You are on page 1of 39

Human Rights abuses are rampant in Israel.

Until recently, torture was legal and the security forces routinely tortured political detainees, most of whom were never charged with any crimes. Methods include violent shaking of detainees, restraining in very painful conditions, sensory deprivation, sounding of loud music for prolonged periods and others. Several prisoners have died as a consequence of torture. It's hoped that a recent Supreme Court decision outlawing this practice, however, will finally put an end to this widely condemned practice. Israeli forces continue to arbitrarily detained hundreds of Palestinians on "security" grounds. Hundreds are put under administrative detention, without being charged or sentenced, in violation of internationally protected due process rights. Some are kept in prison for years without ever being charged. Hundreds more are sent to prison for political reasons following trials that do not comply with international due process standards. Often the main evidence against prisoners are confessions extracted through torture. Detainees are regularly denied visits from their lawyers or family members. Dozens of Lebanese are also being held in administrative detention in Israelicontrolled Southern Lebanon. This includes men, women and children. Some have been in prison for over ten years without charges. The Israeli Supreme Court has found it lawful to hold otherwise unlawfully-detained prisoners as "bargaining chips" for exchange for Israeli prisoners abroad. Israeli security forces have also engaged in extra-judicial executions of Palestinians. Those responsible are very rarely punished for their crimes.

Israel – Gaza Conflict December 2008 – January 2009 On December 27, 2008, Israel launched "Operation Cast Lead" - a 22-day military campaign with the stated aim of suppressing rocket fire from Gaza into Israel. Human Rights Watch documented serious violations of the laws of war by Israel, Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups, some of which amounted to war crimes. In Gaza, more than 700 civilians died in the fighting; in Israel, 3 civilians lost their lives. Laws-of-war violations by Israeli forces included drone-launched missile attacks that killed 29 civilians, the killing of 11 civilians holding white flags, and the use of white phosphorus munitions in densely populated areas. Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups violated the laws of war by firing hundreds of rockets deliberately or indiscriminately into civilian areas in Israel. To date, neither Israel nor Hamas has held the perpetrators of these violations to account, despite recommendations of the UN Fact-Finding Mission (the "Goldstone report"), supported by the UN's Human Rights Council and General Assembly, that Israel and Hamas conduct credible, independent investigations. In Israel, only one soldier has been convicted for a wartime abuse: he got seven months in prison for the theft of a credit card. In Gaza, no one is known to have been punished

for firing rockets indiscriminately into Israel, or for the arbitrary detentions, torture and killings by Hamas of other Palestinians. In addition, both sides continue to violate international humanitarian law. Palestinian armed groups have slowed but not stopped their indiscriminate rocket fire into Israel. Israel is severely restricting the import into Gaza of essential goods and supplies needed for reconstruction. One year after the fighting, Gazan civilians have been unable to repair their destroyed homes, schools and roads. Full coverage here >>

About us
The Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group (PHRMG) was founded in December 1996 in response to the deteriorating state of democracy and human rights under the newly established Palestinian Authority. The group was founded by a diverse group of well-established Palestinians, including Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) members, newspaper editors, journalists, a union leader, veteran human rights activists and religious leaders. The political composition of its founders is diverse - including members of many Palestinian organizations and institutions - thereby ensuring the non-partisan character of the organization. The PHRMG documents human rights violations committed against Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, regardless of who is responsible. In effect, the PHRMG has dedicated much of its work to the monitoring of human rights violations committed by the Palestinian Authority. The PHRMG has instituted a number of projects to deal with the ongoing human rights violations. The projects include monitoring unit, freedom of expression and democracy center, settlers watch hotline and legal unit, etc… Our future projects in the coming two years include peace building development, peace building and conflict resolution monitoring, reforms to the Palestinian judicial system, democracy center, public education and out reach unit, etc… The PHRMG believes that in spite of the ongoing Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territories and the need to denounce Israeli human rights abuses, such scrutiny is essential in the current process of state building, to ensure that the future Palestinian State will be a truly democratic one. In the long run, the protection of human rights can only strengthen the Palestinian Authority. Due to the absence and/or poor reliability of traditional democratic mechanisms, the PHRMG's principle strategy since its foundation has been to appeal to Palestinian public opinion and to international opinion in order to bring about positive change in the human rights situation. Violations of Palestinian human rights by both Palestinian and Israeli authorities persist with little accountability and, for the foreseeable future, the PHRMG will maintain and improve upon its traditional human rights monitoring and outreach activities.

PHRMG Relationship with the International, Local Community

The PHRMG maintains strong ties with international human rights groups, media and donors. Their cooperation and partnership has proved vital to PHRMG’s outreach and support internationally, as well as to PHRMG’s ability to maintain its high degree of independence at home. As illustrations; Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Reporters without Borders regularly utilize PHRMG unpublished and published research for their reports. Since 1999, PHRMG director Bassem Eid gave 220 interviews to international media.

About Monitoring Unit
Our monitoring unit provides the monitoring and research base for PHRMG human rights outreach and legal activities. Field researchers located throughout the West Bank and the Gaza Strip divide their responsibilities into their geographic areas. Researcher responsibilities include keeping abreast of local developments, pursuing long-term monitoring tasks, and responding to urgent human rights situations, in order to record the eyewitness testimonies of victims, witnesses and other actors. See the monitor in the icon of the monitor page

About Outreach Unit
Our outreach unit works closely with the Monitoring Unit. One of the main activities of the PHRMG is the publication of a bi-monthly report; the Palestinian Human Rights Monitor. Each edition of this publication has a particular focus: from torture and unlawful detention to freedom of expression and the censorship of the Palestinian press, or the right to education of Palestinian children in East Jerusalem. The Monitor has now earned a reputation for the quality, accuracy and objectivity of its reports. 1'000 English copies of the report are available for subscription in the form of a magazine, and 26'000 Arabic copies are distributed freely throughout the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, in the hope to educate the Palestinian public and to strengthen democracy and the role of civil society. Other Outreach activities include facilitating local and international media access to human rights issues in Palestine, initiating dialogue activities with institutions responsible for human rights violations, and implementing special projects. The PHRMG also maintains an extensive website - both in Arabic and in English - to grant wide access to all the publications of the Monitor, unpublished reports, and additional data and statistics collected by the organization.

About Bassem Eid
The PHRMG derives great strength from the experience of its Executive Director, Bassem Eid. Mr. Eid worked as the senior fieldworker for the Israeli information center in the occupying territories, B'Tselem for seven years. During this time, Mr. Eid earned international recognition for his documentation and publication of a wide range of human rights issues.

Mr. Eid is the co-author of the B'Tselem report on the Palestinian Preventive Security Service, "Neither Law nor Justice," and was involved in research for nearly every B'Tselem publication from 1989 to 1996. In appreciation for his work for B'Tselem and as a journalist, Mr. Eid was awarded the 1992 Emil Grunsweig Human Rights Award by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI). Mr. Eid was also awarded the 1996 McGill / InterAmicus Robert S. Litvak Memorial Human Rights Award for his outspoken human rights advocacy. More recently, in 1999, the Gleitsman Foundation's Board of Judges presented Mr. Eid with the International Activist Award, in recognition of "his long effort to bring peace to the Middle East." This award was jointly received with ten other activists, including Mahmoud Abbas; Abu Mazen, Yossi Beilin, Faisal Husseini, Ahmed Qurei; Abu Ala and Uri Savir. 2002 nformazione Senza Frontiere (Information Without Boundaries), granted by an Italian organization for freedom of press in the world in Siena-Italy.

uman Rights Abuses in Israel and Occupied Palestine
by Stephen Lendman / February 5th, 2010 Founded in 1972, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) is its leading human and civil rights organization through activities involving litigation, legal advocacy, education, and public outreach. Each year it publishes an annual report covering flagrant violations, positive trends, if any, and “significant human rights-related processes” affecting Israelis and Palestinians. Its latest December 2009 one is examined below, discussing “a disturbing (governmentsponsored) trend that has (gained) currency in Israel over the past year — both in public discourse and sometimes in practice — to make human rights conditional: on fulfilling some obligation, having financial means, or belonging (or not belonging) to certain groups.” For example, free expression is targeted, and Israeli Arabs threatened, denied equality, education, employment, and their citizenship without “declaring loyalty” to Israel — in other words, on condition they abandon their national identity, culture, language, and historic heritage that’s the equivalent of asking Jews to renounce Judaism. Financial means involves regarding social rights, including healthcare and education, as commodities, accessible to those who can pay. And for Occupied Palestinians, Gaza was devastated by war, remains under siege, and sustains near daily assaults, killings, and targeted assassinations. In the West Bank, security forces enforce land seizures, home demolitions, displacement, segregation, isolation, closures, movement and travel restrictions, the Separation Wall’s construction, daily home invasions, arrests, attacks on peaceful protestors,

imprisonments, and torture of detainees under a rigid “matrix of control” involving checkpoints, bypass roads, roadblocks, curfews, electric fences, and various other harassments to cow all Palestinians into submission or make them give up and leave. Since 1948, Israel denied its Arab citizens fundamental human and civil rights and increasingly fewer of them to many Jews. In the Territories, it’s far worse under military occupation and Israeli laws affording no protections to Palestinians. Nor has the Supreme Court upheld the law that should be sacrosanct in a legitimate democracy. When it’s compromised, no one is immune from abuse and neglect as greater numbers in Israel are learning, including Jews. Threatening Free Expression Losing it threatens all other freedoms. It’s a basic legal right even Israel’s Supreme Court recognizes, but not absolutely having repeatedly ruled that curtailing it is justified in extreme public danger situations or if national security may be undermined. However, the “true test of freedom of expression lies in allowing the airing of views that are extreme, controversial, or infuriating.” It’s the state’s obligation to protect them, especially in times of crisis, including war. But during Operation Cast Lead, Israel failed the test. Protest demonstrations were attacked, dispersed, and silenced. Participants were arrested, then intimidated by dubious charges. Against Israeli Arabs, excessive force and preemptive detentions were used, then bogus indictments made based on charges of “participating in unlawful gatherings.” Legally, authorities overstepped so egregiously that harsher measures may follow, and against Palestinians they’re commonplace, including targeted killings and torture. Israel also restricted the foreign media, prohibiting on the scene access to report accurately on the conflict. For their part, the Israeli media largely supported the government. Overall, war coverage restrictions caused Israel’s journalistic freedom rating to drop sharply as measured by international human rights organizations. Dissent was minimally tolerated, and repressing it continued post-war. “Not only were critics silenced, they were accused and vilified, and their critiques unaddressed.” During 2009, anti-democratic Knesset bills also limited free expression, including the Nakba Law threatening individuals with imprisonment for mourning on Israel’s Independence Day. Organizations risked loss of their public funding for doing it. The Incitement Law threatens prison for anyone denying Israel’s existence as a Jewish, democratic state, and the proposed Loyalty to Israel Law rescinds Israeli citizenship for anyone unwilling to pledge loyalty to the state.

