WP 4 Demilitarisation online - Final

WALKING PATH 4 Demilitarisation: Turning Swords into Ploughshares

INDEX Walking Path 4 Programme Breaking the silence. South Hebron Hills map Breaking the Silence (2011). Testimonies from Hebron 20082010 B’Tselem (2007). Ghost Town: Israel’s Separation Policy and Forced Eviction of Palestinians from the Center of Hebron T. Lorincz (2014). Demilitarization for Deep Decarbonization: Reducing Militarism and Military Expenditures to Invest in the UN Green Climate Fund and to Create Low-Carbon Economies and Resilient Communities Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace (2004). The Promotion of Peace (from the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church) Pope Francis (2014). Message of His Holiness Pope Francis on the Occasion of the Vienna Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons Permanent Mission of the Holy See to the UN in Geneva (2014). Nuclear Disarmament: Time for Abolition Kairos Palestine (2010). Come and See: A Call from Palestinian Christians - A journey for peace with Justice Guidelines for Christians Contemplating a Pilgrimage to the Holy Land

2 6 7 100

209

286 304

306 317

WALKING PATH 4 DEMILITARIZATION: TURNING SWORDS INTO PLOUGHSHARES A. SUMMARY Pax Christi has been advocating for demilitarisation and disarmament since its creation and keeps being active with different coalitions concerning conventional and non-conventional weapons. Military investment is a global and significant problem which is frequently ignored. Participants in this walking path will visit to Hebron where they will interact with communities affected by continuous Israeli army and settler violence. Afterwards, they will share how Member Organisations are addressing demilitarisation and disarmament issues around the world and together they will share lessons learned and will strategize on how to strengthen their advocacy at the national and international level.

B.

DEMILITARISATION AND DISARMAMENT

Weapons, conventional as well as unconventional feed a world of violence, threat and fear. Violence destroys what it claims to defend: the dignity, the life and the freedom of human beings. Arms kill and contribute to insecurity and to violations of human rights.

There is a huge gap between what countries are prepared to allocate for war and what they prepared to alleviate poverty and promote economic development. On January 10th of 2010, the Pope Benedict stated “(…) the protection of creation is indeed an important element of peace and justice! Among the many challenges which its presents, one of the most serious is increased military spending and the cost of maintaining and developing nuclear arsenals. Enormous resources are being consumed for these purposes, when they could be spent on the development of peoples, especially those who are poorest.”1 In fact, a lot of investments are used for military purposes while they should be transferred to human development.

Furthermore, this can only happen if the international community joins efforts in order to control proliferation and trade of weapons as well as to create strong verification system and seek alternatives to war in order to resolve international conflicts and promote development. An insisting work on global human security based on partnerships, international treaties coming together with binding measures is necessary to reach peace.

C. PAX CHRISTI’S WORK ON DEMILITARISATION AND DISARMAMENT Pax Christi International believes that the responsibility to prevent a violent conflict with peaceful means comes prior to the responsibility to protect with military means.

A violent conflict or war is always a defeat for humanity.

Pax Christi International is convinced that there is no room for weapons of mass destruction in our world. For many decades, the movement has been campaigning 1

Address of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI to the Members of the Diplomatic Corps for the Traditional Exchange of New Year Greetings. 11 January 2010.

1

for a global zero of nuclear weapons. Although the regular NPT Prep Com (Non Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee) and the Review Conference of the NPT are special occasions to advocate and campaign towards progress on nuclear disarmament, we are aware that the NPT framework does not offer the breakthrough that was expected. That is why Pax Christi International states that the use, the threat and possession of nuclear weapons are immoral and illegal. Both the horizontal proliferation (the increase of possessing nuclear weapon states), as well as the vertical proliferation (the numbers of warheads and nuclear installations) are of serious concern to our movement.

Pax Christi International was a co-founder of the Cluster Munitions Coalition and of the International Action Network against Small Arms and Light Weapons. Our movement campaigned actively to reach an agreement on the Arms Trade Treaty.

Our demilitarization and disarmament efforts look at new military technologies as well. Member organisations have been campaigning against the use of armed drones and in favor of banning lethal autonomous weapons systems (“Killer Robots”).

D. PROGRAM THURSDAY: PILGRIMAGE TO HEBRON 12h30-13h00

Bus leaves hotel. Trip to Hebron. During the trip, Nafez Assaily (Library on Wheels for Nonviolence and Peace) will talk about Hebron and its divisions.

13h00-14h00

-

Meeting with Christian Peacemakers Team members: Learning about their mission and initiatives in Hebron.

14h00-15h00

-

Tour of the city with Hisham Sharabati (Hebron Defence Committee): Old City and through turnstile near Mosque to know more about the effect of Israeli practices on the commercial life and demographic change. Visiting north part of Shahada street, Cordoba School, Israeli Settlements and buildings. Visiting a Palestinian Family in Tel Rumeida.

15h30-16h30

-

Meeting with Operation Dove’s volunteers and coordinators of the Popular Struggle Committee at Women’s Cooperative in At-Tuwani. Visit to families in Suseya who are waiting for eviction orders

16h30-17h30

-

Meeting with Shay from Breaking the Silence. Tour in South Hebron Hills

17h30

Back to the Hotel

FRIDAY: DEEPENING THE DISCUSSION ON DEMILITARISATION During this session, through a participatory methodology, participants will look at how their own organizations and other member organizations around the globe are forging peace by promoting demilitarisation and disarmament.

2

8h30-8h45 8h45-10h15

10h15-10h45 10h45-12h00

12h00 E.

Introductions “Fishbowl” conversation Facilitator: Brigitte Herremans, Belgium, Middle East Policy Officer of Broederlijk Delen and Pax Christi Flanders. Panelists: Fr. Paul Lansu, Belgium, Senior Policy Advisor of Pax Christi International; Gerry Lee, USA, Executive Director of the Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns; Martha Inés Romero, Colombia, Former Latin America and Caribbean Coordinator of Pax Christi International; Mohammed Khatib, Palestine, Coordinator of the Bil’in Popular Committee against the Wall and Settlements.

Expanding the conversation Break Open space to deepen the conversation Discussion about various topics in small groups Return to large group End discussion session

RESOURCE ORGANIZATIONS 

Library on Wheels for Nonviolence and Peace: Located in Jerusalem and Hebron, they offer educational programs and serve as an active library promoting nonviolence and peace for Palestinian children, and organizing training programs in young leadership and nonviolent communication.

Website: http://www.lownp.com/portal/



Breaking the Silence: Breaking the silence is an organization of veteran combatants who have served in the Israeli military since the start of the Second Intifada and have taken it upon themselves to expose the Israeli public to the reality of everyday life in the Occupied Territories.

Website: http://www.breakingthesilence.org.il/



Christian Peacemakers Team Palestine: CPT Palestine is a faith-based organization that supports Palestinian-led, nonviolent, grassroots resistance to the Israeli occupation and the unjust structures that uphold it. By collaborating with local Palestinian and Israeli peacemakers and educating people in their home communities, they help create a space for justice and peace.

Website: http://www.cpt.org/



Hebron Defense Committee resists the presence of illegal Israeli settlement and closure practices in the Hebron area.

Website (Facebook page): Hebron Defence Committee



Operation Dove works to halt the wide-spreading of marginalisation through the direct sharing of life with the poor, the liberation of the oppressed and the elimination of the causes of poverty which generates injustices.

Website: www.operationdove.org

3

F.

ANNEXES (online)        

Breaking the silence. South Hebron Hills map. Link Breaking the Silence (2011). Testimonies from Hebron 2008-2010. Link B’Tselem (2007). Ghost Town: Israel’s Separation Policy and Forced Eviction of Palestinians from the Center of Hebron. Link T. Lorincz (2014). Demilitarization for Deep Decarbonization: Reducing Militarism and Military Expenditures to Invest in the UN Green Climate Fund and to Create Low-Carbon Economies and Resilient Communities. Link Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace (2004). The Promotion of Peace (from the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church). Link Pope Francis (2014). Message of His Holiness Pope Francis on the Occasion of the Vienna Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons.

