| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:23 pm Post subject: Anglican Groups Calls for Israel Sanctions |
| http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1311429,00.html
Anglican group calls for Israel sanctions
Campaigners inspired by boycott of apartheid South Africa
Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Friday September 24, 2004
The Guardian
An influential Anglican group is to ask church leaders to impose a boycott of Israel and firms that do business there in protest at the occupation.
The call, by the Anglican Peace and Justice Network, comes amid growing concern in Israel at rising support among churches, universities and trade unions in the west for a divestment campaign modelled on the popular boycott of apartheid South Africa.
In July, the Presbyterian church in the US became the first major denomination to agree a formal boycott of Israel.
The network said it would press leaders of the 75 million Anglicans and Episcopalians worldwide to impose sanctions on Israel after an eight-day visit to the occupied territories.
The leader of the group, Jenny Te Paa, said the delegation from Anglican churches across the globe was so shocked by the plight of the Palestinians, including the construction of the concrete and steel barrier through the West Bank, that there was strong support for a boycott.
"There was no question that there has to be a very serious kind of sanction in order to get the world to see that at least one major church institution is taking very, very seriously its moral responsibility," she said.
"It happened in South Africa, and in South Africa the boycott had an effect. Everybody said it wouldn't work and it did work. So here we are taking on one of most wealthy and incredibly powerful nations, supported by the US. That's the Christian call."
The network is to recommend the boycott to the church's decision-making body, the Anglican consultative council, in Wales, in June. The group will also make the case that divestment is a "moral imperative" to a meeting of Anglican archbishops in London in February.
Advertiser links
Save Now - 21st Century Insurance
Save $300 on auto insurance and get more coverage and more...
21st.com
Motor Vehicle Insurance
Are you a driver over 50? You could save up to $300 in...
aarp.thehartford.com
Drive Away with Savings
Auto insurance from the American Express Property Casualty...
americanexpress.com
Ms Te Paa said the network had influence within the Anglican community and that she believed the consultative council would agree to a boycott of Israel.
In July, the general assembly of the Presbyterian church in the US, which has 3 million members, voted overwhelmingly for a boycott of Israel. Some Scandinavian churches are also pressing for a boycott of Israeli goods.
The Israeli government is increasingly concerned about the prospect of popular boycotts. It believes there is little prospect of the US or European governments endorsing sanctions, but it recognises growing support among some religious organisations, and in the academic world and trade unions, for organised action against the occupation.
A campaign by British academics for a boycott of Israeli universities drew a furious reaction, including accusations of anti-semitism.
Israeli universities have called it an "unwarranted attack on Israeli academic freedom".
Supporters of the protest say the Israeli occupation, including military checkpoints and curfews, places great restrictions on Palestinians' academic freedom.
Dozens of professors at prestigious American universities, including Princeton and Harvard, have signed a petition calling for an end to US military aid to Israel and for their universities to divest from firms doing business there.
Among the targets would be Israeli products such as fruit, shops that do business there and companies such as Caterpillar, which sells the bulldozers used by the army to destroy Palestinian homes.
"I hope that even by mentioning that we could call for this it would serve as an invitation for dialogue with the Israeli government," said Ms Te Paa.
"If it doesn't happen I think divestment can mean anything from having the list of stores [to boycott] to very significant withdrawal of investment from Israel."
· Three Israeli soldiers were killed in a Palestinian attack on an army outpost protecting the tiny Jewish settlement of Morag in the Gaza Strip yesterday.
Troops then killed three of the Palestinian fighters.
A Palestinian umbrella group, the Popular Resistance Committees, claimed responsibility for the raid, in which the gunmen infiltrated the post under cover of heavy fog.
The attack is likely to strengthen public support for Ariel Sharon's plan to withdraw all settlers and soldiers. | |  | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:56 pm Post subject: What decade is this? |
| From: "Couples Company
Subject: What decade is this?
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:30:25 -0700
Does the below sound Familiar? Circa 1936 or 1941 perhaps? Walled ghettos justified to keep "us" and "them" separate, replacing people forcibly or through zoning, acquiring or destroying homes without compensation, lack of "racial purity" necessitating the relocation etc, etc, etc...No wonder heavily unconstitutional HR4230 is set to pass...it's the only way they can prevent people from drawing the obvious correlations between Germany in the 1930s and Israel today. They have to make it a crime mention it in order to shut people up. I'm disgusted that my government promotes and funds this, thoroughly disgusted. -LDL
http://www.imemc.org/headlines/2004/September/week4/092404/wadi-jouz.htm
Jerusalem Mayor Plans to Replace Wadi Joz Palestinians with Jews
IMEMC Staff & Agencies, September 24, 2004 8:30
Jerusalem Mayor Uri Lupolianski plans to rezone the Arab neighborhood of Wadi Joz for the purpose of settling Jews in the area.