These mostly target Arab Israelis and get strong government backing. Also introduced was a bill almost completely banning demonstrations adjacent to the homes of public officials and service providers, or others responsible for public welfare. After passing its first Knesset reading, the Internal Affairs Committee asked for revisions. Harassing Human Rights Organizations and Activists In 1998, the UN General Assembly adopted the “Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.” It obligates all state parties to respect them and protect organizations and activists from violence, threats, retaliatory action and any discrimination connected to their work. Israel is a signatory, but systematically violates the letter and spirit it expresses. Over the past two years and earlier, anti-democratic and free expression constraints have increased. Targeted senior political figures sought to undermined the legitimacy of their critics lawlessly. For example, when the discharged combat veterans organization, Breaking the Silence, published a pamphlet critical of Operation Cast Lead, government response was harsh. Instead of investigating eyewitness war crimes testimonies, officials vilified the group to undermine its credibility, and the Foreign Ministry asked the Netherlands, Britain, and Spain to half their funding. After the July Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) report about physicians’ involvement in torture, Israeli Medical Association (IMA) chairman Dr. Yoram Blachar asked its members to sever ties with PHR-Israel. The Prevention of Inflation Law passed its first Knesset reading in May 2008 – “in brazen violation of the basic precepts of providing protection and care to asylum seekers.” One of its provisions includes long prison terms for convicted “infiltrators” and human rights activists helping them. Harassing Human Rights Activists in the Occupied Territories Harassment and other measures there are far worse than in Israel, including violence committed by security forces and settlers. IDF actions include:
• • •

declaring West Bank areas closed military zones to deny activists access to them; arresting, detaining, indicting, convicting, and imprisoning activists as a deterrent; and dispersing demonstrations with excessive force, using rubber-coated metal bullets, at times live rounds, stun grenades, tear gas, and other repressive measures against peaceful protesters.

Discriminating Against Israeli Arabs

The Israeli government appointed the Or Commission to investigate early violence at the beginning of the second Intifada in which police killed 12 Israeli Arabs and one Palestinian. It recommended that the state “act to erase the stain of discrimination against Arab citizens in all its various forms and expression,” but thereafter they worsened in even more severe forms. Israeli Arabs enjoy no rights in a state affording them only to Jews. Worse still, they’re portrayed as enemies, and in the past year, proposed racist laws threaten their free expression, political participation, language, culture, historic heritage, and all their rights unless they swear loyalty to the Jewish state and Zionist vision. The Proposed Nakba Law Public outrage over its original version got it revised to exclude imprisonment, but included is a clause withdrawing public funding from any state-supported body holding activities commemorating the Nakba in any way. It’s now removed from Arab school curricula, and banning it denies Arab Israelis their collective identity, memory, and free expression right to their opinions, especially one this important. Removal of Arab Place Names from Road Signs In July, Minister of Transportation Yisrael Katz ordered Arab road signs replaced with Arabic transliterations of Hebrew names, but doing so violates the Supreme Court’s recognition of Arabic as an official language in Israel. Conditioning Rights on Military Service In August, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said the Ministry’s diplomatic training will be conditional on completing military or national service henceforth. As a result, the Israeli Railways fired 40 Arab train junction crossing guards when a condition was added to the vacancy announcement requiring all employees to have performed IDF service. Conditional Citizenship If passed, the proposed Loyalty to Israel Law will make Israeli citizenship conditional on signing a loyalty oath to “the Jewish, Zionist, and democratic State of Israel, its symbols and values.” It will also obligate all citizens to perform military or other national service, and will authorize the Interior Minister to revoke the citizenship of anyone refusing to sign. In late May, the Ministerial Committee for Legislative Affairs rejected the bill. Globally, citizenship is a basic right, but not in Israel where it’s conditional, especially for Arabs. For example, in May, Interior Minister Eli Yishai ordered the citizenship of four Arabs revoked because they were suspected of harming state security. Doing so tells Israeli Arabs that their citizenship is conditional, not guaranteed, and can be revoked for any reason if state authorities wish.

Violating the Right to Housing At issue again is making it conditional on swearing loyalty to Israel to keep Arabs out of Jewish communities. In addition, a June agreement between the state and Jewish National Fund (JNF) authorizes the transfer of some privately (central region) owned land to the state in exchange for undeveloped Negev and Galilee substitute areas. The idea again is discrimination, treating Jews one way and Arabs another by seizing their land for Jews only development. Violating Free Expression and Political Involvement It primarily affects Arabs, one example being in towns and villages where they protested against the Gaza war. They were met with harassment, violence, and mass arrests, unlike the guidelines for Jews. Also, preemptive arrests were made, targeting Arab activists and public figures on suspicion they might protest the war. These are police state tactics, reflected in all ways Israeli Arabs and Palestinians are treated. They portray a troubling picture portending worse ahead to deny non-Jews equal rights and strike hard when they peacefully protest. And yet the Orr Commission stressed that: It is imperative that we act to uproot manifestations of prejudice against the Arab sector that were demonstrated even by the most respected senior police officers. The police must impress upon its officers the idea that the Arab public as a whole is not their enemy, and must not be treated as such. They are, worse than in October 2000, proving Israeli Arabs aren’t respected or safe under Jewish rule, let alone given equal rights. Racist Views By considering Arabs enemies and unwanted, mistreating, excluding, and discriminating against them is sanctioned, and Jews support it. According to the Israel Democracy Institute’s 2009 Democracy Index:
• • • •

53% of Jews support Arab emigration from Israel; 54% of Jews and Arabs agree that only citizens loyal to the state deserve civil rights; 38% of Jews believe Jews deserve more rights than others; and only 33% of native Jews and 23% of new immigrants want Arab parties in the government, even though their members are Israeli citizens.

Overall, the survey authors say the data indicate broad support for revoking Arab political rights, ones only to be afforded Jews as more evidence that a democratic Israel is more illusion than fact.

Bedouin Rights Tens of thousands live in so-called unrecognized villages, some pre-dating Israel’s founding. Yet Israel won’t recognize them, excludes them from regional and municipal planning, denies them basic services, calls Bedouin settlements illegal, and forcibly expels their residents from land they own. Those remaining are given two choices — live under appalling conditions or voluntarily move to one of seven recognized townships or rural villages, live in poverty and unemployment, and relinquish all rights to their land, heritage, and traditional lifestyle. Yet in December 2008, the Commission for the Resolution of Arab Settlement in the Negev, chaired by retired Supreme Court Justice Eliezer Goldberg (the Goldberg Commission), issued some unprecedented statements. It called Israel’s policies against Bedouin citizens inappropriate, saying they’re recognized residents, not “trespassers,” and the state should legalize their status and allow them to build on their land. Nonetheless, the report didn’t unequivocally say how, and presented impediments that could indefinitely delay or even halt village recognition. Also, it didn’t clearly recommend guidelines to assure basic services and essential infrastructure to spur economic development. As a result, Bedouin rights are still denied, and they continue being uprooted from their land. Criminal Justice Rights In 2006, a Supreme Court ruling bolstered the right to legal representation by affording persons suspected of a serious crime the right to have all interrogations videotaped, in cases involving a possible sentence of 15 or more years. Otherwise, forced confessions can be extracted through torture or other harsh means. Nonetheless, due process is ignored if individuals are suspected of a security offense. In these cases, they may be detained and interrogated for several days in isolation, with no access to counsel, their family, or a judge. After arrest, oversight can last up to 96 hours. Afterwards, meeting with a lawyer can be delayed another three weeks and video documentation isn’t required, so the most abusive practices can be employed out of sight and unreported, yet confessions gotten this way can convict. In Occupied Palestine, it’s far worse for any offense. Suspects can be held for eight days before being brought before a military judge, not a civil one. In addition, draconian regulations prevent contact with a lawyer, and authorities aren’t obligated to document interrogations. According to the 2002 Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law, suspects can be held up to 14 days with no judicial oversight and prevented from attorney contact for up to three weeks during which he or she can, and most often is, brutalized under the most

