The United Arab Emirates and Israel

With much fanfare, the Netanyahu and Trump PR machines announced that Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have agreed to establish diplomatic relations. According to the UAE Israel has agreed to give up the West Bank annexation plans, which Netanyahu has been talking about. According to Trump, Israel would forgo for now “declaring sovereignty” over occupied West Bank territory. And... according to Netanyahu his plan to annex part of the West Bank “remains on the table.” 

 

The Israeli move seems brilliant: they first announce that they would take over (others call it steal) Palestinian land and then in return for agreeing to cool their landgrab plan for a while, get something tangible. It is, of course, far from brilliant: without reaching an agreement with the Palestinians, their frustration will continue to fester. Israel might get richer and militarily stronger, but it will not live in peace. Rich and strong and screw the rest.

 

It has been reported that settlers are livid. They had believed Netanyahu and were hoping for the formalisation of the de-facto annexation, that Israel has been carrying out salami-fashion for years. To be told that you have to put off stealing for a while must be difficult for them. Judging by the past, they need not worry. Operation Landgrab will be allowed to continue.  

 

Palestinians too are disappointed – by their “brethren”. I don’t know why. They should have gotten used to it. They have been mistreated by the Arab world throughout their history. Yet, neither pointing to that fact, nor to the Palestinians' own mismanagement of their interests, will solve the problem. And, as already said, unless it is solved, there will regularly be trouble.

Solidarity I

It began with rumours in various countries that the health system would very soon have to prioritise life-saving treatment. Priority was said to be given to the under 70s, or some said under 60s. 

Some American voices could be heard saying that the older generation would gladly die to save the economy for the younger one. Does anyone, anyone at all, believe that these disgusting Republicans do not have personal arrangements to ensure that when push comes to shove, they would be given access to the treatment? That they personally would not have to pay the price, which they suggest the rest of the old population should?

A few days ago, the 80-year-old Israeli philosopher, Asa Kasher, whose claim to fame was writing the ethical code for the Israeli army (sounds like a contradiction-in-terms), wrote an article, all up-in-arms about this suggestion that a 50-year-old should have priority over a 90-year-old. 

It is wonderful what the eye of the beholder can do. With that understanding, Kasher, if he is up to it, may wish to spend his remaining days to ponder, how a Palestinian would write the ethical code for the Israeli army.

The A- Word

A few days ago, the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, said that unless Israel reached a peace agreement with the Palestinians, it “risked becoming an Apartheid state”.

The Israel lobby in the US in their not so holy alliance with right-wing Republicans, who will attack Democratic administrations regardless of merit, managed to force Kerry to apologise.

He shouldn’t have.  

Apartheid is a system of segregation or discrimination on grounds of race and Israel is justifiably nervous about the use of the term apartheid in connection with its policies vis-à-vis the Palestinians. After all, South Africa became a pariah in the world until it rid itself of its apartheid system. Yet, even many Israelis agree that Israeli rule or control of a substantial Arab population (beyond the 1967-line), which may not be racially motivated, produces an apartheid-like outcome.

Kerry was wrong: Israel does not “risk” becoming an apartheid state. Israel’s course of action leading to a one-state solution, a bi-national state under Jewish rule, will undoubtedly create apartheid. AIPAC, the Israel lobby, might find the suggestion that Israel is at risk of becoming an apartheid state  “offensive and inappropriate,” but it is not half as offensive and inappropriate as Israel’s policies AIPAC so successfully defends.  

Introducing emotive terminology such as apartheid into a debate quickly raises the level of agitation and should – if only for that reason - be done with awareness. Sometimes, however, increasing the pressure is just what is necessary.   

Germany and Israel on Palestine

Until this morning, Germany together with the USA, Canada, Guatemala and let’s not forget Micronesia were the only countries that were about to vote against the Palestinian bid to become a non-member-observer-state at the UN. Now it seems that Germany has decided to abstain.

Senior Israeli government spokesmen – in various tones of brutality - have warned that if Abbas would go to the UN it would be the end of the Palestinian Authority. But then, the Israeli government has been doing its utmost to dismantle the Palestinian Authority anyway. The way the vote is going, Israel is being shown what the world thinks of its conduct and its policies. It is sadly fast becoming a pariah state. 

It must have been a hard decision for Mrs. Merkel. Supporting Israeli governments has been one of the means by which German governments have attempted to make reparation by supporting the Jewish people after the Holocaust. Yet, had Germany voted against the Palestinian bid, it would have done so against German public sentiment. Israeli policy vis-à-vis the Palestinians, its arrogant obstinacy and its deteriorating moral values have become too much even for Germany. Germans are becoming more and more anti-Israel.

Not only Germany, Israel too - instead of opposing - should vote for the Palestinian bid. 

Paradise or the Girl from Hell

When Mr and Mrs Abergil named their daughter Eden they probably did not consider the meaning of the name. Eden in Hebrew means something refined, delicate. The Garden of Eden is paradise.

This is Eden Abergil's version of paradise. A Paradise that does not ' see anything wrong with Facebook images of Palestinian detainees.'

Unworthy of her name – Let her go to hell.

Just a Dinner Party in Germany

Out of the blue, a friend of mine said that he was uncomfortable with the fact that Israel was patrolling the Persian Gulf with two U-boats that Germany had given to Israel as a present and which Israel had armed with nuclear weapons.

My friend continued and explained that the whole world knows how in 1981, Israel had “started a war with Iraq” to bomb its nuclear reactor and that it was now planning to do the same with 17 nuclear sites in Iran. He added that the Iranians were not stupid and that they had buried their sites deep in the earth and that Israel was mad with its plans to attack Iran with those two small U-Boats.