Link Permanent Mission of the Holy See to the UN in Geneva (2014). Nuclear Disarmament: Time for Abolition. Link Kairos Palestine (2010). Come and See: A Call from Palestinian Christians - A journey for peace with Justice Guidelines for Christians Contemplating a Pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Link

4

# Y X

Y X Y X

#

Y X Y X

#

Y X Y X

Y X

Beer # Muslem

# Tarqumiya Rejected Barrier Route Beit Kahil Low Barrier 317 ## Telem # # # ## # ## # ## Separation Barrier - Built Idhna ## # # Separation Barrier - Planned Adora # Physical Block Al Khamajat Suba # Checkpoint Taffuh Special Security Zone Humsa Nature Reserve Military Training Zone Tarusa Deir Samit Palestinian Urban Areas Rafada Israeli Settlements Dura Settlements Regional Council Beit 'Awwa Wadih Unauthorized Outposts # ## # #Mitzpe Lachish Wadi 'Ubeid The Green Line Negohot # # Fuqeiqis Khirbet Salama Tawas Area A 60 ## # # # Khursa # Area B Al Fawwar RC # Marah al Baqqar Area C Khirbet Abu Hamid ## # # Palestinian Susiya Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Ash Shuyukh

Sa'ir

# #

Halhul

Tarqumiya

Y X Y X

Y X

pnei kedem Susiya Asfar and Its Outposts

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

South Hebron Hills

Y X

Y X

$QFLHQW 6XVL\D 6\QDJRJXH

Y X

#

Y X

Y X

X Y Y X

Khirbet al Hasaka

Y X

#

Y X

Y X

#

oc Bl

## # # # # # #

## # # ## ###

Y X

Y X

# #

Y X

## # #

Y X

Y X

#

Y X

Y X

Al'Uddeisa

Y X

Y X

# #

Y X

Y X

Hill 26

Y X

Y X

Y X

# # # # Ar Rawa'in

Kiryat Arba

Y X

#

Al 'Azazima

Palestinian Susiya

#

Y X

Y X

k

# # # #

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

6XVL\D 1RUWK :HVW +DVGHL +DVKHP

#

#

Y X

Y X

Y X

Hebron

Y X

Y X

Y X

#

Y X

#

Y X

##

Y X

#

#

# #

## # # ## # # # #

Y X

#

Y X

Y X

Susiya Settlement

Sde Kalev

Y X

Y X

Bani Na'im 'As Samu

Y X

Y X

#

Y X

Y X

Y X

# #

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

# ###

##

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

#

#

# #

# ## # #

Y X

Y X

Y X

### #

Khirbet at-Tawamin

# #

#

§ ¦ ¨

Y X

# Birin

Y X

Y X

Y X

Haggai

§ ¨ ¦

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

0

.35

60

.7 ʮʷ

Pnei Hever

Haribat an Nabi

Y X

Y X

X Y

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Ar Rihiya

Y X Y X

Khallet al 'Aqed

Y X

Iskeik

Y X Y X

# #

Abda'

Y X

Beit ar Rush at Tahta Y X

Y X

Khirbet Bism

Al 'Alaqa al Fauqa

XY

Hadab al 'Alaqa

XY

Abu Suhweila Beit Mirsim XY

Wadi as Sada

Khallet 'Arabi

Y X Y X XY XY

Al Buweib

# #

Y X

Y X

Zif

Deir Razih

#

Al 'Alaqa at Tahta

Khurisa

XY

XY

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

#

Al Muntar

Y X

Y X

Otniel

Rabud

Y X

X Y

Al Bira Y X X Y

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Carmel

Y X

Y X

Al Faqir

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Qinan Jaber Y X

Duma

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

Y X Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X Y X Y X Y X Y X Y X Y X Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Sansana

Y X Y X

Arab al Fureijat'

Y X

Y X Y X Y X

Y X X Y

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

#

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Khirbet Zanuta

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

asael

X Y

Y X

§ ¦ ¨

, 317

Y X

Y X Y X

Y X Y X

Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Mor Farm

#

Haribat an NabiKhirbet at-Tawamin

Y X

#

Tene

#

§ ¦ ¨ 317

Khirbet Ghuwein al Fauqa

Shani

316 Imneizil

#

Khirbet bir al 'Idd

Nof Nesher (Lucifer Farm)

Metzadot Yehuda Yatir South West

Khirbet at Tabban Khirbet al Fakheit

Y X

# #

Mitzpe Yair (Magen david)

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Ar Ramadin

Um Alfahem

ʭʧʴʬʠ ʭʥʠ

Y X

Y X

Y X

# #

´

Halat al-Taba

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Susiya Settlement

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

Shim'a

Qawawwis Hirbet al Tawamin

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

X Y

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

As Samu'

Y X

Shim'a North Former Mizpe Eshtamoa

Y X

Y X

Khirbet al Maq'ura

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Khirbet Asafi

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

AvigayilMantiqat Shi'b al Batin

Y X

Y X

60

Y X

Khirbet Shuweika

Anab al Kabir' Y X

Eshkolot

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X Y X

Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

An Najada

Tuba

# ### #### # ## Susiya North West

§ ¦ ¨

Y X

Y X

Ma'on

Hill 833 Maon

Y X

Y X

Y X

At Tuwani #

Ma'in

Y X

Y X

Y X

Susiya # Old Synagogue X Y

X Y

Y X

Y X

Y X

Khirbet Deir Shams

Adh Dhahiriya

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

X Y

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

317

Y X

Y X

Al Karmil

Khallet Salih

Y X

Somara

Y X

Y X

Y X

# # ##

Y X

Y X Y X

#

§ ¦ ¨

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

#

Y X

#

X Y

Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

#

Y X

Y X

## Abu al 'Urqan

Y X

Y X

Y X

#

Ad Deirat Y X

Y X

Y X

Ar Rifa'iyya

Yatta

#

Y X

Y X

Y X

Qinan an Najma

60

Y X Y X Y X

Y X

Y X

Y X

§ ¦ ¨

Y X

Qurnet ar Ras

Y X

Y X Y X

Jinba

Ha'lava

Khirbet al Majaz

Khirbet Tawil ash Shih

Hadera

ʤʸʣʧ Netanya

Beit Shean

Jenin

ʯʩʰ'ʢ Tulkarm

ʤʩʰʺʰ ʭʸʫ ʬʥʨ Taybe ʤʡʩʩʨ Tira ʤʸʩʨ Kefar Saba ʠʡʱ ʸʴʫ Kfar Qasem ʭʱʠʷ Petach Tikva ʸʴʫ ʤʥʥʷʺ ʧʺʴ

Nablus

ʭʫʹ

Mirkez Lod

ʣʥʬ

Ramallah ʤʸʩʡʬʠ

Beit Shemesh

ʹʮʹ ʺʩʡ

Bethlehem

ʭʧʬ ʺʩʡ

Hebron ʯʥʸʡʧ

0

1.25

2.5

5

7.5

10 'ʮʷ

ʯʠʹ ʺʩʡ

Yatta ʠʨʩ Adh Dhahiriya ʤʩʩʸʤʣ-ʠ

Jericho

BREAKING THE SILENCE Soldiers' Testimonies from Hebron 2008-2010

… I’ll tell you that within a very short time I began to feel that I was much busier protecting Arabs from the Jewish settlers than protecting Jewish settlers from the Arabs.

How is that manifested on the ground?

I don’t know what Hamas does inside Hebron, but whenever there was tension in the mixed neighborhoods, or mixed streets, I never witnessed a situation where Arabs harassed Jews. I mean, there was no violence on the part of Arabs, they didn’t harass the Jews. I think this was mainly out of fear. Because whoever was there before us handled them very roughly. The Jews, however, would really drive the Arabs crazy.

They’d throw diapers full of shit into their gardens, throw their garbage into their yards.

If an Arab kid was walking in the street and ran into three Jewish kids, they would beat him up or just harass him and all. There were lots of such harassments.

Breaking the Silence

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

This booklet contains the testimonies of about 40 Israeli soldiers who served in the city of Hebron between 2008 and 2010. With this collection, we aim to portray the military occupation in Hebron during periods of “normalcy”, of which an understanding is of utmost importance. In the absence of political prospects, the occupation in Hebron and other locations operates as a stable rule, itself unlimited in time, yet exacting severe limitations on those Palestinians who are forced to live under it.

Background Hebron is one of the largest Palestinian cities in the West Bank, with a Palestinian population of approximately 175,000. In addition, about 750 Israeli settlers live in Hebron, a fact which greatly influences the character of military rule in the city. Since 1997, the city has been divided into two asymmetric sectors – H1 and H2. H1 includes about 80% of the city's area and is under Palestinian rule, while the remainder of the city, H2, is under direct Israeli rule. Tens of thousands of Palestinians live in H2, the sector which also contains the Israeli settlements. The impetus for settlement in Hebron is principally religious – Hebron is home to the Cave of the Patriarchs, the burial place of the three forefathers and three of the fore-mothers according to the Bibilical tradition.

Protecting the Israeli population of the city constitutes a complex military task. More than 30 Israeli citizens have been murdered in the city since the founding of the settlement during Passover in the spring of 1968, and 17 members of Israeli security forces have been killed there since September 2000. The crowded, urban setting greatly complicates efforts to protect Hebron's Israeli population. In addition, Hebron is populated by some of the most violent and extreme settlers, who also serve as catalysts for the violence in the city. These factors define the experience of the soldiers who testify in this booklet.