horrific conditions. B’Tselem reported that 85% of Palestinian detainees are tortured, a longstanding practice, unconstrained and unreported. Hatred and Racism In mid-2008, the Oz unit replaced the Immigration Police and began intensifying residency law enforcement against asylum-seekers and migrant workers invited to work as nurses, in agriculture, and for construction. Now they’re accused of causing unemployment and dehumanized by being called “burglars, junkies, and street people.” As a result, human rights activists and others expressed outrage, and so didn’t some cabinet and Knesset members. In July, it forced Prime Minister Netanyahu to announce a three month expulsion suspension to provide time to devise a more equitable policy, so far not done for either refugees, migrant workers or asylum seekers. In addition, in the past year, they’ve been targeted, called “foreigners,” racially slurred, made to feel unwelcome, and sometimes harmed by violence and killings. Subsets of Israeli society are also affected, including Arabs, ethnic Ethiopians, Russians, gays and lesbians, and even ultra-Orthodox Jews. Rights of the Elderly They’re one of Israel’s fastest growing groups, the result of a falling birth rate and increased life expectancy. Yet the collapse of the Pensioners Party in the last parliamentary election reduced their status to an excluded and deprived population. As a result, many suffer from ageism, exclusion, discrimination and poverty. In fact, elder Israeli poverty ranks among the highest in western countries. Pensions are no longer linked to the average wage, but to the Consumer Price Index, so their future value will likely drop. In addition, long-term care issues are deteriorating because to qualify, elders and their adult children must pass a means test. Chronic care facilities are getting less funding, and growing numbers of institutions can’t maintain minimal medical standards, or must reduce staff and the care they afford. In employment, the 2004 Retirement Age Law lets employers ousts workers who reach retirement age, regardless of their skills, desire, or need to stay employed. Unlike other western countries, Israel fires on the basis of age. The 1988 Equal Opportunity in Employment Law, prohibiting discrimination age bias, is now weak and not enforced. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that for persons past their retirement age, the state can deny them jobs in preference to younger workers – saying this doesn’t constitute age discrimination. Even persons as young as 50 are affected as employers illegally get away with discriminating against them on the basis of age.

Chronic care insurance is another issue. The 1995 National Insurance Law assured it, but economic pressures weakened it and social benefits overall as Israel succumbed to the same neoliberal pressures afflicting all western countries, some more than others, but all heading in the same direction. The result is society’s most vulnerable are greatly impacted, including seniors. In Israel, elders are increasingly viewed as dependent, weak, less wanted, and burdensome. The result is less care and more impoverishment when they most need help. The Right to Education Private schools have long existed in Israel, but now they’re proliferating at the expense of public ones. The term “private” refers to ones not under state auspice or regional councils, including those in the Amal or ORT network, kibbutz schools, Arab schools run by the Church, and Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) schools. Now private secular ones have appeared with specific educational agendas or philosophies, and others noted for their small class size, high-quality teachers, or particular distinction making them desirable to some Israelis. Private or not, they’re all part of the “recognized but unofficial” education system and get 75% of the funding given official state schools. In May 2007, an amendment to the State Education Law passed requiring regional councils to provide comparable funding. “The entire subject of ‘recognized but unofficial’ schools is a complex one that raises profound questions about the right of parents to make decisions about their children’s education, equality in education, the legitimacy of State intervention (in deciding content) and the character of a given school (by setting conditions for public funding), and more.” Violating the Right to Equality in Education Admissions policies restrict entry to recognized but unofficial schools to relatively few students. Criteria include entrance exams, admission committee decisions, and more. Discrimination thus exists, favoring some over others despite Ministry of Education directives prohibiting them. Because these schools are heavily subsidized, the entire public must have access without discrimination, but they don’t. High tuition charges create another barrier, leaving out most Israeli children because of affordability. Public schools are also affected. For example, parents prefer schools offering targeted curricula – such as the Nature School and School for the Arts, both in Tel Aviv. Despite the prohibition, both require entrance exams and charge high tuitions. Although some specialized schools offer financial aid to needy families, few, in fact, are helped, even for “specialized track” public schools that also charge additional tuition and require a personal interview to determine child eligibility for a special program. The

result is a two-track system – one for well-off families, the other for those with limited means, unable to provide their children with the best. Decline of Public Schools They’ve declined as recognized but unofficial schools have grown in popularity. As a result, compared to OECD countries, class sizes are larger, teacher salaries lower, and student achievement mediocre. It’s no surprise that 61% of parents polled prefer private to public education. They’re publicly funded, have better teachers, and attract children from more affluent families. In contrast, public education is deteriorating, and the more it does, the greater the incentive for parents to prefer private ones – if they can afford them. Recently, Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar said he’ll introduce legislation to broaden the ministry’s discretionary powers “to weigh whether or not to grant recognition to an institution based on educational and financial considerations,” including if doing so would adversely affect public schools. It’s a positive step, but much more is needed, so far not gotten to reverse a discriminatory trend showing no signs of being stopped. The Right to Housing The August 2004 Israel Lands Administration (ILA) decision #1015 created admissions committees to agricultural communities and small communal settlements. They consider applications from candidates wanting land to settle there, and recommend whether or not to permit them, using dubious criteria based on “social compatibility” standards, heavily discriminating against minority or other unwanted groups. “These are up-scale, rural, or private home developments built on what was once kibbutz and moshav fields, not the property of the State and offering a high standard of living at an affordable price,” based on a discriminatory selection process. Sectoral Marketing and Acquisition Groups Discrimination also affects apartments letting private developers market them to specific groups of their choosing, thus screening in “quality neighbors” as a selling point to attract others like them. It results in closed communities leading to social gaps as wealthier neighborhoods get the best public services, while others deteriorate. The Right to Social Security In 2009, the global economic crisis impacted Israel hard, especially jobs with a sharp rise in unemployment, and those without them discovered that since 2000, social safety net protections have deteriorated.

In addition, unemployment insurance has eroded to one of the lowest among western countries, and eligibility became more stringent. As a result, those qualifying have decreased by about 50%. In 2007, less than one-fourth of Israel’s unemployed were entitled to monthly stipends. Those without them struggle for any means of support, making them vulnerable to exploitation. “The drastic cut to income-support and unemployment insurance has been one element in Israel’s high ranking in the (OECD’s) Inequality Index.” The Wisconsin Plan In summer 2005, it began as an experimental pilot project administered by private companies with the goal of reintegrating income-support recipients into the workforce. However, its primary focus was to reduce the number of people on income-support roles, so widespread criticism resulted. Private companies have a conflict of interest for being compensated by the number they remove. They also don’t invest sufficiently in services to encourage employment, such as retraining, on-site childcare, and programs to complete academic degrees. Rather than help the unemployed, they try to “re-educate” them with sanctions to force them to cope in the current adverse job market “through means that weaken their ability to stand up for their rights.” Participants thus feel degraded and helpless, with no government measures to stop this. The Right to Health Care The 1994 National Health Insurance Law was enacted to provide all Israelis with universal healthcare coverage. That was then. This is now under budget cutting pressure and privatization, leaving workers and the most vulnerable isolated and helpless. The public health system most rely on has deteriorated greatly in quality, forcing recipients to pay more and get less. The result is two parallel unequal, systems — high quality for the well-off and less of it for all others, with gaps between them measured by statistical health indicators across regions, socioeconomic levels, and ethnic groups. Several features in particular stand out, showing how Israeli health care shifted from a right to a commodity based on the ability to pay, as well as a new proposal to establish another healthcare fund as a profit-making enterprise. Dental care isn’t covered at all, forcing many families to forego it. However, in May 2009, the Health Ministry announced that it would assume funding of basic preventive dental care for every school child, thus assuring it regardless of financial means, and funding it from the allocation for new medicines. It’s a small step in the right direction, but the broader one looks bleak.

Co-payments The 1998 Economic Arrangements Law let the national health funds increase co-payment amounts for medical services and drugs as well as additional fees. Ever since, they’ve been rising, and according to the Central Bureau of Statistics, 32% of 2008 national health expenditures was funded by direct payments, including dental care. The result is greater numbers of Israelis foregoing care because they can’t afford it. The Israeli Medical Association believes co-pays should be abolished for some services, mainly preventive care, and proposes other ways “to achieve the appropriate balance between ensuring medical care for all and efficiency in the system.” Supplementary Insurance They fill gaps uncovered in the standard health basket for those who can afford it. About 24% of the population doesn’t have it. Of these, 52% declined because of cost. In addition, 32% of those in poor health have none, including the elderly impacted by higher premiums with age. Not only does supplementary insurance not provide solutions for everyone, it’s actually “widening the gap between lower and middle classes, and expediting the process that is turning health care from a right into a commodity.” Two trends have thus emerged: – an ongoing decline in services and drugs provided by the state, and the increase in what individuals receive based on their ability to pay; and – the promotion of supplementary insurance to well-off people, leaving the rest disempowered and left out. Instead of fixing the system, policy makes it worse by catering to the needs of people who can afford them, not the rest. The Fifth Health Fund It’s another symptom of commoditization, contradicting the National Health Insurance Law defining national health funds as public bodies and declaring new funds must be non-profit. However, spending cut priorities pressured national health funds to privatize, and got the idea included in the 2009-2010 Economic Arrangements Law, so far not voted on in the Knesset, but may be to enhance competition and efficiency. Instead of solving public healthcare problems, it will further undermine social solidarity and deepen the existing inequality, the very direction Israel is heading. Rights in the Occupied Territories Israel’s preemptive, indiscriminate, Operation Cast Lead attack against Gazan civilians took a devastating toll, compounding the existing humanitarian crisis with the Territory

under siege. Of course, medical services were greatly impacted, including willful attacks against hospitals, other health facilities, ambulances, and providers. In addition, Gaza’s entire infrastructure was savaged, affecting electricity, water and sewage facilities already severely compromised. Israel committed wanton crimes of war and against humanity continuing to this day, causing incalculable human suffering further impacted by closure and isolation. Postconflict, Israel obstructed and vilified independent investigations, then denied serious charges in their aftermath, including by their own combat veterans based on their personal experiences they went public on to reveal. A year later, nothing is resolved. Gaza remains under siege. Sub-minimal amounts of basic goods are allowed in, including construction materials, essential equipment, raw materials, and spare part necessary to function and rebuild. Tens of thousands have no shelter, relying on temporary facilities, crowded quarters with relatives, or tents that aren’t suitable in Gaza’s winter. Israel violates every obligation imaginable to protect civilians under international humanitarian law, and attacking them indiscriminately is a grievous war crime. West Bank Discrimination and Segregation Around a half million West Bank settlers have created a “regime of separation and institutionalized discrimination, voiding the principle of ‘equality before the law’ of all (meaning). Within the same territorial boundaries and under the same regime, two populations live side-by-side, (separated and unequal), with entirely (different) infrastructure and bound by two (judicial) systems” that are entirely dissimilar. Jews have full rights, Palestinians none under oppressive military occupation. Inequality is pervasive in all respects, with Palestinians forced into shrinking cantons surrounded and isolated by settlements, expanding by expropriating their land and making conditions for them untenable, “in absolute contravention of the principles of international law” assuring the rights of protected people under occupation. Separate Roads In October 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that closing the main road connecting Beit Awa and Dura in the western Hebron Hills, affecting tens of thousands of Palestinians, was disproportionate. But it failed to address the greater issue: that separate roads for Jews only are illegitimate, illegal, and must cease. Citing disproportionality only, the Court avoided the core issue of segregation and discrimination favoring Jews over Arabs, leaving the impression of its support. Separate roads are only one example of how Israel restricts West Bank free movement for about 2.5 million Palestinians, keeps another 1.5 million under siege in Gaza, and gets away with it.

