. No matter what Israel or its defenders say, this is not about self defence, or tunnels, or rockets, or Hamas. It is, rather, a brutal colonial war waged on an imprisoned, blockaded, and besieged people who do not care to live on their knees.
These war crimes are what we Palestinians face whether we surrender or whether we stand. As one of the most ardent philosophers of freedom Jean-Jacques Rousseau pointed out, when explaining the uselessness of one people trying to subjugate another and expecting submission: “There is peace in the dungeons, but is that enough to make them desirable?” For the Palestinians, it is our story that can now be clearly seen: a decades-old struggle for freedom, and of united resistance to our collective destruction. And in this long and hard battle, a terrible beauty is born. It is a story replete with bravery, with sacrifice, with a grand collective spirit, of hearts full of grief and of love.
Collective spirit is tangible everywhere you find Palestinians. The very unity Israel set out to destroy by launching this war has manifested itself on a popular level both inside Gaza and outside of it to an unprecedented degree.
The head of the Catholic churches in Gaza, on seeing the demolished mosques over that terrible weekend of Eid, calling the people to bring their minarets and set them on the roof of the churches to pray with them together, as one people; young protesters at the biggest demonstration of the occupied West Bank in decades, shot in the head at Qalandiyawith live bullets by snipers with silencers, with others rushing to take their place; in Hebron, old men walking out alone in front of the young protesters who were being fired on at point blank range; families hurrying to give blood, to volunteer; the united Palestinian delegation made up of all the political factions at Cairo, demanding with one voice the lifting of the siege to free our people; and above all those who are defending our streets and neighbourhoods, heads held high.
These gestures, which illustrate a people standing , have brought people across the world shoulder to shoulder with Palestinians in anger at what they see, but also in love for that universal freedom so precious to all people, and to honour the universality of human dignity in the face of such ugliness.
Nelson Mandela, who left prison without renouncing the armed struggle, declared that South Africa would not be free until Palestine is free. He understood that a struggle for justice always unites ordinary people and always isolates oppression and injustice.
Each minute, more people raise their voice for embargoes, sanctions, and boycotts; more send support to Palestinians; more Latin American countries send Israel’s ambassadors home; more ministers resign on principle; more people speak up freely for, and with, the Palestinians in their epic battle for freedom. Israel has lost. The demonstrators’ chant that went out from Saturday’s march of more than 150,000 in London, from protests in cities across the world from South Africa to Santiago, shows that while the Palestinians resist they will never be alone, and that Palestine and its people will one day be free. Their chant has echoed straight to Gaza: “In our thousands, in our millions, we are all Palestinians.”
Karma Nabulsi is a fellow in politics at Oxford University