In order to understand Hebron today, we must return to the mid-90s, to Purim in late February 1994. On that day, Baruch Goldstein entered the Cave of the Patriarchs and murdered 29 Palestinians while they were praying, wounding an additional 120. The massacre greatly influenced the dynamic between Palestinians and Israelis, while also bringing about a completely new conception of security dominant still today, based on the “Principle of Separation”. In accordance with this principle, the settlers who live in the center of the city near the Cave of the Patriarchs “enjoy” near complete segregation from their Palestinian neighbors. This is implemented by placing severe restrictions on Palestinian movement in various ways, including the complete

3

prohibition of Palestinian vehicular traffic on certain roads, the closure of hundreds of shops by military orders, and even the closure of roads to Palestinian pedestrians, forcing them to find creative routes to their own homes. The “Principle of Separation” changed the face of the Hebron's Old City – thousands of Palestinians have left the center of the city in recent decades, leaving a ghost town behind. Yet this principle is not the only determinant of the city's character today. The direct military rule in an urban setting over thousands of residents who do not desire this rule also plays a major role in defining the city's character. This necessitates a form of control which relies on a constant show of military presence, in order to deter the local population from challenging the existing regime. Of course, this sort of military authority does not (and cannot) distinguish between a Palestinian who seeks to harm Israeli civilians or soldiers, and a Palestinian who simply lives in the area under Israeli rule. Therefore, all Palestinians who live in the areas surrounding the Jewish settlement are privy to recurring and random night inspections conducted by the military, with the aim of maintaining the sense of control over the Palestinian population and the sense of security for the settlers in the city.

Beyond this, the settlers play an active role in defining the dynamic between residents of the Old City, as well. Near daily occurrences of abuse of the Palestinian population by settlers, including humiliation and physical attacks, are part and parcel of the lives of those Palestinians who still live in H2. Even worse, twisted norms of law enforcement in which two different populations are subject to two different sets of laws – one military and one civilian – creates a situation of selective law enforcement at best, and complete lack of law enforcement over the residents of the Jewish settlement at worst.

At the edges of this booklet, one can see a new phenomenon, one which was not expressed in earlier years – the unarmed Palestinian struggle against the occupation, often joined by Israeli activists. The soldiers in this booklet also testify about these protests, and the military's methods for dealing with them.

Hebron since 2008 This booklet is the third published by Breaking the Silence about Hebron. The first described the experiences of soldiers serving during the Second Intifada, who went on to found Breaking the Silence after their discharge from the army. The second described the years following the Intifada (2005-2007), and portrayed the transition from control over a population during a period of combat and violence to control over

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

a population which does not present much opposition. The present booklet contains testimonies from the closing years of the last decade, 2008 to 2010, years in which the city has become completely absorbed into the method of control over it to the point that it is difficult to perceive any intent for change anytime in the foreseeable future.

It is difficult to remember a more calm period in Hebron from a security perspective.

Even the more significant incidents in recent years, like the evacuation of the “Disputed House” (a Jewish settlement point which was erected between Kiryat Arba and the Cave of the Patriarchs), and attempts at terrorist attacks inside Hebron, stand out as exceptions in a city which has maintained relative quiet. Many Israeli commentators advertise this quiet in order to prove just how much the situation in Hebron, and the Occupied Territories overall, has improved. Israeli society, fed by these commentators, is sure that its sons and daughters are being sent to a city which operates properly. It is against this backdrop that we publish this booklet, with the aim of portraying daily life in Hebron when things are “quiet”.

It is imperative, and especially during such a period, for Israeli society to heed the voices of its soldiers. The stories included here are told from the point of view of soldiers who served in the field, and they constitute a call to Israeli society to turn its attention toward the troubling reality in its own backyard. We must understand the significance of our actions and the responsibility we have toward their impact, internalizing the fact that when one digs deeper beyond the perception of “quiet” in Hebron, one finds the harsh reality of military rule.

5

Jewish Cemetery

al-Shalala Compound

Haret a-Sheikh

Haret a-Sharif

Khallet Hadur

Haret a-Jaabri

Qeitun

Abu Sneineh

Abu Snina

Qiryat Arba

Prayers' Road

Wadi al-Hussein

New Settlement Point (Evacuated)

Givat Ha'avot

Beit Romano Tomb of the Patriarchs The Casbah aTel S hu Rumeida Avraham ha Bab Avinu da al-Khan Muslim St Cemetery Haret re a-Sahla a-Salayme et

Beit Hadassah

Bab a-Zawiya

Closed Shops Checkpoint Police Travel Forbidden Shops Closed and Travel Forbidden Palestinian Entry Completely Prohibited Area Affected by Closure Settlement

Restrictions on Palestinian Movement

HEBRON

H1 H2

Testimony no. 1, 2008 There's nothing we can do about it Another event I remember well took place while I stood guard at the post on a Saturday and it was...It’s exactly at the point where Jews and Arabs travel along the same road. An Arab woman came from one direction. A young Jew – I’m not even sure he was from Hebron – with those side curls and skullcap and all, comes along and spits in her face. And this was all during the period when we weren't allowed to do anything. I yelled at him: “What are you doing? What do you think you’re doing?”

And he says, of course: “You’ll see, you’ll find out.” She proceeded to the Cave of the Patriarchs. He also went in the same direction. I reported it to the Border Police, of course, because they have more authority than we do with civilians, but nothing happened. I wasn’t even allowed to touch the kid, not detain him, nothing.

What are you allowed to do?

Basically I could detain him, but what does that mean? If I say “Stop!” and he continues walking? He walked right on.

Did you speak about this with your officers?

I did.

And what did they say?

There’s nothing we can do about it. At some point we were given a real okay to detain them. To really detain them.

To catch them?

Yes. If I could have back then, I would have. I was so annoyed. I couldn’t understand how a person could do this. It’s unreal.

When you did have permission to detain them, were there such cases?

I didn’t myself do it but I heard of some. When I was in the war-room I did once call an officer to go out to a site.

To a place where soldiers detained civilians?

One of them. At the 4-5 army post. There was some incident. A settler kicked the mute woman’s child. Ever heard about the mute woman? There’s this mute woman at 4-5, she can’t speak. Her son Ahmad was this mischievous child. When a settler walked by he’d go: “Fuck you…” Of course to… Then the settler kicked him, so he [the settler] was detained.

Didn’t the police show up?

What could they do about it?

7

*** Testimony no. 2, 2010 He went ahead and did what he did The front command, the company commander… they were always talking about how they would beat up Palestinians for fun, the whole time. Both on their patrols and…

It was a constant, but there was one story that became ‘the main event’ for me on the ground… One day we were alerted. An announcement came through on the loudspeakers: “Front command group to David [army jeep]!” We all jumped up, began to load up gear, the medic and I were there, preparing, and the company commander opened his office door, came out and said: “Get out of here, only *** and me are going.” He told me to take down the gear and go as I was. He wasn’t wearing his [bulletproof] vest or anything, just his weapon and uniform. We drove to “Pharmacy”, the checkpoint there. There were two, three children there who wouldn’t go through the metal detector. We stopped, the commander got off, took a kid inside the alley.

One of the kids who wouldn’t go through the metal detector?

Yes. And then he [the commander] went ahead and did what he did.

What was that?

There was… I recall – it’s etched in my mind like a movie – he faced the kid, the kid was close to the wall, he stood facing him, looked at him for a second, and then choked him with the… held him this way with his elbow.

Against the wall?

Choked him against the wall. Then the kid went berserk, the commander was yelling at him the whole time, screaming and screaming at him in Hebrew, not in Arabic.

Then he let go, the kid raised his hands to wipe his tears, and the commander went boom! so the kid lowered his hands to stop rubbing his eyes. He left them hanging at the sides of his body. Then the slapping started. Slap, slap, slap, slap… Incessant hitting, and constant yelling. Then the kid began to really scream out, it sounded scary so people started to come out and gather around the checkpoint, peeking into the alley, and I remember the commander coming out and telling them: “Everything’s fine.” Then he yelled at the kid: “Stay here, don’t go anywhere!” He came out, told them everything was fine, called the squad commander at the checkpoint, and stood facing the kid, saying: “They have to be treated in such-and-such a way.” Then he

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

gave the kid another two slaps and let him go. It was an insane thing. I remember sitting in the vehicle, watching this and thinking: “I waited for this situation for three years. From the moment I enlisted. I enlisted in order to stop such things, and here I am doing nothing, choosing to do nothing. Am I okay with this?” And I remember answering myself: “Yes, I’m fine with this. He’s hitting an Arab and I’m doing nothing about it.” I was really aware of the fact that I wasn’t doing anything because I was really scared of that company commander. What? Should I jump off the jeep and tell him he should stop, that what he was doing was stupid?

How old was the kid?

A teenager. Not 18. Like 13, 14, 15 years old.