Criminal Injustice: Separate and Unequal Systems West Bank settlers are governed by civil law, protecting the rights of the accused, “anchored in Israeli legislation and legal precedents.” In contrast, Palestinians live under military law that’s far more repressive in military courts under IDF officers, affording no judicial fairness. One example is different periods of detention for Jews and Arabs. Under military rule, it’s harsh, excessive, and inconsistent with the obligation to respects basic rights under international law, including for suspects not charged. Instead, administrative detentions are ordered during which interrogations include torture and other abusive treatment. Some differences for Jews and Arabs include:
• • •

preliminary detainment until judicial review — 24 hours for Jews most often; eight days for Palestinians; maximum detainment for interrogation, prior to remand request – 15 days for Jews; 20 for security crimes; 30 days for Palestinians; total detainment for investigative purposes — 30 days for Jews; 35 for security crimes, and only the Supreme Court can authorize extensions; 98 days for Palestinians with additional three month extensions; and arrest until the end of legal proceedings and before a verdict — 9 months for Jews with only Supreme Court ordered extensions; two years for Palestinians, with renewable six month extensions.

Moreover, youths are treated no differently, with those as young as 16 considered adults. For Jews, it’s 18. For Palestinians, prison sentences are the norm. They may be long or indefinite whatever the charged offense, with or without cause, and are often based on secret evidence unavailable to counsel. Convicted or administratively detained minors are then incarcerated with adults. Access to Resources West Bank Palestinians endure water shortages, an irregular supply, and poor quality, especially in summer and arid years. As a result, health is adversely impacted as are farmers needing water for agriculture and their livestock. According to the WHO, the minimal daily human water needs (for home, municipal and industrial use) is 100 liters per person. Palestinians get about 66 liters despite enough West Bank water for everyone. The problem is who get it and for what, with Jews afforded disproportionate amounts at the expense of Palestinian needs. One-third of Palestinian communities, comprising 10% of its West Bank population, aren’t connected to the water system, so must collect rainwater in cisterns near their

homes for all their needs. Even so, the Civil Administration often destroys them, even in particularly arid areas, forcing residents to rely on well groundwater, supplemented by expensive water from private suppliers. For many families, it’s too great a burden because of widespread poverty. Even communities connected to the main water system receive limited and irregular supplies, well below their needs, and in summer conditions may be acute with water available only once every few days and only for a few hours. Again, other sources must compensate. Right to Personal Security: Discrimination in Law Enforcement Israeli security forces protect Jews well, employing diverse measures for their safety. For Palestinians, it’s another matter, including not preventing settler violence that harm their livelihoods, property and lives. Incidents include violent assaults, harassment, trespassing, land theft, and property destruction, yet security forces do nothing to stop them, nor are settlers prosecuted for their crimes. At times, attacks are known about in advance, yet hardly ever stopped. As a rule, IDF soldiers and commanders don’t enforce the law against Jews. Their only obligation is to protect them and intervene when Palestinians defend themselves. Police, in fact, typically don’t use their authority against Jewish criminal suspects. Nor do they consider Palestinian complaints seriously or investigate properly when they’re lodged. Cases most often are closed due to “unknown perpetrators” or insufficient evidence to prosecute. Undermining Democratic Foundations: Legislative Initiatives In recent years, numerous laws and amendments have been improper, including ones affecting civil liberties like free expression and the right to protest peacefully. Examples include: – the Biometric Database Law: in 2009, a bill advanced to create a biometric database to store fingerprints and facial features of all Israeli citizens and residents – a measure no other democratic country has and one that will give government officials police state power, to use abusively, especially against Israeli Arabs; – The Economic Arrangements Law: it’s a legal travesty giving the executive branch power to make radical changes in Israel’s socioeconomic policies, with no checks and balances, in violation of basic human, civil and social rights; even worse, since enactment, new provisions have been added without debate or proper consideration; critics call it a “legislative monster” with good reason;

– Expanding the Wisconsin Plan nationally without public debate: as a pilot project in four Israeli regions, it reduces the number of people getting income support, and forces them into low-paying jobs instead of better ones they once held; and – Land Reform – Land Grab: the proposal involves privatizing land, the composition of the council to administer it, and procedures for planning and building — all having social, environmental, and financial impact; even so, the reform “was bulldozed through the Knesset in a problematic legislative process.” Contempt of Court: Ignoring Supreme Court Rulings Proposed laws are undermining the Court by allowing the circumventing of its decisions, violating human rights in the process. For example, a proposed amendment will prevent Palestinians from submitting compensation claims against the state for IDF-committed injury to their person or property during non-wartime activity. In December 2006, the High Court rejected a similar amendment. Of concern also is the trend over the past two years of governments disregarding High Court of Justice and Administrative Court rulings. Doing so is police state tyranny, not democratic rule now fading even for Jews. For example: – “binding arrangements” of migrant workers to their original employers – earlier, the High Court ruled them illegal and instructed the state to make new employment arrangements within six months for workers employed in nursing, agriculture and industry; it wasn’t done so “binding arrangemens” are unchanged; – national priority areas – in February 2006, an expanded seven justice Supreme Court panel ruled that assigning this status to certain regions for the allocation of educational resources was illegal and discriminatory against Israeli Arabs and ordered change in 12 months; as of November 2009, it hasn’t been implemented; – dismantling sections of the Separation Wall – several times, the High Court ordered its route changed because it illegally and disproportionately violated the basic rights of Palestinian residents; most often the state treated Court rulings as “recommendations only,” ignoring them; – fortification of Sderot schools – in May 2007, the Court ordered it for Sderot and western Negev communities near Gaza; delays and extensions followed; – East Jerusalem classroom shortages – several times the Court ordered the Ministry of Education and Jerusalem Municipality to build hundreds of additional classrooms for Palestinian children; so far, compliance has been minimal, and no serious effort has been made to alleviate a critical shortage; and

– Interior Ministry disregard for the Administrative Court rulings – these courts are the main venue for adjudicating entry and immigration to Israel; yet the Interior Ministry doesn’t abide by its rulings or change its policies when ordered. Final Comments Israel is in crisis mode — in all respects for Israeli Arabs and occupied Palestinians, and increasingly for Jews having their human, civil, and social rights compromised and eroded. Israeli democracy is flawed and illusory. Its denied entirely to non-Jews, afforded solely to privileged ones, governing how America does for the rich at the expense most others. It mocks the rule of law, and is heading the country for police state-imposed dystopia if the present trend continues. That should concern Jews and Arabs alike to want it stopped, and ally in common cause to do it. Imagine a different kind of Israel, free and democratic, treating all its people equitably. Imagine the same kind of America, not the broken society now in place. Imagine if enough people in both countries stopped imagining and became activist. That’s how change always comes, from the grassroots by committed people not quitting until they get it. What worked before can work again, and it better before conditions become so bad it won’t matter. Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. Contact him at: Also visit his blog site and listen to The Global Research News Hour on Mondays from 11AM-1PM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests. All programs are archived for easy listening. Read other articles by Stephen. This article was posted on Friday, February 5th, 2010 at 9:01am and is filed under Activism, Democracy, Discrimination, Education, Health/Medical, Housing, Human Rights, Israel/Palestine, Justice, NGOs, Racism, Social Security. ShareThis

17 comments on this article so far ...
Comments RSS feed 1. Ismail Zayid said on February 5th, 2010 at 1:01pm # This thorough, comprehensive and authentic report, by Stephen Lendman, devastates the myth of the so-called: “Israel, a free and democratic state.” This report tells it as it is. Report this comment