I blew up. But he was adamant, yes, he said, he knew that those were Israel’s plans and this would not be Israel’s first mistake. Israel, after all had gone into that war in Gaza and a couple of years ago in Lebanon. I explained that I had no idea what Israel’s plans were and that I doubted very much that my friend had any inside information from the depth of Israel’s – probably non-existent – strategic planning. However, I reminded the flabbergasted dinner table – flabbergasted because of my reaction – that unlike Germany or any other country in the world, Israel had enemies that made clear their wish to annihilate it. Iran is one such enemy and that country has now been allowed to become nuclear.

Before Israel allows Iran or anyone else to annihilate it, it will strike. I have no moral qualms about that. My German friend does. Israel is not considering the other six billion inhabitants of the earth, he said. Some Germans are rightly uncomfortable with the fact that Germany had started two world wars. My friend is taking this discomfort a step further: he is terrified by the idea that German U-Boats – be they in Israeli hands- could trigger a third world war. This would be a third world war that could be laid at Germany’s door.

Israel’s irresponsible and immoral conduct vis-à-vis the Palestinians produces more and more anti-Israel sentiment. The willingness to accept a serious threat to Israel’ existence is where such sentiment should not be allowed to go.

2^nd Dinner

Two days later, at a different dinner party in Germany, I was lectured to by a German lawyer. This man explained to me how well Israel had done in the last twenty years. Every year – he told me – Israel enlarges the territory that it populates; every year it cultivates more land. To top it all, Israel manages this without waging war.

Choosing who to dine with is an art.

Does Netanyahu Have the Balls (for Peace)?

For the first time in many years the US administration is giving Israel a hard time. Even the American friends have grown tired of Israel’s lies.

Will Netanyahu seize this as his opportunity to go down in history as the man who brought peace with the Palestinians?

Nobody likes to give in to pressure, least-of-all extremists and faith-driven right-wingers. Netanyahu’s bloated right-wing cabinet and the coterie surrounding him cannot make one very optimistic. Netanyahu’s brother-in-law is on record with an accusation that Obama is an anti-Semite. Others surrounding Netanyahu say so off-the-record. Even more outrageous to them are Jews in the American administration – such as the two senior Obama advisors, David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel - who do not toe the Israeli line. Are the two on the Mossad’s list? Perhaps for some dirt that could be fed to opponents?

Israel’s moral situation is fast deteriorating and for its own good it needs to be forced by the outside world. The alternative is frightful. Let the external force that will lead to change be the US and Europe and not war.

The Israel lobby in the US must be working overtime these days. Netanyahu will be pulling all the levers he can and calling all the favours he is able to. In the past, this has always worked and US Presidents have succumbed to the pressure.

Please, Mr President, do not falter.

Thank You America

It has taken the US a long time, a very very long time. Left-of-centre Israelis have been praying for US intervention for years. Instead, the USA has permitted Israel to run wild with its settlements in the Occupied Territories. Finally, the Obama administration has told Israel to fuck off.

Israel had gotten used to pissing on its dwindling number of friends with impunity. Announcing new building plans in East Jerusalem during Jo Biden’s Israel visit last week was one outrage too many. Worse even was Israel’s subsequent explanation that they were sorry about the timing of the announcement. They were not sorry about the actual building plans.

Will Netanyahu finally go for peace? Will he bring in new coalition partners instead of his present land grabbing lot? I believe that - like so many others - Israel only understands the language of power. The time has come for the US to use its power.

Why do some Israelis call the world to boycott Israel?

In an open letter published by the Los Angeles Times, Dr. Neve Gordon, a senior lecturer at the Ben Gurion University in Beer-Sheba, called on the world to boycott Israel: “Putting massive international pressure on Israel is the only way to guarantee that the next generation of Israelis and Palestinians – my two boys included – does not grow up in an apartheid regime.”

Anat Matar, a colleague at the Tel Aviv University, came out in his support: “…only when the Israeli society’s well-heeled strata pay a real price for the continuous occupation will they finally take genuine steps to put an end to it.”

The general reaction in Israel, however, was uproar. Ben Gurion University’s President stated that Gordon’s remarks were “…an abuse [of] the freedom of speech prevailing in Israel and at the Ben Gurion University”. Moreover, they were “irresponsible and morally reprehensible”. She also suggested: “Academics who entertain such resentment toward their country are welcome to consider another professional and personal home.”

Not only right-wing Israelis are uncomfortable with calls such as Gordon’s or Matar’s. Gordon admits, “A global boycott can’t help but contain echoes of anti-Semitism. It also brings up questions of a double standard (why not boycott China for its egregious violations of human rights?)”

Jewish history is a long story of the successful Christian drive at marginalising Jews and Judaism. When that came to an end after the Holocaust, Arab countries started to systematically boycott Israel. For many years they successfully blackmailed their European and other trade partners into boycotting the newly founded Jewish State.

These were boycotts stemming from hatred of Jews and a wish to get rid of them and later from a concerted and clearly stated Arab wish to eliminate the Jewish State of Israel. This hope is still very much a fact of life.

However, when Gordon calls for external pressure he does so as an Israeli patriot and out of love of his country. Gordon, Matar and many other Israelis who pray and hope that the new US administration will force Israel to get out of the Occupied Territories do not hate Israel; they love their country and want it to thrive. They just hate the grossly immoral condition Israel has deteriorated into over the last forty years. To change that, they call for a boycott.

Gordon suggests pressure be placed in a “gradual sustainable manner that is sensitive to context and capacity” and talks of “sanctions on and divestment from Israeli firms operating in the occupied territories, followed by actions against those that help sustain and reinforce the occupation in a visible manner.”

Is that wrong?