And how long did this go on?

The hitting? I don’t remember.

10 minutes? An hour?

It wasn’t… Something like 10 minutes of hitting. Then he called the squad commander in.

The squad commander at the checkpoint?

10, 15 minutes. Then he got in the jeep and rode off.

And tell me, did you happen to speak about this with anyone, with another officer, even with friends?

I remember when we came back to our post, everyone disembarked and I was …

I got off, went into my room where the whole platoon was, and said: “Listen, you wouldn’t believe what a crazy thing just happened, he [the commander] just started hitting.” That’s it.

Didn’t they say anything?

The point is, me and the deputy company commander were on really good terms, I spoke with him about it after he was discharged, and after I’d been transferred to the brigade training base. I told him about it and he said, already as a civilian: “Why didn’t you tell me? You know we would have done something about it. You know we would never have let that pass.” That’s the way it is.

***

9

Testimony no. 3, 2008 They’re supposed to feel totally safe Describe Shuhada Street for me, the main drag.

First of all, visualize walking up from the Cave of the Patriarchs, nearly all along – first you’ve got the large cemetery on your left, and further up the small cemetery, also on your left. On your right, almost at the end, you’ve got Palestinian homes, covered with chicken wire. Further up, there’s our outpost and after that you arrive at the Beit Hadassah compound. In the middle there’s Gross Square, with a sort of large pillbox army post in the middle. That’s the visual description. Of course, it’s not a bustling street, there is only the occasional vehicle or two, occasional pedestrians but never Palestinians. I’ll make this more broad and say that apparently also never Arabs, for fear that they’re actually Palestinians.

Are there people still living in houses on this street?

Yes, but there’s only an exit in the direction of the Casbah, and even there, on the doors there’s graffiti that shows the Star of David or says “Death to Arabs” and things like that. But those doors are no longer in use. Some of them used to be shops, others entrances to houses that are now blocked. That’s it. Only Jews can go on that street. There’s no chance. It’s only on extremely rare occasions or in cases that actually shouldn’t have happened, that Palestinians end up there. They don’t go past 4-5 Post, no way. That’s it. It’s a Jews-only road, and they’re supposed to feel totally safe there. I don’t think there’s much more to add, but it’s problematic because even in the part which is supposed to be used by both Jews and Arabs, in actuality that section is divided by these iron barriers designating the part of the road that Palestinians are supposed to go on, ridiculously narrow compared to the part where the Jews can go. That’s it, that’s the road.

***

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

Testimony no .4, 2008-2010 A kid at the briefings In your time out there, did the settlers living inside the base enter through the same gate [as the soldiers]?

Yes. One of the problems was that a third, fourth grader would always be standing around during our briefings, with a [bulletproof] vest and a toy gun. You should see this some time. Every single day. He comes to the briefings all ready, with a vest, knee-guards, wearing a huge helmet, stuff the army gave him, and a toy gun, standing there with all the soldiers. He knows everything by heart.

So children hang out inside the army base?

That’s it. I suppose that… Yes, they hang out there. Not all the time, but yes. They do pass through. If we’re playing volleyball and one of them happens to come along, he joins the game. The Chabad people, too, for them it’s like South America [where they do religious outreach]. Soldiers come back from their shift, totally dead, finished.

And these guys come in: “What’s up, bro’? How are you?” and then, “Why don’t you come in, read something?” With former youth movement members [from secular backgrounds] it’s a bit more difficult, but I can see how it works, you know? It’s a freezing night, and along comes this Chabad guy with his guitar…

*** Testimony no. 5, 2010 Illegal demonstration Saturdays they’d always come around, always at noontime. These guys would come stand in front of Gate No. 1, the crossing point between the Jewish and Arab sections of the city, sing some chants, hold up some signs. Usually there was a small-tomedium percentage of [Israeli] leftists. I mean, there were demonstrations when they weren’t there at all, and sometimes there were these groups of “anarchists”, as they were called. I never really got into definitions, I didn’t care, but mostly Israelis, and a larger number of tourists from all over the world – there were Japanese, some Irish, lots of people, and one Arab who would always show up, he was there both as a sort of organizer, and also so they would hear someone chanting [slogans] in Arabic.

11

Sometimes there would be kids, Arab kids, they’d enjoy being let out at the last moment, and everyone would be happy, and sometimes more people came along, but that also died out. At first they were more numerous, but at a certain point I think they got tired of it, they’re aware that our battalions keep being replaced, so they’d come at first to show themselves, be seen, make their impression, and since a new battalion is in, lots of people come to demonstrate. And after a while, there wouldn’t be anyone left. On Nakba Day1 the demonstration was a bit larger, more people came and brought balloons, and that’s it. There were no demonstrations during Ramadan.

Were you okay with this, or was there something special? What happens?

We come, close off the area. At first they would stand almost at the gate, then we said: “Let’s move them a bit further off so they won’t touch the gate, won’t get too close, to avoid trouble.” Then at some point we’d just go in. Same size of force assigned to the [settlers’] patrol [in the Casbah], only all front command groups would show up at the demonstration anyway because it’s the most interesting thing happening there on a Saturday.

Why is it interesting? What goes on there?

Because there’s something to watch. Like, you stand there, waiting for them to chant, until they give up and leave. Sometimes they would make a fuss a bit longer, leave and then come back 20 minutes later, so again you have to show up there and it’s a bother. For us it was pointless pestering, it meant having to spend a long time on this hot, crowded road. Most of the time doing nothing. At some point – I don’t know what brought on the shift in attitude – but it was decided we were going to detain all the Jews, the Israelis. Because they were the only ones we had any basis for stopping, they entered enemy territory and that’s against the law. They also come by way of all sorts of crossings, not through the IDF checkpoints, stuff like that. They come close enough. It’s very simple to get to the Territories around there. So at some point they decided to detain them – the Israelis – so we would sort of block them, and we’d say: “This is an illegal demonstration.” Then at some point the square became included, the junction would be neutralized and they couldn’t be in it, so as not to hamper traffic, and to keep the demonstration under control.

Why was the demonstration illegal?

I don’t know, for no reason. It was simply stated: “Illegal demonstration.” At some point that junction was declared an area forbidden for demonstrations, something like that, some kind of regional commander’s orders. But at some point they stopped going there. We simply blocked the way from the junction and then they wouldn’t

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

come, they would stand in one of the neighboring streets. Then it would be declared an illegal demonstration. A Border Policeman would announce it on a megaphone in Hebrew and Arabic: “This is an illegal demonstration. You have five minutes to disperse or be arrested.” Of course they wouldn’t stop after we said that. It was obvious. So at some point the battalion commander or his deputy would say: “Okay, this is it. Now we’ll arrest them.” We’d choose this guy and that guy, just the people who stood out most.

Chosen at random or did they do anything?

No, half random. Those who looked more familiar to us. There was this one woman who always showed up, older, I don’t know, around 50 years old, gray hair, who’d always show up. So we’d say: “Okay, we’ll arrest her.” Now, we’d arrest the Irish guy because he was a nuisance.

How are they arrested?

We’d decide to do it and then we’d say: “Okay, take that one.” And we’d simply go ahead. Usually all the soldiers were lined up so whoever is closest simply goes over, grabs and pulls.

Did they resist?

There were many people who didn’t resist. You’d say: “I’m taking you in.” And they go: “What? Why? What do you want? What did I do wrong?” and then come with you without any trouble. There are guys you’d grab, especially tourists, and they’d try to prevent you from taking them. So you had to pull hard, create a buffer and move them out of the Casbah.

Were there any beating incidents?

No, most of the time it was just moderate physical force.

What is moderate physical force?

It means you simply grab someone and pull. You don’t hit people. It was very clearly defined, so we don’t slip into those things. We were told not to hit anyone, not to hit with our weapons, not push people down to the ground or kick them, not to try to grab their cameras. Because we aren’t allowed to do that. As Israeli soldiers we are simply not allowed.

***

13

Testimony no. 6, 2008 Spread an Israeli flag across the porch Did you enter homes?

Not if there was no need to. If there isn’t a good enough reason, we don’t. Sometimes we’d enter gardens, on the patrol we’d enter yards, but let’s say you have to be on the lookout. Then you have to go up to the roof. Sometimes we were on porches. The family would go out, see that we’re on their porch, they were already used to this, and they’d go back in. Or a family would sit watching TV in their living room and we’d look from upstairs and there’s a football match going on at the same time. There was this one time, during Passover, we needed to take a house which was at the center of Jabal Rahmah, it was the time around Land Day2… The house is in the center of the neighborhood and we needed to spend two, three days in it during the events, to lookout from its porch over the neighborhood.

What events?