The neighborhood in question was zoned and planned a number of years ago by the Housing Ministry for Arab residents.
Lupolianski wrote in a letter sent to the Housing Ministry "zoning the neighborhood for a Jewish population is likely to contribute significantly to the unification of the city"
Lupolianski's letter also mentioned that the rezoning is needed for security reasons as the Arab Wadi Joz neighborhood overlooks the main road to Ma'aleh Adumim settlement and Emek Tzurim national park.
The chairman of the Yahad branch in Jerusalem, Ehud Arnon, said that the mayor, this time, revealed himself to be no different from his predecessors.
Housing Ministry sources have said that Lupolianski's request makes a lot of sense from a planning point of view; but they also noted that no decision on the matter had been made.
Even as East Jerusalem has been a zone free of the ongoing crisis, plans to takeover their neighborhoods and replace them with Jewish population are ongoing.
With no record of any hostility in the area, Jerusalem mayor is still referring to the Arab citizens of East Jerusalem as a security threat and claim to be working to secure the Ma'aleh Adumim road and the nearby national park.
Israeli officials repeatedly expressed concerns over the population growth ratio between Jews and Arabs in Jerusalem and are working to maintain a demographic balance of 70% Jews, 30% non-Jews with the most racist and discriminatory means.
DeleteReplyForwardSpam Move... | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 1:44 pm Post subject: Anglican Peace and Justice Network Statement on the Israeli/ |
| Anglican Peace and Justice Network Statement on the Israeli/Palestinian
Conflict
September 22, 2004
Give Sight to the Blind and Freedom to the Captives
We, as members of the Anglican Peace and Justice Network, representing
23 Provinces of the worldwide 75,000,000 member Anglican Communion, have
visited the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem over these last 8 days, and
during that time have been inspired by the faith of the people in the
diocese, while also being exposed to the draconian conditions of the
continuing Occupation under which so many Palestinians live. We have
heard from Israeli Jewish voices, and from Palestinians, both those who
reside in Israel and those who live under Occupation. We note the
continuing policies of illegal home demolitions, detentions,
checkpoints, identity card systems and the presence of the Israeli
military that make any kind of normal life impossible. We have seen and
heard the effects of the overwhelming presence of settlements or
colonies in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and in Gaza, and
the bypass roads and highways that connect them while disconnecting
Palestinian villages, one from another. We have seen the destruction of
precious arable lands and restrictions on precious water resources.
Finally, and shockingly, we have been exposed to the separation wall
that violates international boundaries, causing mayhem in Palestinian
daily life and further defines Israeli intentions to appropriate land
from the Palestinians.
We conclude from our experience that there is little will on behalf of
the Israeli government to recognize the rights of the Palestinians to a
sovereign state to be created in the West Bank - which includes East
Jerusalem - and Gaza. Israel, with the complicity of the United States,
seems determined to flaunt international laws, whether they are the
Geneva Conventions, United Nations resolutions or the most recent
decision of the International Court of Justice in declaring the
separation wall illegal. In fact, we note that this latter decision is
based on building the wall on Palestinian territory, which once again
demonstrates the illegality of the Occupation itself.
We deeply respect and honor those Israelis who are prepared to end this
miserable Occupation and recognize a Palestinian State, people
courageously committed to justice and who work against home demolitions,
who promote human rights and oppose settlements, bypass roads and the
separation wall. And we pay tribute to the courage, endurance and hope
of the Palestinian people who suffer the dreadful injustice of the
Occupation.
We deplore the unwillingness of the Israeli government to implement
United Nations resolutions 242 and 338. At the same time, we want to
assure the Israeli Jewish community of our concern for their security
and safety, to be able live without fear. We deplore the unbroken cycle
of violence, which has claimed too many innocent lives on both sides. We
condemn violence whatever the source. We reach out to Palestinians and
Israelis of good will, assuring both of them of our love and support in
ending this long and troubled conflict. We embrace all those who have
lost loved ones in the violence and extend our deepest sympathies.
We offer not only our solidarity for a just peace, but also our
observation that it is the Occupation in its many facets that foments
the violence and fuels the conflict. Collective punishment of the
Palestinian people must be brought to an end.