2. Jacob said on February 6th, 2010 at 2:26am # Nobody can deny that there is discrimination in Israel against its Arab citizens. Knowing Israel’s history, this unfortunate fact is easily understandable. Many in Israel strive to abolish that discrimination and progress is being made. But such discrimination is found in many countries. From England (ask the Muslim Council of Britain) to France, and from Italy and Belgium to the Scandinavian countries. But to claim, like Lendman does, that “since 1948, Israel denied its Arab citizens fundamental human and civil rights” shows his extreme anti-Israel bias. He ignores the fact that the Arab citizens of Israel have the right to vote and be elected. They have the right to have political parties and the right to free expression, as evidenced by the newspapers and books they publish. They have the right to educate their children in a separate framework, according to their own culture and language. The Israeli parliament has 12 Arab members, one serves as a deputy-speaker. Lendman can find the Israeli Arabs in all ways of life. As lawyers and judges, all the way to the Supreme Court. As professors and students in all universities, as physicians and patients in all hospitals. In the police as policemen and high rank officers. Thousands of them volunteer and serve in the army. And Israel’s democracy is no more “illusory” than the one in the US. The fact that the ACRI published its report is a proof that it remains the only democracy in the Middle East, to the great sorrow of Lendman… Report this comment 3. Eileen Fleming said on February 7th, 2010 at 5:06pm # TO JACOB and his ilk: Israel is NOT and Never was a Democracy! In the May 28, 1993 edition of Yedioth Ahronoth, Ariel Sharon explained: “The terms ‘democracy’ or ‘democratic’ are totally absent from the Declaration of Independence. This is not an accident. The intention of Zionism was not to bring democracy, needless to say. It was solely motivated by the creation in Eretz-Isrel of a Jewish state belonging to all the Jewish people and to the Jewish people alone. This is why any Jew of the Diaspora has the right to immigrate to Israel and to become a citizen of Israel.” Jeff Halper, American Israeli, co-founder and coordinator of Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions and Professor of Anthropology, explains:

“An ethnocracy is the opposite of a democracy, although it might incorporate some elements of democracy such as universal citizenship and elections. It arises when one particular group-the Jews in Israel, the Russians in Russia, the Protestants in pre-1972 Northern Ireland, the whites in apartheid South Africa, the Shi’ite Muslims in Iran, the Malay in Malaysia and, if they had their way, the white Christian fundamentalists in the US-seize control of the government and armed forces in order to enforce a regime of exclusive privilege over other groups in what is in fact a multi-ethnic or multi-religious society. Ethnocracy, or ethnonationalism, privileges ethnos over demos, whereby one’s ethnic affiliation, be it defined by race, descent, religion, language or national origin, takes precedence over citizenship in determining to whom a county actually ‘belongs.’-”An Israeli in Palestine: Resisting Dispossession, Redeeming Israel” Page 74 On February 3, 2010, “The Independent” reported that a high-ranking officer who served as a commander in last year’s assault on Gaza admitted that Israel’s army went beyond its previous rules of engagement on the protection of civilian lives and that he did not regard the longstanding principle of military conduct known as means and intentions: whereby a targeted suspect must have a weapon and show signs of intending to use it before being fired upon – as being applicable before calling in fire from unmanned drones and helicopters during Israel’s assault on Gaza known as Operation Cast Lead. Article 1975 of The UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict Goldstone Report on Human Rights in Palestine to the international community recommends that the States who are parties to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 should start criminal investigations in national courts, using universal jurisdiction, where there is sufficient evidence of the commission of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and where ever warranted following investigation and alleged perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted in accordance with internationally recognized standards of justice. AND that especially the Quartet, has the responsibility to ensure that respect for the rule of law, international law and human rights means for all sides in the conflict. Learn More RE: Smoking Guns and Bulls-eyes: Israel rewrote the rules of War for Gaza @ option=com_content&task=view&id=1579&Itemid=230 Report this comment 4. Mulga Mumblebrain said on February 8th, 2010 at 2:54am #

Eileen Fleming ought to remember that Israel’s supposed ‘..previous rules of engagement on the protection of civilian life’ is an example of the tactic recommended by Adolph Hitler and pursued with tenacity by the Zionists for decades -the Big Lie. Every Israeli aggression has been marked by deliberate targeting of civilians, from the multiple massacres of the Nakbah, designed to terrorise the Palestinians into flight, up to the carnage in Gaza. The massacres at Qibya, Qana (twice), Sabra andShatilla, Gaza a number of times, Jenin, etc, etc were not accidents. They derive from core Judaic religious beliefs, that Jews are superior to all others and that the Judaic God approves of and in fact demands, the extinction of those who stand in the way of ‘his people’. After all, what are Purim with its 75,000 victims of Judaic vengeance and Passover with its killing of all first born, without mercy, but holy massacres.? Andwhat is the story of Amalek, condemned by the Judaic god to extermination, and recently used by one of Netanyahu’s thugs to refer to Iran, but the tale of a genocide foretold and devoutly anticipated by Judaic fundamentalists? The Yesha Council of Rabbis and Torah Sages, connected to the settler infestations in the Occupied Territories expressed it succinctly in 2006 during Israel’s campaign of mass murder of civilians and destruction of infrastructure in Lebanon. These clerico-fascist worthies declared that killing civilians in time of war was not just not prohibited under Judaic Law, it was a ‘mitzvah’ or good deed. There’s the truth of it, not some mealy-mouthed mendacity about Israeli military morality, a cynical hypocrisy if ever there was one. Report this comment 5. Jacob said on February 8th, 2010 at 7:35am # Fleming should keep in mind that the term “democracy” is not found in the Magna Carta or in the Bill of Rights. But, it does not mean that those documents are not a clear expression of what democracy is. The Israeli Declaration of Independence states that ALL citizens, regardless of their religion , gender or ethnic origin have the same rights. In Israel, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are recognized religions and equally supported by the state. In Israel, like in many other democratic nation-states, ethnos does not privilege demos. Like many other nation-states Israel has a special relationship with its diaspora kinsmen. The Council of Europe established a committee of jurists known as the Venice Commission. In October 2001, the commission published its findings in the “Report on the Preferential Treatment of National Minorities by Their Kin State”. It states that relationship between a homeland and its diaspora kinsmen do not contravene international law. All this means that the Israeli Law of Return, which grants immediate citizenship to any Jew living abroad is in accord with the democratic norms. One can find laws granting special treatment to diaspora kinsmen in many countries, like Ireland, Greece, Austria, Bulgaria, Poland,

Hungary, Russia, Germany, Slovenia, Slovakia and others. Jeff Halper, born in the US, chose to immigrate to Israel. Being part and parcel of the Jewish people he considered Israel his own state. The fact that he is able to organize and publish his harsh criticism of Israel, is a perfect demonstration of Israel’s democracy. As for the Goldstone commission. It was established by the UN Human Rights Group, well known for its virulent anti-Israel bias, which did nothing during the 8 years of Hamas rocket fire at Israeli villages and towns. It is very important to keep in mind that the wording of the resolution establishing the fact-finding UN commission, prejudged the outcome of any investigation, by stating that violations of humanitarian law have been committed by Israel. Israel was targeted and Goldstone delivered it. Article 58 of the Geneva Convention states that the parties to the conflict shall to the maximum extent feasible: Avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas; And article 28 states that the presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations. But Hamas locates its rocket manufacturing workshops in houses occupied by families, it stores arms and ammunition in private homes, it hides Grad rockets in mosques, it fires its rockets from densely populated areas. That was the main reason for the civilian casualties in Gaza. Mulga’s post, a classic anti-Semitic screed, deserves nothing but scorn. Report this comment 6. mary said on February 8th, 2010 at 2:35pm # If anyone here could spare the time to write to Hana who is in ‘Administative Detention’ in Hasharon prison, that would be most kind. Poor young woman. Her brother has been killed and her father and mother hassled and then she is humilated by the IDF thugs and imprisoned. She is just one of thousands of course. Here is how you can help Ms. Hana Shalabi: • Send Hana letters of support to her postal address in prison • Write to the Israeli government, military and legal authorities and demand that Hana be released immediately and that her administrative detention not be renewed. • Write to your own elected representatives urging them to pressure Israel to

release Hana and to put an end to Israel’s unlawful, arbitrary and cruel system of incarceration without trial. For more information about administrative detention and Addameer’s Campaign to Stop Administrative Detention please visit the website. Report this comment 7. Eileen Fleming said on February 8th, 2010 at 3:05pm # Thank you all for this conversation because I have just begun a You Tube series of weekly messages and my next message is RE: DEEP Interfaith Dialogue! Part 1 is here: What You Need to Know so We Can Change the World RE: Addameer: On January 5, 2006, during my 2nd of 7 trip’s to occupied Palestine, I traveled to the Ramallah Headquarters of ADDAMEER [Arabic for conscience] and met spokesman Ala Jaradat. While chain smoking at his office desk and in a soft spoken voice he said: “Since 1967, 650,000 to 700,000 Palestinians have been arrested and detained. That totals 20% of the total population and 80% of all adult Palestinian males have been arrested. “Most of these arrests occur after midnight when large numbers of IDF storm into neighborhoods or refugee camps, horrifying everyone and arresting anyone 14 years or older. Sometimes they storm into business offices and arrest the breadwinners of the families without any charges. “These arrests and detentions are based on military orders; we live under a kind of Marshall Law which rules every aspect of Palestinian life: where we live, our license plates that restrict our movement and limited voting rights. Under these military orders the Israeli government is free to hold anyone eight days without accusations or charges. They can hold anyone up to 180 days for interrogation and up to 60 days without benefit of a lawyer. ”The Israeli government never agreed to the Second Geneva Convention, the Knesset never ratified it, and when it comes to the Occupied Territories they totally ignore it. Israel is the only State that approved torture of detainees. I know there are dictators who use torture, but Israel is the only State that supported torture until 1999. That is when International, Israeli and Palestinian pressure