During Passover many Jews come [to Hebron]3, and there was this event held by the Arabs and we had to be there for two, three days. This means the family had to leave the house. We get there at 6 a.m., our platoon commander – who does not speak Arabic – comes along and tells the family that they have to leave the house. They don’t understand what he wants, they don’t want to leave, they’re a whole clan inside, the place is full of people. He yells at them and it’s sheer stupidity. There’s an army guy who understands Arabic, the liaison officer who knows Arabic comes along to talk with the Arabs to explain to them that we’re not throwing them out of their house for life – still this is shit, making them leave for 48 hours. What would they do? Go to the neighbors? So this officer [who speaks Arabic] arrives only four hours later. They stand there frustrated, quarreling with us, and have no idea what we want. The liaison officer isn’t there yet, there’s a quarrel and shouts and they’re forced out. Finally the younger son probably wanted to shove the platoon commander, and the father – who’s already seen it all – tells him: “Let it go,” and they come out, heads hanging, and we sit there in their home for two days. Now, this annoyed me: It’s in the middle of an Arab neighborhood and the army’s instruction is to spread an Israeli flag across the porch. Not only does the whole neighborhood now know we evicted the family for 48 hours, now they’ve also got an Israeli flag in the middle of their road. And this is not a Jewish neighborhood, it’s in the Arab area. You can fly an Israeli flag, you can do lots of things…

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

How many family members were forced out of that house?

I think it was the mother and father, their son and his wife and some kids of theirs, perhaps eight to ten people in all. Something like that.

And they simply waited downstairs for the Arabic-speaking officer to arrive and explain things to them?

Yes. They waited downstairs, they yelled, sat at their neighbor’s, got angry. Yes. You held an observation post inside that home?

Yes. One soldier stood outside in the street, two guys downstairs, two on the porch and one soldier slept on the floor, exhausted. That was it more or less.

Why this particular home?

Because it was central, second storey, had a good lookout over the central square.

So its location was advantageous.

Was the lookout from there over the neighborhood itself or towards the Jewish settlement and the Cave of the Patriarchs?

The lookout was over the neighborhood plus the street you had to cross if you wanted to get to the Jewish settlement neighborhood. Meaning, if you wanted to move from Jabal Rahmah to Tel Rumeida, you’d probably have to cross that road. It controlled the roads but also the area in that neighborhood that was closer to the Jews.

You remained there for two days?

Something like that.

*** Testimony no. 7, 2008 Big action … There was a really crazy story that happened with them there. Our patrols would enter through the Police Checkpoint, and the thing is that they would always be standing there.

The Palestinian policemen?

Yes. I remember coming back from our post. Now the army posts in Hebron are really something, they’re tough. They wear you down, all the time. Anyway I’m on my way back from the post… Later I’ll tell you about the arrests, we were constantly carrying

15

out arrest missions, every night. There were two weeks of nightly arrests, they had assassinated the guy who did the terrorist attack in Dimona – it wasn’t us who did it but after he was assassinated, everyone went into Hebron. So I get back to base and right away we’re gathering up, and… super stress! We’re going out right now, there’s a briefing, the company commander comes, there are Palestinian police standing there, the problem with them is that they break the agreement and keep standing right in front of Police Checkpoint which they are actually not allowed to do because it blocks the traffic, so we go in, catch them, confiscate their weapons and bring them in with us. In terms of “action”, that was really the peak of action, in terms of the feeling it gives you. You enter the Police Checkpoint. Ever been inside? There’s a square and then a right-turn and another large square. The Palestinian Police HQ is there.

Some of us are instructed to stand in the road and prevent the Palestinian policemen from reaching the central square which is right opposite the Police Checkpoint. I don’t need to tell you that in one second flat, we’ve got hundreds of people circling us and throwing stuff, roof tiles are flying at us, seriously. This was during a period when things like this weren’t happening, at this point in my service I hadn’t seen such things, and now here were tiles being dropped from the rooftops. We get there and I see some really tough Palestinian policemen running and my heart is pounding like I don’t know what, and he’s holding his Kalashnikov like this. In the chaos I catch him and he looks into my eyes really scary and alert with his gun, and I kept telling him in Hebrew or in my lame Arabic that there would be no firing. It was scary, it felt close.

Also because the whole city could sense that there was something serious going on, and some of the policemen tried to resist and I don’t know what else. It was really scary. We were shoving each other. And I no longer knew how to cope with this on my own. Where do I draw the line? I didn’t know what to do. Some of the time I was blocking him. A subordinate of his – he must have been the superior officer – stood behind him, and my friend pointed his gun at him and he was scared and did nothing.

He was still armed with his Kalashnikov? All the Palestinian policemen still had their Kalashnikovs?

Yes. He is scared, and not advancing – that Palestinian policeman. So in the meantime, as I keep trying to look him in the eye and tell him there would be no firing today, I don’t recall how that specific incident ended. Suddenly there were shots – later I learned they were shots in the air by the company commander who was already being mobbed. Then I somehow see him kicking people. But that was his critical mistake because at any moment those shots… According to the rules

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

of engagement, they said earlier: “If you feel threatened, you kill all the Palestinian policemen.” Those are the instructions. Whoever points a gun at you, you shoot. And I really thought, that poor fellow with his hands like that, I heard shots, what do I do?

Shoot him? Kill him now? Thank God I didn’t, but it could have come to that, too, in such a tense situation. So anyway I think we dragged two Palestinian policemen out and took their vests and some Kalashnikovs. But it caused a riot that lasted for hours. We dispersed from the rear, with teargas from the Police Checkpoint and we also went up onto some houses. So we did shoot teargas from there, constantly, and they threw stones, and the whole area was on edge. That was the event of that tour of duty.

Was rubber ammunition used as well?

I don’t remember. I do remember lots of teargas. All the time.

The two Palestinian policemen you mentioned arrived from their HQ? Yes. Not the ones the army wanted to take?

No, those were taken.

How many Palestinian policemen were there?

Two, and they were taken out.

And what size was your force?

Really small. That’s the point. Just guys who weren’t on posts at the time, I don’t know, maybe seven men and another seven from another platoon. Even guys who hadn’t been on such missions. It wasn’t an organic force, it was a motley crew.

15 soldiers, more or less?

Yes. And how were the Palestinian policemen behaving?

The two I finally saw outside were scared.

But you said some beating started.

Yes, I see it all in a flash, during the event. We weren’t there for a long time, 20-25 minutes. But everything boiled up around us. It’s stressful. The whole street comes out to see what’s happening, especially after shots in the air are heard.

And you see a Palestinian policeman approaching you, holding a Kalashnikov?

Yes. He looked tough. Had this tough-looking moustache. Really scary. I won’t forgive my company commander, those shots in the air were a real mistake, we were a millimeter away from everyone shooting everyone. Because this is what we were 17

told, that’s why it’s so thrilling. Maybe we can kill some people today?

So how do you cope with this? You find yourself standing unprotected in the middle of the road facing two armed Palestinian policemen, two servicemen…

We orchestrated the whole incident from the Police Checkpoint and from the rooftops.

The situation developed gradually. While you’re still inside, the riots are not that bad yet?

That’s right. But I remember my company commander beating up various people who came up and tried to stop him. There was this circle around him, there was an old man who came along and tried to grab his hand, so he kicked him. I don’t know what he was trying to prove, but he was… He was that kind of person. When we were in Gaza, too, sometimes you’d walk around the middle of the company base and see three men handcuffed crying in the middle of the base. He would relate to them, I don’t want to say he’d beat them up at ‘zero-range’, but he was totally tough in that respect.

He was a part of the team that tried to detain the two Palestinian policemen?

Yes, yes.

And they resisted?

I didn’t see it, I told you, I left right away. I saw them outside already.

And outside the battalion commander already took them away?

No, it took a while. They stood with us, we talked, we looked at their Kalashnikovs.

They stood there cuffed and blindfolded? Or they were standing with their Kalashnikovs on them still?

No, no way. Their weapons and vests were already in our hands, but they were not cuffed or blindfolded.

Just standing there? On the Israeli side of the Police Checkpoint?

Yes. Standing with us on the Jewish side of the Police Checkpoint. I don’t remember.

It was a totally insane situation.

***

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

Testimony no. 8, 2008 We sealed the whole house Once we closed off a [Palestinian] house. We blocked it off because it was constructed illegally or something. Activists from a bunch of organizations came to try and prevent the eviction by standing in our way and swearing and stuff, anyway we weren’t supposed to talk to them.

Where was this?

It was opposite the Jewish settlement. But I’m trying to remember which road. There’s the main drag of the Casbah.

The Casbah or the one connecting the settlements?