We therefore urge the following steps in order to achieve a sovereign
and independent Palestine living alongside a secure Israel recognized by
and at peace with her neighbors:
* The withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from all occupied areas in
accordance with 1967 borders and a complete halt to settlement building,
both new or expanded, to be followed by a process of phasing out
settlements altogether
* The immediate dismantling of the separation wall in compliance with
the ruling of the International Court of Justice wherever the wall
violates West Bank land
* The introduction of an international peacekeeping force under the
auspices of the United Nations into the Occupied Territories charged
with maintaining security so that both sides may be free from further
attacks
* A humanitarian effort led by the United Nations to provide relief to
the suffering Palestinian people
* The immediate resumption of negotiations involving Israel and the
Palestinian Authority under the umbrella of the United Nations, European
Union, Russia, the United States and the Arab League (while we support a
total withdrawal from Gaza, we urge it to be part of an overall
resolution of the conflict).
* That negotiations be based on United Nations resolutions 242 and 338
that results in a viable and sovereign Palestinian state with Jerusalem
as its capital as well as the capital of Israel, and assures the right
of return for Palestinian refugees
The unconditional recognition of the state of Palestine must be
implemented if peace is to prevail in the Middle East.
As an aside, we are deeply troubled by the use of United States-made
weapons and aircraft provided to Israel and being used for attacks on
civilian targets, which occur with increasing frequency. We urge a
moratorium on the use of such weapons, which violate US law.
And we address a word to the wider conflict in the Middle East. The war
in Iraq further fuels anger and hatred during these already volatile
times. We urge the withdrawal of US forces to be replaced with an
international presence led by the United Nations. Further, we believe
that a much more constructive course would be for President Bush and
Prime Minister Blair to intervene and resuscitate the peace process as a
direct action of healing and reconciliation for the global community.
Finally, we call upon the faith communities, and especially the Anglican
Communion, to a time of focused and intentional prayer and advocacy for
peace in the Holy Land. We call on the leadership of the Abrahamic
Faiths from around the world to exercise their authority and influence
on the political leadership among the several nations who carry the
responsibility for making a just peace.
http://www.wfn.org/2004/09/msg00211.html | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 5:07 pm Post subject: Israel must be treated as South Africa was, Dr Ilan Pappe |
| Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:22:10 -0700
From: "Jeffrey Blankfort" <jblankfort@earthlink.net> View Contact Details
Subject: Israel must be treated as South Africa was, Dr Ilan Pappe
Israel must be treated as South Africa was: sanctions, boycotts
Prof. Ilan Pappe
Prof. Ilan Pappe is one of Israel's most prominent “new historians”. In May 2002, Pappe was threatened with expulsion from his university, the University of Haifa, for supporting a Jewish graduate student whose dissertation documented an massacre of Palestinians by Israeli soldiers. The expulsion proceedings were suspended due to a protest by international academics. Green Left Weekly's Nick Everett spoke with Pappe during his recent visit to Australia.
Green Left Weekly, September 1, 2004.
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2004/596/596p16.htm
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.
What brought about the current intifada (uprising) in Palestine, and what is the Israeli government's policy towards it?
The intifada is the result of Palestinians’ frustration [with] the intolerable gap between the discourse of peace and reconciliation and the actual reality on the ground. While the diplomats involved in the 1993 Oslo accords were talking about peace and independence, on the ground the occupation continued. In fact, it became worse — more settlements were built, more roadblocks were introduced and the Israeli policy in general became harsher and more cruel.
Ever since the outbreak of the second intifada, the Israeli politicians and generals are using it as a pretext for trying to affect by force their own idea of how the Palestine question should be solved. It is wrong to look at the Israeli government as an “aberration”, as a dramatic shift in Israeli policies. The government led by PM Ariel Sharon epitomises Israeli policies rather than deviates from them.
[Sharon has] also learned something that he failed to understand in his first government — if you employ words such as withdrawal, Palestinian state and “peace”, you ... can present your own middle way — annexing parts of the West Bank to Israel in a way that does not sound fanatical or extreme, but is the only way to peace.
And this is [why] the UN and of course the US and the EU are supporting Sharon's “peace plan”. And the Sharon peace plan is very clear — he was very honest about this — he does not want the Gaza settlements, he wants only half of the West Bank.
The Labor Party has found the rationalisation to explain why most of its members are now supporting the Sharon government, with a huge demonstration in Tel Aviv supporting Sharon. The peace camp came to the big demonstration in Tel Aviv to support Sharon. This is unbelievable. But the reason is because [Sharon] succeeded in mesmerizing them as well with the words of “peace”, “withdrawal” and “Palestinian state”.
There is a consensus within the Israeli political centre about what this settlement should be: which is mainly taking over as much of Palestine as possible and moving Palestinians off it. Which means that the Israelis are building walls on what they see as the borders of Israel, which will leave the Palestinians only 10-15% of original Palestine. They would divide what is left of the original Palestine into two areas — the West Bank and the Gaza Strip — and put on it walls and barriers. It would amount to two prison camps.