groups forced the issue and Barack was confronted about it when he visited the United States. “The IDF will round up and arrest family members and use threats against their relatives to force confessions. The interrogations lead to Military Trials which is theoretically like court with three Judges presiding but only one is required to have an education and a law degree is not at all necessary. The Military Commander appoints the translators, issues all orders, assigns the judges, and has total control. One appeal is allowed, but if the judges are settlers the Palestinian is in deep shit! “Administrative Detentions are issued by the Military Commander for a period of six months and the reason is always labeled ‘Security’ and the charges can be renewed indefinitely. One Palestinian spent eight years under Administrative detention and hundreds have endured four or more years. Today fifty are being held for the past four years. They may be released for a day or two and then they are rearrested because they are social or political activists but reasons are not given by the Israeli government. … Report this comment 8. dan e said on February 8th, 2010 at 5:34pm # And yet still now more of these “Jacob” types keep popping up with the same old tired blah-blah. Well I’m glad there are people around with the patience to refute these zionist mealymouths in detail. To me it’s all so corny. Report this comment 9. Mulga Mumblebrain said on February 9th, 2010 at 5:04am # Jacob descends, naturally and reflexively, to the anti-Semite vilification. How quaint! For his information I am no ‘anti-Semite’. I am viscerally ‘anti-Judaic fascism’, and ‘anti-Zionist’,two different categories entirely. To be against someone, ie prejudiced towards them, solely on the basis of their membership of a certain group, religious, ethnic or cultural, is imbecilic and detestable. It is,of course, the very sin that the majority of Zionists, Israeli supremacists and their Sabbat Goy stooges are guilty of in their indiscriminate hatemongering against Palestininans, Arabs and Moslems. As far as I’m concerned it is plain that many Jews are fine and honourable people, inside Israel and without. One need only think of those brave and principled Israelis who oppose the brutal imprisonment and brutalisation of the Palestinians, and their decades of dispossession,murder, torture and humiliation. You, Jacob,are of the other type,as you make plain. As far as I am concerned Zionism is to the Jews as Nazism was to the Germans, although

it is plainly not yet practised with the totalitarian intensity of Nazism. As for Judaism, I take it as I find it.I find all the monotheisms intellectually and spiritually unappealing, but the fundamentalist strain of Judaism, so prevalent in Israel, so clearly one of the driving forces of Zionist chauvinism and supremacism, really offends me. While I do not, and ought not, feel inclined to criticise the religious superstitions of others, that is only in the case where these religious beliefs do not impinge on the rights of others. The practice of fundamentalist Judaism in symbiotic league with Zionism, that has stolen the land of another people and brutalised them with exquisite, racist sadism, for decades, while vilifying and denigrating them around the world when they dare resist (even when they did not), is,however, in my opinion, a text-book example of religious wickedness, so I have every right, indeed a moral obligation, to criticise such racist and xenophobic savagery, and criticise the apologists for it, such as yourself. Now, as to your mythical account of the circumstances that led to the Goldstone Report, it is, I believe, a text-book example of Zionism’s propaganda imperatives,ie cynical hypocrisy, narcissistic self-delusion and rank mendacity. The inmates of the Gaza concentration camp are, to great extent, the victims of Israeli ethnic cleansing during the Nakbah, continuing during the 1950s and again in 1967. While you whine about rockets fired at Israel, you cynically and typically omit that Hamas repressed such retaliatory attacks for six months prior to November2008,when your Chosen People,the Israelis, unilaterally broke the cease-fire. Even then Hamas offered a new cease-fire, but as Israel had spent months practising for urban warfare in the Negev, they weren’t interested. There followed the cowardly and brutal onslaught for which you are such an unctuous apologist. As Goldstone found, and as was attested by the Gazan victims, the UN, the Red Cross, Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, Medicines sans Frontieres, foreign doctors in Gazan hospitals and journalists in Gaza, and brave, honest and decent Israeli troops sickened by the atrocities they witnessed, Israeli troops committed numerous atrocities. Your assertions of Hamas hiding amongst civilians is an old Zionist lie, often disproved, but cynically and wickedly proffered every time Israel deliberately bombs a mosque, an hospital, a school or an ambulance. It is a reall bully-boy’s argument too, as Gaza is a crowded concentration camp, walled in by Israel and the fascist Egyptian Quisling despotism of Mubarrak, and Gazans had nowhere to flee, unlike people in Grozny, say, or Beirut. A real ‘turkey-shoot’ eh, Jacob? Just the venue for the Israelis to display their martial valour. I do hope it doesn’t lead you to contemplate having another go at Hezbollah. The Lebanese do not deserve another dose of cowardly Israeli murderousness and destructiveness, and Israel will get an even greater beating next time, I’m certain. Returning to the detestable absurdity of your description of the events leading up to the cowardly assault on Gaza, you there expose a typically racist Zionist interpretation of events. As Zionists disinformationists, Jewish and Sabbat goyim alike, always do, you describe the rocket fire on Israel as if it occured in some sort of vacuum, as if poor, loveable, peaceful Israel, was attacked for no reason, by bloodthirsty savages living in luxury and comfort in their sea-side paradise. The

erasure from history of the brutal siege of Gaza, that began in 2005, that has been pitilessly tightened ever since, and of the brutal Israeli bombing raids, shelling, death-squad incursions, and the particular savagery of the night-time supersonic overflights, designed to terrorise and which have inflicted such psychological terror and harm on children, would make Orwell’s Big Brother proud. The lackeys of Zionism’s Ministry of Truth do not bother to hide their racist contempt for Israel’s victims. While the comparative death-toll in those years was more than ten to one greater amongst Gazans than Israelis, for the Zionist and their Sabbat goy stooges, these are deaths and suffering amongst non-persons, untermenschen of no value. In this world-view, so typical of Western colonialists and racists, only the suffering of the white, European,Israeli ubermenschen counts. That this calculus is proclaimed with such cynical purpose, certain in the knowledge that it will never be questioned,let alone criticised in the Western media sewer, just illustrates how deeply Zionist racism has infected Western consciousness and discourse. 10. Mulga Mumblebrain said on February 10th, 2010 at 9:38pm # jon the concentration camp guard Shalit is a prisoner-of-war. In contrast to the thousands of Palestinian prisoners of Israel, many kept in secret gaols unknown to the Red Cross etc , there is no evidence that he has been tortured.Israeli torture of Palestinians is ubiquitous, as attested by Amnesty,Human RightsWatch, B’tselem,the UN etc. Then there is Shalit’s luck in being Israeli. The Gazans need him as an exchange for their prisoners.In the usual Israeli fashion of narcissistic self-worship,the Israelis equate swapping hundreds of their Palestinian prisoners for one Jew as evidence of their illusory ‘morality’. In fact it just mirrors the racism and supremacism of people who see themselves as above the rest of humanity. And the Palestinian prisoners, despite the torture, are at least better off than the hundreds of victims of Israeli death-squads who raid Palestinian homes at dead of night, and kill their victims on the spot, as their allies the US does in Iraq and Afghanistan. Report this comment

Human Rights Violations in Palestine Interview With Richard Falk By C.J. Polychroniou 19 July, 2010

Interview responses by Richard Falk to questions regarding his Annual Reports as Special Rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian Territories on behalf of UN Human Rights Council CJP: Upon whose request was this report submitted and what are its main findings? RF: As Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories (West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza Strip) on behalf of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC), I have an obligation to submit annually two reports, one to the HRC and the other to the General Assembly. The most recent report was to the HRC, covering the period June-December 2009, and is addressed to Israeli violations of human rights law and international humanitarian law in the course of its occupation of the Palestinian territories occupied during the 1967 War. It does not cover violations of human rights law by the Palestinian Authority (PA) on the West Bank, nor by Hamas in Gaza. The report’s presentation to the HRC had been originally scheduled for presentation and discussion in March 2010 but was postponed at the initiative of the (PA) that had sought revision of the original text. Some modifications were made, but the PA continued to be dissatisfied, but their attempt to postpone again the consideration of the report was rejected by the parliamentary official who determines the HRC agenda. The report was presented and discussed at a session of the HRC on June 14, 2010. There was no serious friction although the substance of the report was generally criticized by the representative of the United States, who also complained that the framework of inquiry was biased because it only referred to Israeli violations. The report’s major findings can be described in summary form: urgent emphasis was placed on the continuing humanitarian catastrophe resulting from the Israeli blockade of Gaza, which continued to deny the civilian population basic necessities in sufficient quantities and shut down the flow of goods and materials in such a way as to destroy 90-95% of the Gaza economy, causing massive poverty and widespread unemployment. This blockade, established in June 2007, constitutes

collective punishment that is unconditionally prohibited by Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention dealing with the rights and obligations of belligerent obligation. Israeli officials have not defended the blockade on security terms, which would be impossible, but as an initiative intended to undermine the authority of Hamas as the governing presence in Gaza or to supply leverage to negotiate the release of the single Israeli military personnel held captive. Such national goals do not provide a legal or moral justification for subjecting the 1.5 million civilians in Gaza to the rigors of this blockade;

importance was attached to the Goldstone Report (the outcome of a HRC fact-finding mission, headed by Judge Richard Goldstone, to assess the allegations of war crimes made with reference to both Israel and Hamas after the Israeli attacks of December 27, 2008-January 18, 2009), especially to the implementation of its main recommendations calling on the Government of Israel and Hamas to conduct investigations of their own to assess the findings of the Goldstone Report, including taking appropriate action to establish accountability for those individuals whose conduct seemed to violate the laws of war. The issue remains as to whether these political actors are willing to carry out investigations that meet international standards. So far the Israeli and Hamas responses, although self-described as investigations, amount to little more than rationalizations for the behavior undertaken. Thus the HRC, and the UN more generally, is challenged to see whether it can overcome geopolitical pressures mounted within and without the UN to have the Goldstone Report buried. It was my conclusion that the report was extremely fair to Israel, even leaning over backward by giving Israel the benefit of the doubt and by limiting the investigation in ways that overlooked some important Palestinian grievances. If the UN allows the Goldstone Report to die, then it will further confirm the existence of double standards in relation to the enforcement of international criminal law. There will be serious international attempts to impose some mechanism of accountability for geopolitical ‘losers’ (for instance, Serbia under Milosevic; Iraq under Saddam Hussein), but important states and their friends will be given an exemption from the accountability.