The Casbah. There’s the main street of the western Casbah, separating the Avraham Avinu settlement and the Arab houses, so among the Arab houses adjacent to the Avraham Avinu settlement, there was some construction [by Palestinians]. According to procedures – I don’t even know what to call it, it’s not procedure, it’s certainly not a law – according to the brigade commander or the regional command, the Arabs are not allowed to build or renovate there. If they do, there’s an okay to evict them, to block off the houses. So that family who’d lived there for years renovated or something, so the Jews from Avraham Avinu settlement informed on them and forces were brought in to evict them. So the organizations like TIPH4 and all those guys tried to prevent the eviction and there was quite some chaos. Finally the houses were blocked off.

You only provided security during the action or did you actually carry it out?

We secured it, we did everything except seal the…weld the door. We did everything.

You also took the family out?

Yes. A policeman came along, who spoke Arabic, but we did it.

How did it take place? I mean, they probably have furniture, stuff, you say they’ve lived there for years.

We sealed the whole house.

With everything inside?

Everything. All the contents. Perhaps they took out several things, but everything was left inside. At some point it was opened for them, about a month and a half later.

I personally had to check and see that no one broke in, that it was still welded shut and untouched.

19

And who opened it a month and a half later?

I believe it was the DCL, I don’t exactly know what the story was out there. It was a totally sick story. You know, you feel something’s not right, that things are not being run properly, and it’s not because the army is doing it, but because there are those Jewish settlers there who are behind it all and they film and document which is also problematic in itself.

*** Testimony no. 9, 2008 “Try to ignore them” Because of our background, we’re not guys who are out looking for brutality. Ethically and politically it was difficult for many of us to be there. We had a hard time with the settlers. We were in the middle, we had the center of the Casbah and the middle of the Jewish settlement and much of our trouble was with the settlers. Most of the violence we experienced was not with the Palestinians, they didn’t have a chance.

There is nothing they can do facing the soldiers. It was the settlers who were violent.

Throughout my time there, I kept a notebook in my pocket and every time settlers would swear at us or behave violently, I’d note it down. I also interviewed other soldiers and wrote about it.

How many such incidents do you have recorded?

Lots. About 20 to 30. It was important to me to note down things I witnessed myself, or that close friends told me about. I didn’t want stuff that I… It was important for me to record violence of all types, whether verbal abuse or actual assault.

What’s an actual assault?

One of our missions in Hebron is to prevent friction. Separate routes were designated for Jews and Arabs. One of our “favorites” was the [settlers’] Casbah tour on Friday afternoons. They would spit at people in the face…

The settlers would enter the Casbah on Fridays?

Yes. One of the tour guides living in the Jewish settlement there would regularly lead such a tour and we had to provide security for them, let alone the fact that we’d need double manpower to do it, and that was the most humiliating of all. It was less about us, more about what they’d do… There was swearing, and confrontations that we www.breakingthesilence.org.il

tried to prevent. A whole street had to move aside so this gang could get through.

What was the procedure regarding the Palestinian population during such a Casbah tour?

One force would secure the area on the rooftops, another force below with the company commander or his deputy would surround all the settlers, move the residents aside. We tried to make it “clean”, “sterile”, so as to disrupt their lives as little as possible, although you cannot help disrupting. I don’t know how long it lasted.

Did you run into real violence on the part of settlers, beyond the swearing?

No. I think that even if they slapped someone, the mere fact that they’re there is violent, the way I see things. What does it matter whether he shoved someone, or swore at him or slapped him? It’s this lording over the Palestinians that is so hard.

Did you get a chance to show your notebook to any of the officers?

No. At some point we had a conversation with the battalion commander. He was a frank, honest man and he told us to bring up stuff we saw or if he had done something, he wanted to look into things. He told us he looked into things he knew about. We told him about our confrontation with the settlers, that there’s this constant feeling that we are unclear about the army’s demands from us, where the limit is. We’re not civilian police, we have no police rights and the settlers don’t regard us as an authority. When it’s convenient for them they’re with us, and when it’s not… Then he said: “Even if they spit or jump at you, try to ignore them.” He was conscious of the problem, but he too was limited because it’s a political issue.

What were you told about your authority regarding the settlers?

We were told that we could stop them if something develops, but in actual fact it’s very hard. The general feeling was unclear. The police is very low on manpower and I want to believe that they wanted to handle these things but I know how hard it is for them with the number of incidents happening there.

***

21

Testimony no. 10, 2008 Left there, cuffed and blindfolded Were there more cases of detaining people who you were supposed to bring to an army post or to the police?

Arrests. But that’s obvious.

Not arrest missions, say on a patrol, but someone who was rude or suspect?

Oh, metal thieves. That was a weird thing, of all the things they would break into the Jewish settlement for – cross over rooftops or I don’t know where – they’d break into the Jewish settlement to steal metal from their former shops on Shuhada Street6 that had become prohibited to them. So they’d go in, suddenly some lookout would detect them on her surveillance monitor, and report: "Metal thieves". At some point it became unbearable for the guys. Once we caught them ourselves. They simply put them there. Sitting around the 4-5 Post, waiting for the police. Now, I mean really, what would the police do with them? For the 15th time. This would happen day after day, they’d come to steal metal and we already knew that the police would slap them around, and say: “Don’t ever do that again,” and let them go.

Where did they try to break in?

Behind 4-5 there’s the road, right? There’s this V-shaped set of shops where the two roads connect and in the middle there’s these… So they would simply try to enter those shops, or not necessarily even enter. I remember that on one of the patrols we stood there on top of the roof and suddenly realized where they were going into. We went in and saw merchandise that was still there from…that had not been put away in storage yet. Hats and straw stuff. But everything was upside down and broken.

How old were those kids you would catch?

Young. Sixth graders and such.

Preteens.

Exactly. Let’s say they can already tell right from wrong, what’s allowed and what’s not, let’s put it this way. They choose what to do. There were some slightly older ones, ninth graders.

The police would show up in the case of the metal thieves?

After a very long while. I remember that once, or several times, the company commander said: “We already know what the police will do, they’ll let them go after about three hours, so let’s just do it ourselves.” The police wasn’t summoned, they were left cuffed for five hours near 4-5. I remember shift changes and a briefing when www.breakingthesilence.org.il

to let them go because the police would have already arrived. They were simply left there cuffed and blindfolded, and then released.

*** Testimony no. 11, 2009 The biggest event – over nothing One event comes to mind. I remember it was Land Day2 and we were told that below the Mitkanim7 post, at the entry gate to the Casbah, “38”, a demonstration was reported. We got there and saw 20 to 30 people with some Arab Knesset Member. It was a quiet demonstration, nothing extraordinary, signs and such. We talk and the company commander said: “Okay, one hour and that’s that, they’ll get tired and go home.” Then I remember the Hebron brigade commander comes along and says: “No, they have to be dispersed forcefully. It’s a closed military zone and they must be dispersed.” Border Police was summoned and they began to shoot teargas and rubber ammunition. Just like that. Over nothing. As soon as they did that, photographers came out. I say look how the army screws itself over nonsense. For something that would have dispersed had we waited for half an hour. I remember the mindset there: “We show them!” That was the biggest event we had there. But over nothing. I didn’t recognize any sort of danger from them. Just an event with some wounded and pictures that were unflattering to the army.

Palestinian wounded?

Yes. Nothing serious, but teargas was shot. For nothing. I thought of the stupidity of it.

That right away the commanders get swept away. The commander of the spearhead company at Tel Rumeida started spraying teargas. That was one event. Besides that, it was relatively quiet back then.

***

23

Testimony no. 12, 2010 Special relations There was this person who arrived one Saturday and decided it was forbidden to open the post gate at Mitkanim7, that it should be left closed throughout the Sabbath.

Someone from the Jewish settlement?

Yes. Living right next door. In the Mitkanim neighborhood. He came along, got angry, yelled, swore, and pulled at the electric cord of the gate so it wouldn’t function.

Was the police summoned?

Yes. They picked him up.

Detained him?

Yes. There was some story there. Then he came back. He was eccentric, always like that.

Did he really sabotage the gate?

He simply disconnected the cord from the electricity so we couldn’t open and close it. At some point, after this incident I think, a gate especially for pedestrians was installed. On Saturdays the larger gate was closed, for vehicles, while the pedestrian gate was operable without electricity, and still the main gate remained closed. On weekdays, the gate was simply closed all the way. That’s it, there weren’t too many incidents with these settlers living next us. There was this idea that there shouldn’t be too much close contact with them, we shouldn’t get too friendly. Because if a situation arises and some Arab goes by and this and that, and the little kids would feel privileged because they’re your friends and here they’re already standing with you at your post, and on one of your shifts they would suddenly feel they can pick fights with the Arabs there. “What, why are you stopping us? You’re our friend!” I don’t know.

Like they’d take advantage of their special relations with you to raise hell.

***

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

Testimony no. 13, 2008 To pass the time Let’s talk about the patrols. You said you’d enter deep into [Palestinian] Hebron.

It was so cool, because you actually got to see the city.