I don't think the Israelis mind calling these two Bantustans — or prison camps — Palestine and claiming this is the solution. I think that the Israeli government feels that it has a window of opportunity now with the US government [of President George Bush] and it may not have such a window of opportunity in the future. This is why I think that the present policies are directed at solidifying such a “solution” or settlement.
Another problem [for the Israeli government] is that ... it feels that it has lost the demographic battle. In other words, it doesn't matter how it shapes the border — whether 1%, 2% or 10% of the West Bank is annexed — the demographic balance, which obsesses [Israeli leaders], is going to change rapidly.
If you compare the growth of both populations, you can see that in 10 or 15 years, the Israelis are going to lose their majority. [They realise that] however you juggle; however you play with all this power, at the end of the day [the Israeli government is going to represent] a minority.
Once, talk about transfer and expulsion was the property of extreme right-wing politicians and was taboo. It has moved to the centre. Distinguished scholars, politicians talk openly about the need to expel Palestinians. They argue that that is the only way for Israel to survive.
We have an Israeli government that is not going to negotiate with the Palestinians a final settlement, but is going to dictate by force what is Israel and what is Palestine.
What is your reading of the mood amongst the Palestinian people and their response to this policy
Two agendas are very important here. One is [because of] the total collapse of the social, political and economic infrastructure of the Palestinian territories under occupation. This means that there is a need for non-government organisations and civil society to rebuild society from below. It is being done, but it is being done under occupation — an almost impossible task. That is one very serious challenge.
The second agenda is democratising the institutions that would allow the refugee communities to take a major role in the decision making in the future. The Oslo accords totally excluded the Palestinian refugee community — almost half of the Palestinian people — from any say in their future.
What is the present impact of the international volunteers in Israel, coordinated by organisations like the International Solidarity Movement (ISM)? Are there prospects of a renewed peace movement in Israel and what kind of international solidarity can we offer?
The ISM is a very important movement, especially in the role [of] making people outside Israel and Palestine aware of what is going on. I don't think it can stop the occupation, nor is it having a great deal of effect on Israeli public opinion.
We need to have a stronger political edge with regard to Israel's position in the world; much of the effort should be directed to exerting pressure on Israel. The hope for a peace movement from within [Israel] to change things is admirable, but is not very feasible. The dangers facing the Palestinians are so serious and so grave that it would be helpful if some energy would go towards helping exert pressure on [Israel] from outside world.
There are two agendas that should be put forward by activists around the world, and also inside Israel. I don't want to confuse the two agendas.
The first agenda is not a peace agenda. If you are in the business of protecting the cause of Palestine you are not just on the business of peace — you have a much more urgent agenda, which is saving the Palestinians in Palestine. I'm not sure that you can prevent the Israeli government from taking its next steps in its policies of destruction and expulsion by talking about dialogues for peace.
I think you should start thinking about what an activist group can do to create an atmosphere in which Israel is a pariah state as long as these policies continue. Talk about sanctions, talk about boycotts, talk about anything that drives home the message that enough is enough, that such behaviour cannot be tolerated from a state that claims to be part of the family of civilized countries.
This is an agenda that requires a lot of coordination and thinking. There is an impressive movement of disinvestment now in the US that has been gathering momentum and which should be looked at as one possible model. The boycott on South Africa started in an Irish supermarket, where [an employee] refused to do the bill for shoppers who had South African goods in their trolleys.
The second agenda is the agenda of the long-term solution in Palestine. It is important to rethink the whole idea. Whether we like the idea of a two-state solution, or whether we don't like the idea, I think the reality on the ground in a few months is going to prove that the two-state solution is not feasible anymore.
What does it mean? How do we go forward? We need to work on the right of return [for Palestinian refugees to Israel] as a symbolic idea and as a practical idea. You cannot have a solution to the question of Palestine if the refugees are not part of it. And you cannot have a solution if the Palestinians in Israel are not part of it.
What do you see as the significance of the hunger strike of Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails?
The hunger strike of the political prisoners in Israeli jails — following the example of Irish hunger strikers in British jails — is a very important development. First of all, it is a Palestinian strategy of non-violence. It is very difficult to practice non-violent tactics in Israel. I am very fearful of the Israeli reaction to this hunger strike. The Internal Security Minister, Tzahi Hanegbi, has said, “They can strike until death”.
Israel is being let off for policies that no other country in the Western world could do. [The hunger strike] is not enough, but it is a move in the right direction. I don't think suicide bombs are the right way, either militarily or politically. As a non-violent strategy it is the right way to go, but it has no chance unless we create an international atmosphere in which Israel is treated as South Africa was.
*Pappe has written numerous books, few of which have been translated into Hebrew. His latest is A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples. | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