One law exists for the powerful, another for the weak and vulnerable. This is not a healthy message to convey, but it reveals the weakness of the UN as a reliable partner in the search for justice. attention was also given to disturbing signs of accelerated Israeli settlement expansion on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. The whole settlement process is a violation of Article 49(6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention that prohibits an occupying power from transferring parts of its population to an occupied territory. Not only are settlements unlawful, but their continued development, reinforced by a network of expensive roads sends a signal that Israel is deliberately undermining the possibilities of a two-state solution to the conflict. Ever since occupation began in 1967 Israel has been responsible for creating ‘facts on the ground’ that would enhance their bargaining position at any negotiating table. Now that there have been 43 years of occupation it becomes more illuminating to refer to the settlement phenomenon as ‘creeping annexation.’ Even aside from the settlements, occupation that is so prolonged should at some point be viewed as close to de facto annexation, despite the de jure persistence of a formal condition of occupation. Finally, an Israeli acceptance of a ten-month freeze on settlement expansion can be looked upon either as an Israeli sacrifice for peace or as a cynical acceptance of a peace process that Tel Aviv will short circuit as soon as it raises Palestinian rights as understood by international law. other serious issues were also addressed in the reports: settler violence against Palestinians resulting in death and injury, the destruction of property, and the vandalizing of mosques. This was combined with clear reluctance of the Israel Occupation Forces to provide adequate protection, in some instances no protection at all, to Palestinian civilian society as is required by international law; house demolitions carried out in East Jerusalem and the West Bank in ways that violate basic rights and induce fear and intimidation (arriving with heavy military backup in the middle of the night, giving residents a few hours to move out, and abusing family members, including children); wall demonstrations: Palestinians in the period under review continued to mount weekly

nonviolent demonstrations against the continued construction of an Israeli separation wall on occupied Palestinian territory. This wall was declared unlawful by a 14-1 majority in the International Court of Justice in its advisory opinion of 2005, later endorsed overwhelmingly by the UN General Assembly. Not only has Israel defied the legal conclusions of the highest judicial body of the UN, it has consistently used excessive force, causing deaths and serious injuries to Palestinian demonstrators and their Israeli and international supporters. CJP: Why does it cover only the period up to December 09? RF: (see above) CJP: Is the ongoing war on the part of the PA against you related to internal Palestinian politics? RF: I would not want to describe our past tension as a ‘war.’ It is true that a core concern of the PA was the manner in which I described the political realities in Gaza, particularly objecting to explicit references to the role of Hamas. I am hopeful that future relations will be smoother. CJP: Did PA seek in any way to influence the findings of the report? RF: The precise nature of their objections to my text are confidential. I think it is fair to say that the PA would have welcomed less emphasis on Gaza, more on East Jerusalem, and especially greater stress on adverse developments on the West Bank. I intend to do this in my next report, due in August, and scheduled to be presented to the UN General Assembly in October. CJP: Since the Israeli attacks on Flotilla Freedom, relations between Turkey and Israel have deteriorated even further. Is this a real friction or a PR game on the part of Turkey? RF: The Turkish-Israeli relations have to be seen in a larger frame.

Ever since the AK Party came to power in Ankara in 2002 there has been a drift toward a more pro-active Turkish foreign policy with Arab governments, and more generally with the Islamic world. This became more pronounced after the European Union made it clear that the prospect of Turkish membership was doubtful, if not altogether non-existent. Turkey was also disturbed when Turkish Cyprus accepted the Annan Plan for the solution of the Cyprus conflict and Greek Cyprus voted against it, the perverse result was the admission of Greek Cyprus to the EU. On another track the relations of Turkey to Israel and the United States had seemed to be on a downward slope ever since 2003 when the Turkish Parliament refused to give permission for the use of its territory to mount an invasion of Iraq. Israel’s aggressive policies toward neighbors also engendered opposition from the Turkish Government, although it should be appreciated that Turkey tried to contribute to conflict resolution in two ways: by proposing the treatment of Hamas as a political actor after it prevailed in the Gaza elections of January 2006 and by doing its best to broker negotiations between Syria and Israel, looking toward the withdrawal of Israel from the Golan Heights. Two major Israeli undertakings definitely disturbed the Erdogan government and Turkish public opinion: the heavy devastation of southern Lebanon and parts of Beirut in The Lebanon War of 2006 and Operation Cast Lead in the winter of 2008-2009 a heavy land, sea, and air attack on the essentially defenseless and beleaguered population of Gaza. Prime Minister Erdogan was harshly critical of Israeli tactics, and had a well publicized encounter with Shimon Peres at the 2010 World Economic Forum. This was followed by the humiliation of the Turkish ambassador to Israel who was made to sit in a physically subordinate position during a diplomatic meeting in Tel Aviv. On the Israeli side, what was undoubtedly the most irritating Turkish initiative, was the effort to promote an accommodation with Iran, especially with respect to its nuclear program. In particular, the deal that Brazil and Turkey reached on May 17 with regard to handling Iran’s low enriched uranium so as to reassure peaceful uses seemed to enrage the United States and Israel as both were pushing hard for a less diplomatic, more

confrontational approach that centered on gaining widespread support in the UN Security Council for a further tightening of sanctions. It is against this background that the May 31 attack on the Freedom Flotilla should be understood. This attack seemed to be partly a response by Israel to recent Turkish initiatives, especially to Iran, and a signal to Ankara not to interfere in the future with the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. Israel undoubtedly underestimated the hostile international reaction to their lethal night time attack on a flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian cargo to the long suffering people of Gaza. To attack the Turkish vessel, Mavi Marmara, in such a frightening manner, killing nine passengers, including a Turkish American, was a major miscalculation even leading Israel to give up, at least on the surface, the blockade of Gaza. It was the blockade, and the failure of governments and the UN to do anything about it for almost three years, that gave rise to the flotilla in the first place, and to the underlying Free Gaza Movement that had sent a series of single ships on earlier similar symbolic missions. This incident should be marked down and remembered primarily as a great, although costly in lives, victory for civil society activism, and has in the aftermath greatly expanded and deepened the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Campaign. At the same time, there is nothing to suggest that the Turkish-Israel-United States strategic triangle has been broken apart. There are confirmed reports of private Israel/Turkish talks, encouraged by Washington, designed to restore cooperation and diplomatic normalcy. It is too soon to tell whether Israel will meet Turkish demands for an apology for the attack on the Mavi Marmara, compensation for the families of the victims, and a formal lifting of the blockade, or on the contrary, Turkey will accept a compromise. At the same time, it would be premature to speak of regional realignment with respect to fundamental policy concerns.

CJP: Turkey’s new strategic orientation can’t be merely around commercial interests. Is Turkey after some form of integration in the Middle East? RF: Under the leadership of the brilliant statesman, Ahmet Davutoglu, Turkey has pursued the most creative foreign policy of any major state over the course of the last several years. There have been several components: continued efforts to become an eventual member of the EU; resolution of all conflicts with neighbors; encouragement of conflict resolution in the broader region (Israel-Palestine; Bosnia-Serbia; Caucuses); seeking a Cyprus solution; continuity with independence in relation to earlier alliances; economic and cultural cooperation throughout Middle East and Central Asia, a neoOttoman sense of Turkey’s regional and global roles. Interviewed by C.J. Polychroniou, a freelance journalist, mainly published in Athens

sraeli violations of human rights and international law
Israeli violations of human rights & international humanitarian law in the Occupied Territories JEFF HALPER Presentation, 20 June 2002 Hearing on "EU-Israel Bilateral Relations in the Framework of International and European Law" at the European Parliament: I would like to begin my presentation by talking about "sides." There is a perception -indeed, an expectation -- that Israelis and Palestinians will be on separate, conflicting and irreconcilable "sides" of what is called the "Israeli-Palestinian Conflict." There is a committee of the European Parliament that liasons with the Palestinian "side," and another that liasons with the Israeli "side." I would like to declare at the outset that I do not locate myself on either of those "sides." For me, as an Israeli Jew, "sides" mean something different altogether. I am on the "side" of Israelis and Palestinians who seek a just peace that addresses Palestinian rights of self-determination as well as Israeli concerns of security and regional integration. I am on the "side" that stands for equality, human rights, democracy, peaceful co-existence and regional economic development. To be sure, there is another "side," those Israelis and Palestinians that advocate exclusivity, conflict, a win-lose mentality and continued injustice and suffering. That is the way the "sides" divide, not Palestinian-Israeli.

In terms of resolving the conflict, there is yet another meaning to "sides" -- that of two equal parties coming together to resolve their grievances and perceived causes of injustice. Here some kind of symmetry is supposed, of two parties that consider each other legitimate parties to negotiations -- "sides." It took the Palestinians until 1988 to formally recognize the fact, if not the full legitimacy, of the Israeli "side," which they did in their declaration of independence in Algiers. They did so again in the Oslo Declaration of Principles of 1993, where by recognizing Israel as within the 1967 borders, the PLO conceded not only the 56% of the land partitioned to the Jewish state by the UN in 1947, but also the additional 22% conquered from the prospective Palestinian state -- 78% altogether. In return, Israel did not recognize the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people. In the Oslo Accords it agreed only to negotiate "final status issues" with the PLO, without committing itself to any particular outcome, including the establishment in the end of a viable, sovereign Palestinian state. Understanding this is crucial for comprehending Israel's unilateral "giving" certain concessions to Palestinians, presenting its positions in a "take-it-or-leave-it" manner, or declaring the results of certain rounds of negotiations as "null and void." It explains why Israel continues to reinforce an occupation whose every element, including the systematic demolition of 9000 Palestinian homes since 1967, violates international humanitarian law, and particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention. It explains the absolute impunity by which Israel invades Palestinian cities, imposes a permanent closure that impoverishes millions of people or imprisons an entire people behind barbed wire, checkpoints and walls "so high that even the birds cannot fly over them," in the words of a prominent Israeli military historian. For neither Israel nor its pre-state Yishuv nor the Zionist movement as a whole has ever recognized the Palestinians as a distinct people with national or even individual rights and holding legitimate claims to the country. Israeli Jews view Palestinians as merely "Arabs," an undifferentiated part of an Arab mass that might just as well live in one of the "other" 22 Arab countries as in "ours." From the point of view of legitimacy there is only one "side" in the view of Israeli Jews, themselves as the only nation in the country, exclusive holders of exclusive claims to it (a right that extends to all Jews whether or not they live in Israel or have citizenship there). This exclusive right extends to the entire country, including the Occupied Territories. There is no other "side," only a mass of intractable "Arabs" with which we must deal in one way or another. This is the source of Israeli human rights violations in both the Occupied Territories and within Israel itself. This is the source of the impunity. There is no symmetry, no "two sides." The issue of symmetry -- or a fundamental lack of symmetry -- must also be recognized at the outset. There are no two "sides" from the point of view of power, of the ability to resolve the conflict equitably -- and even of responsibility. We often speak of "two sides," each of which must "stop the violence' or which is "equally guilty" of perpetuating the conflict. But this ignores the fundamental imbalance of the situation. One "side," Israel, is an internationally recognized state with one of the most powerful military forces in the world (including 200-300 nuclear warheads, making it the world's fifth largest nuclear nation) and an economy more than 20 times larger than that of the Palestinians. And it is the occupier. The other "side" is a fragmented, stateless, impoverished,