You would just drive around? Or you would conduct searches?

Yes, yes.

How would you do it?

We’d check vehicles. It was just like checking vehicles at the checkpoint in and out of Nablus, checking cars inside Hebron. We’d go in on patrol, put up a roadblock in the middle of their street, and actually check vehicles.

You check that there’s no bomb in the back seat, or you’d stick a knife between the door and the wall? There are all kinds of ways to check a car.

Not taking the car apart, not that, but it depended on the soldier. There were cases where just to pass the time, people would take cars apart.

What do you mean by taking them apart?

I remember this more from the Nablus area, but you know, the little compartment under the steering wheel.

The fuse compartment?

Yes. You were supposed to take out their fuses?

No, just the compartment.

And when you did that, you’d get a traffic jam in the middle of Hebron?

Yes.

***

25

Testimony no. 14, 2010 In the middle of the night, in the middle of the street There was one tour, it was a particularly special settler tour. They had these sort of rounds where they sang atonement prayers, but not really. They walked only on the main road, too bad I can’t remember the name of this tour. One guy was there, not the one who regularly guided them, a different fascist who lives right next to the army post and he was there, with lots and lots of children. It was a children’s tour, with a few adults. Mainly children just hanging around. He walked – it took about an hour and a half just to cross the road which usually takes about three minutes. So he walked, stopped at about eight to ten spots along the road, I don’t know. And he didn’t just say relevant things; he kept reading stories out loud every time. I don’t even know about what.

What was he reading?

It was a narrative about someone who came to Hebron which supposedly belonged to Arabs and there keep being…I don’t really remember what the story was about, because I wasn’t really listening. It bored me and I had work to do. After all I was on duty. But there were all kinds of descriptions such as: “I was gripped by an Arab with the stench of a cadaver,” and just these very graphic descriptions that reminded me of Nazi propaganda. I don’t know, totally demagogical. Finally I asked the kids: “How did the story end, what was it about?” “We don’t know, we weren’t listening.” They weren’t even into it, they just came with lots and lots of shofars8, and every time he wasn’t talking, during the short walks between the narration stops, they blew the shofars, and this was around one o’clock in the morning. Walking around, blowing the shofars, and he brought this music-mobile and had music on in the middle of Hebron, full volume.

In the middle of the night?

Yes. In the middle of the night, in the middle of the street.

Did you know that this was planned for the tour?

I think so. I remember telling ***: “How can this make any sense? Would anyone in the world find this logical? And it’s happening right now!”

And what did he say?

He just said: “There’s nothing to do about it. We can’t really change it.”

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

Did residents come outside? Say anything?

No, not at all. I don’t even remember seeing people in the windows. Perhaps a few, but no, not even that.

How do you explain this?

First of all, they probably knew what was happening and preferred to avoid confrontation. But I don’t know, even if we did see anything, once in a while on those night tours we did see a few people. One or two, nothing major. They, too, see the group and walk away. They’re not interested. They don’t care about this tour now.

They see soldiers and Jews, and they don’t…

How many children were on that tour?

Quite a few. Around 50, something like that.

And each of them blew the shofar?

Not all of them, but many.

So there was noise.

Yes, definitely, thank God! You could hear it all the way to the Cave of the Patriarchs, to the Wailing Wall…just kidding. There was plenty of noise. There were guys who really came just to make noise, they weren’t listening. As soon as he began to speak they went aside, talked amongst themselves, they were tired of the whole thing, wanted to get back, get out of the Casbah, stuff like that. But they made tons of noise, as much as possible before he resumed his storytelling.

How many soldiers are needed to secure 50 children on such an affair?

I think it was on the scale of a normal settler tour of the Casbah, something on the order of 20 guys. There’s a set routine: One force secures them from the rooftops.

Both on the longer and the shorter tours, they know the route. One force goes in front, another force comes up from behind, and there are guys flanking the tour. That’s it, the front command jeep usually goes along in front. Everyone is clear about their mission. Every time they pass a door or a house corner, a pair of soldiers stops until they are replaced. It’s very orderly and you know exactly what you’re supposed to do. Routine.

***

27

Testimony no. 15, 2010 Military zone There was another experience – right opposite Gate No. 1 there’s a toy shop, located between Gate No. 1 and that building, say three, four meters away, considered a military zone.

Is there an official army order?

General’s orders and all. There was this shop belonging to an Arab who used to sell all kinds of trinkets, toys. GSS9 guys came along with the unit that welds things shut.

They told him: “You have until five o’clock to evacuate the place.”

You escorted them? You were with the GSS? Yes. We entered with them. It wasn’t exactly GSS, it was a unit that does these things and they’re also Arabic speakers, I don’t exactly know what they do.

Did they tell him why he had to get out?

Yes. They didn’t really explain, they said it was now a military zone. They showed him the official document.

Just like that, out of the blue? That shop has been there for quite a while, no?

Yes. I didn’t understand why they came suddenly.

But it’s inside the Casbah?

Yes. Beyond Gate No. 1. They speak fluent Arabic. They came, talked to him, told him, said there was nothing he could do about it, that he better not start asking questions or talking because it wouldn’t do him any good. We went elsewhere and they welded it shut, outside the Casbah. There’s a passage one can sneak through into the Jewish settlement, so that was welded shut and taken care of. Then we got back to Gate No. 1 and the guy was still in the shop and they talked to him again, and he wouldn’t evacuate. So we were placed along both sides of the street, along the Casbah, along the diagonal.

How many men were you?

A lot. We really blocked the place. We were blocking traffic. We told the drivers, if you want to get through, go around. We didn’t know how long this would take and that was the most frustrating part because we told them it was about to end and that it’s alright.

The deputy battalion commander came along and other guys and real violence broke out. The owner was forced out, the shop was ransacked, stuff was kicked in the air, forcefully, people were screaming and yelling from the outside. We simply stood

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

there for a good couple of hours. That was the problem, we didn’t know when this was going to end and we got dirty looks from the Arabs and tourists, standing there and seeing everything happening without knowing what to do with all of it.

Who ransacked the shop?

The deputy battalion commander. The company commanders.

Were they looking for something?

No, I think they wanted a show of force. Perhaps they said it was a search but I don’t believe that. It was simply to scare people, to show force. They forced him out, holding his hands and legs.

How old was this man?

Elderly. I don’t remember exactly. There was even an ambulance summoned.

Perhaps he suffered a heart attack during the incident. The problem here was that we really stood there four, five, or six hours. Motionless. The tourists and the…didn’t move either. You say to them: “Go around, if you want to continue, just go around.”

They remain, and I got to the point where, even trying to put on a serious face, like ”Don’t mess with me!” or “Go away!” to make them think I didn’t care what they wanted. And that’s a really long time. You also see the violence behind you, and the people facing you ask you questions. There was a demonstration and we wanted to make some room there. The CPT5 came, they’re illegal as far as we’re concerned, on principle. They had no permission by our government to be there. And there are these old ladies, especially from the CPT, whom you are supposed to shove off with your body, and it’s unpleasant because the woman is about the age of my grandmother, and I can’t do it. Finally I do it.

How do they respond?

One of them was looking at the ground, indifferently as it were, not seeing that I’m there. I told her to move, in English, and she wouldn’t react, so I began to shove her, and she wouldn’t move. I shove her and she moves a bit, shove her a little more and then a little more. I shove her with my body and I remember this really well because it was so unpleasant, standing there for hours facing civilians and seeing the violence going on behind me.

Did blocking the street create a huge traffic jam?

Yes. It was insane. At some point people gave up and went around.

Didn’t you let up a bit during all of this?

There were especially elderly people who had to get home, people back from

29

shopping and stuff like that, so we called our superiors, spoke with them on the side and they let them through. There were exceptions.

The toyshop – can you tell me a bit about what went on inside there?

I saw the Border Police there, but I wasn’t watching the whole time, I wasn’t really there and I didn’t see everything that happened.

Which guys were there, which company commander? What ranks were the people ransacking the shop?

There was a deputy battalion commander, GSS agents, Border Police. I’m sure my own deputy battalion commander was there. He was a hot-headed guy, acted kind of German, really neurotic. I remember him messing things up. There were guys who wanted to weld the place up, and some Border Policemen who came. It was mostly they who did it. All the rest, the company commanders, sergeants and squad commanders, were either around, or securing and making sure the soldiers were lined up properly.

Did you happen to see the shop afterwards?

It was simply welded shut.

Totally sealed, and hasn’t been opened since?

Not when I was around.

How long had it been opened before it was sealed?

A good few months.

And then one day the army decided to do this?

One day they simply said: “That’s it, we’re doing this.”

And what about other shops next to it? They remained open?

Yes. The house above it, called the “Doctor’s House”, was abandoned then.