vulnerable and traumatized people (70% of which are refugees or displaced persons) possessing no sovereignty and only a lightly armed militia. And it is occupied -- or exiled. The Palestinians, moreover, are in a situation of resisting colonization -- a right recognized in international law -- which differentiates their use of "violence"-asresistance to Israel's "violence"-as-repression, the latter a violation of the right of selfdetermination. While Palestinians must also be held accountable for their actions, including the use of terrorism, their situation is qualitatively different from that of the Israelis whose use of state terror and systematic violations of human rights (in making its occupation permanent) involve a much greater degree of choice. From here I would like to make one other fundamental point: the Israeli Occupation is not simply a reaction to terrorism or a means of self-defense, but is an expression of a pro-active policy of de facto annexation that began immediately after the 1967 war. It is a goal in and of itself, which has generated over the years a high degree of suffering, violence and human rights violations. Israel tries to deflect attention from this fact by presenting its military actions and policies of repression as mere reactions to "Palestinian violence and intransigence." In this way it has made the Occupation disappear from the discourse. This presentation rests on the fundamental proposition that the Occupation is an outcome of conscious Israeli policy of controlling the entire "Land of Israel" from the Jordan to the Mediterranean. Nothing illustrates this better than the construction of more than 200 Israeli settlements -- 44 in the year and a half of Sharon's premiership alone. It is the Occupation and its role in preventing the Palestinians from realizing their right of self-determination that is the source of the conflict, not Palestinian resistance. What flows from all of this is an Israeli attitude of impunity towards Palestinian human rights and a disregard - even a rejection - of international humanitarian law as applying to either Palestinians or to the situation of occupation. Virtually all of Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands violates human rights conventions - and especially the Fourth Geneva Convention that forbids an occupying power from making its presence a permanent one. Thus: -- Article 3 prohibits "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment," a routine element of Palestinian life under Israel's occupation. -- Article 32 forbids assassinations, and any brutalization of the civilian population, including their treatment at checkpoints and in "security searches." -- Article 33 prohibiting pillage would obtain to Israel's extensive use of West Bank and Gazan water resources, especially as they are denied the local population. It also prohibits the use of collective punishment, as represented by the imposition of closure, curfew, house demolitions and many other routine actions of the Occupation Authorities. -- Article 39 stipulates: "Protected persons [residents of occupied lands] who, as a result of the war, have lost their gainful employment, shall be granted the opportunity to find paid employment." It thereby prohibits the imposition a permanent "closure" on the Occupied Territories, such as Israel has done since 1993. -- Article 49 forbids deportations and any "forcible transfers," which would include such common practices as revoking Jerusalem IDs or banning Palestinians from returning

from work, study or travel abroad. It also stipulates that "The Occupying Power shall not…transfer parts of its own civilian population into territories it occupies" - a clear ban on settlements. -- Article 53 reads: "Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons…is prohibited." Under this provision the practice of demolishing Palestinian houses is banned, but so is the wholesale destruction of the Palestinian infrastructure (including its civil society institutions and records in Ramallah) destroyed in the reoccupation of March-April 2002.. -- Article 64 forbids changes in the local legal system that, among other things, alienate the local population from its land and property, as Israel has done through massive land expropriations. -- Article 146 holds accountable individuals who have committed "grave breaches" of the Convention. According to Article 147, this includes many acts routinely practiced under the Occupation, such as willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury, unlawful deportation, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property. Israeli courts have thus far failed to charge or prosecute Israeli officials, military personnel or police who have committed such acts. -- The PLO also bears a measure of responsibility for the violations of its own people's rights under the Fourth Geneva Convention. According to Article 8, the PLO had no right in the Oslo Agreements to abrogate their rights and suspend the applicability of the Convention, since "Protected persons may in no circumstances renounce in part or in entirety the rights secured to them by the present Convention." Had international humanitarian law been the basis of the Oslo peace process rather than powernegotiations, the Occupation would have ended and the conditions for a just peace would have been established, since virtually every element of Israel's occupation violates a provision of the Fourth Geneva Convention. And this is perhaps the most important point. The International humanitarian law provides a map for the equitable resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian "conflict." By guaranteeing the collective rights of both peoples to self-determination and prohibiting occupation and the perpetuation of refugee status, it leaves only the details of an agreement to be worked out by negotiations. Boundaries, the just resolution of the refugee issue based on the Right of Return and individual choice and the other "final status issues" can be resolved only if they are addressed in the context of human rights and international humanitarian law -- and not as mere by-products of power. Nothing is being asked of Israel that is not asked of any other country -- accountability under covenants of human rights formulated and adopted by the international community, which Israel pledged to respect as a condition for its creation by the UN and upon which Israel itself has signed. As it is, Israel refuses to abide by international law and treats both the Palestinians under its control and the international community attempting to intervene with absolute impunity. The refusal of the international community to intervene makes it complicit in the violations of human rights and war crimes that Israel is committing in the Occupied Territories. The European Union and this very Parliament has emerged in our time as a

hopeful sign of a new age of lowered boundaries and great economic integration for the benefit of all its member nations. International humanitarian law has also emerged since World War II as a hopeful sign of a world based on justice and equality rather than power and dominance. If the new political and economic form that is it the EU is not founded firmly on the new notion of universal rights and justice, then it will remain an interesting but finally localized experiment in technical cooperation among states, with no implications for a truly better world. The Occupation poses a bold challenge to the international community, whether to its elected representatives as in this chamber or to the civil society as represented by the NGOs and faith-based organizations testifying before you today. In an era of global transparency, of mass media, instantaneous news coverage and the internet, can a new Berlin Wall be built that locks millions of Palestinians behind massive fortifications, Israel's $100 million "security fence?" Decades after the end of colonialism and a decade after the end of South African apartheid, will the international community actually sit passively by while a new apartheid regime arises before our very eyes? And in a world in which the ideal of human rights has gained wide acceptance, could an entire people be imprisoned in dozens of tiny, impoverished islands, denied its fundamental right of self-determination? Until we all act according to the ideals and rules we ourselves have created, the answer will remain blowing in the wind.
• • • • •

human rights international law war crimes Jeff Halper ICAHD

raeli violations of international law and humanitarian law in the OPT continued during the reporting period (17 – 23 March 2011). Shooting: During the reporting period, IOF killed 6 Palestinian civilians, including 4 children, and 4 Palestinian resistance activists in the Gaza Strip. They also wounded 28 Palestinians, mostly civilians, including 11 children. In the Gaza Strip, on Saturday evening, 19 March 2011, IOF killed two Palestinian children who were nearly 300 meters away from the border between the Gaza Strip and Israel. It is worth noting that on 17 March, Israeli aircrafts dropped fliers on border areas warning Palestinians from getting as close as to 300 meters from the border. On 22 March 2011, IOF killed 4 Palestinian civilians, including two children, and wounded 11 others, including 8 children, with artillery shells in the east of Gaza City. IOF claimed that a shell went astray and killed and wounded these civilians. PCHR's investigations refute this claim as the area was targeted by 4 successive artillery shells. On the same day, IOF killed 4 members of the alQuds Brigades (the armed wing of Islamic Jihad) in Gaza City. During the reporting period, IOF launched a series of air strikes on a number of Palestinian civilian facilities and a police station. The targeted facilities were destroyed and a number of houses and other property were damaged. Additionally, 15 Palestinian civilians, including 3 children,

were lightly injured. On 19 March 2011, IOF positioned at the border between the Gaza Strip and Israeli fired a number of artillery shells at Palestinian areas. As a result, 6 Palestinian civilians, including a child, were wounded, and a mosque was damaged. In the West Bank, IOF and Israeli settlers wounded 9 Palestinian civilians, including two children. During the reporting period, IOF used excessive force to disperse peaceful demonstrations organized in protest to Israeli settlement activities and the construction of the annexation wall in the West Bank. As a result, 4 Palestinian civilians, including two children, were wounded, and dozens of Palestinian civilians and international human rights defenders suffered from tear gas inhalation. During the reporting period, a Palestinian civilian was wounded and two others sustained bruises by IOF that intervened to protect Israeli settlers who attacked Palestinian civilians and property. On 23 March 2011, two Palestinian civilians were wounded and arrested in Beit Ummar town, north of Hebron, when IOF attacked Palestinian civilians participating in the funeral procession of a dead woman. BBC: Why is Palestinian blood cheaper than Israeli blood?