Essentially, there was one sealed shop and one that wasn’t. It had to be cleared, that’s all. No more.

Did you understand what the reason was for closing it?

I guess the army didn’t want some Hamas guy sitting in that shop and observing our movements.

Facing the gate?

Yes. There’s an exact angle facing the road going up to the Jewish settlement. It took a long time until the shop was sealed.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

*** Testimony no. 16, 2008 If you’re not crying, you’re laughing Stones were thrown at us, both by Jews and Arabs.

Where were they thrown from?

Inside our war-room, there was a surveillance control room. I saw the incident through the television cameras. There were Arab children throwing stones at a Jewish family. All the forces in the area were alerted. Lots of Jews and Arabs came and were all throwing stones at each other. And when the soldiers came, everyone started throwing the stones at the soldiers. There was also the whole episode of the ”House of Contention”10 which we were ordered to evacuate. They [settlers] organized a whole pilgrimage of their supporters who came on foot from Jerusalem to Hebron, and who had to provide security for them? We did. The Palestinians were demonstrating in protest. We get to the site and everyone begins to throw stones at us. You ask yourself: “What am I doing here?”

What do you do?

Find a place where you’re safe from the stones and wait for them to stop – you can’t do a thing. Only the Border Police can react because they’re police– so they’re called in.

Did you witness their modes of operation?

I witnessed Border Police in action once. One unit came, they all walk in three lines, wearing black vests, helmets on their heads, you see they know what they’re doing, unlike the local Border Police. A bit scary. A Jewish settler outpost had to be evacuated. The Border Police stands there in rows and you see the Jewish crowd from Kiryat Arba11 coming at them and they stand there with their shields, waiting.

Anyone who jumped them would be handcuffed and placed at the side. They’re so big they don’t need teargas. After finishing the job they let the people go and they left.

I was on guard at the sentry post at the time so I saw it all happening.

The settlers were known for their violence?

On the one hand they were nice to us, they invited us over on Fridays [for Sabbath dinner]. I wouldn’t go, my friends did. We had an NCO in charge of Jewish education, and he managed to organize through the religious school in Kiryat Arba that soldiers

31

would be hosted by families [for Sabbath]. The same religious school who later threw stones at the soldiers. If you’re not crying, you’re laughing at the way things worked there. It’s hard to understand the situation. You don’t understand who you’re protecting. At most of the incidents I witnessed, it was Jews assaulting Arabs and we had to secure them [the Arabs]. There was a case where two older Haredi Jews decided to come down from Kiryat Arba to Hebron not by way of the Worshippers’ Path12 but through an Arab neighborhood. A force had to go over there to rescue them.

How did they do it?

They went there and got them out. They continued walking towards the Cave of the Patriarchs.

*** Testimony no. 17, 2008 To be the nice guy and the bad guy at the same time There was an episode of someone chasing a kid with a commando knife because he annoyed him or something.

Who chased a kid with a commando knife?

One of the soldiers.

Was the kid Jewish or Palestinian?

Palestinian.

What was the story there?

He sort of ran over him. He was very excited about having done it. All of us felt almost ready to beat the guy up. He was from another platoon.

This was on a patrol?

No. He was standing guard at the post. The kid wanted to have the dessert from his lunch which he hadn’t touched anyway, something like that. He asked him for it. The soldier said: “No, get out of here.” So he came and asked again. I remember it happened to me many times, standing guard at the post and kids come around asking you for food. I recall I had a hard time giving them stuff and then having to enter their house armed. It was weird for me to have to be the nice guy and then the

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

bad guy at the same time. I don’t want a kid to like me when I’m pointing a gun at his dad. There are lots of things that remained unconscious, all these thoughts that I have in retrospect. It was simple at the time… It doesn’t make sense, if I’m standing guard now, I’m a soldier. Why should I give him my dessert?

*** Testimony no. 18, 2008 Dress rehearsal Once we carried out a mock arrest.

What’s a mock arrest?

Before you go on an arrest mission, you have to carry this out. I’m not even sure it’s proper army procedure. I was told it was. You choose – or rather – a house is chosen for you to practice an arrest procedure. Like a dress rehearsal before the real thing.

Tell me about a mock arrest.

The first arrest mission my platoon carried out – my platoon was the one doing the most arrests in our company. So on our first time, we got a house, not far, and we had to practice the arrest. You come along and as usual get all the people out of the house. You wake them up at one o’clock in the morning, get them out, blindfold them, take their IDs, and that’s it. They’re not taken anywhere. Our guys were totally exhausted by this. If there’s one thing I’m really sorry about in terms of being humane… There was simply no reason, no justification for this. They were really mad at us, mad at everyone.

That was the last time you got to do a mock arrest.

There weren’t anymore. But there were many times, again it’s this issue of randomness, you choose a house and you go there to carry out activities, even if you have nothing on the people living there.

***

33

Testimony no. 19, 2010 You’re a part of it There was once this pilgrimage to the tomb of a [Jewish] sage inside the Casbah. I remember lying on the surrounding rooftops; you’re looking out observing everything.

On the one hand you don’t like that you’re doing this, and it’s all because of some sage that they want to pray here, and now you’ve got to clear all the Arabs away from the site, stop traffic and all. It’s frustrating to be a part of this. No one asks you if you want to, you’re simply a part of it.

What was the story of behind the sage?

There’s some grave there, I don’t remember the man’s name. We had to enter Palestinian Hebron to get to it.

Not the Casbah.

Not the Casbah. Palestinian Hebron. It’s frightening because you enter with a large force, stopping traffic. We entered some hours earlier to position ourselves on the rooftops all around. You stop traffic, in effect enforcing a curfew. People are not allowed to come out of their homes, walk around, get back home from being out.

For how long?

Several hours, five to six hours.

And people from the Jewish settlement come there to pray?

Yes, both from the Jewish settlement and from other places.

Where were you?

On some roof.

What did you do there?

Lay there with my rifle, that’s what I did most of the time. I had to listen to the settlers argue among themselves that it’s impossible to live with leftists.

You said the street was closed off. Explain.

There’s a semi-central street there, with many people on it, but it’s not the main street.

Is there commercial activity?

Yes, and cars traveling through it. So they stationed army vehicles on both ends of the street covering a certain distance.

Do you remember how many kilometers it was?

It was perhaps two kilometers – from the army barrier to some building that was under construction. All this was blocked. To go up to some roof, we had to break www.breakingthesilence.org.il

through a door, just break the lock – it was a school or a bookshop or something, I didn’t understand exactly what it was. We had to kick the door and break it in order to get upstairs. That’s it. You sit there, on the lookout, don’t let people through. There were people inside… deaf people. It was a center for the hard of hearing, something like that, and they were stuck there for five, six hours.

People there had to stay inside?

Yes. Either you get out now and do what you have to do, or you stay inside. No, it wasn’t even get out now, because the army arrived without announcement, so if you’re inside, you stay there, and if you’re outside you go away.

What about the deaf people or others who went outside, what was done about them?

They didn’t go outside. They stayed inside and someone from the army tried to communicate with them somehow.

When you go upstairs to the roof of the school or a home, you go through the…?

There was a staircase so I simply got in by kicking the door.

Was there a family inside?

No. It was empty. But we went upstairs and lay on the roof.

Can you estimate how many troops were there when this area was closed off?

A lot. We were… There were guys from our advance company and we were also spread around. In terms of numbers …there were several platoons out there and a medical team from the battalion HQ and the company commander and the deputy battalion commander, and the battalion commander and our own company commander, that’s a lot.

About how many Jews came out there to pray?

Not so many. Several dozen. But it was not crazy like at the Cave of the Patriarchs, just a few dozen. They came to pray, had a picnic, really it was the biggest absurdity.

You see them sitting down at a picnic table, ambling around, eating, having a nice time. You think to yourself: “This doesn’t make sense. For this you are supposed to stop everything on that street and leave the hard of hearing stuck in their building?”

There may actually be people who think it wasn’t that important for me to be there at the moment… I think I’m too scared to refuse to carry out orders…

When the street was opened after a few hours, were you all there?

We wrap things up, the group of worshippers leaves first, and then the forces leave together, keeping an eye on one another.

35

*** Testimony no. 20, 2008 The army is there The patrols – that’s 50% of what a soldier in Hebron does. What was their purpose?

“Patrol 30 defended the Jewish settlers in Hebron and the State of Israel,” and all that. What was its purpose? To make the Arabs feel that the army is there, it’s everywhere, and they’d never be able to know where the patrol would show up. The army is always there. Meaning they shouldn’t think they can… And also carrying out inspections. In the briefings, it was defined as preventing hostile terrorist activity in its designated area. Practically speaking it was simply to deter. This hand gesture – when you’re walking up front, next to the officer, this is the gesture. He goes like this and you go like that.

As if you’re opening the way.

Yes, really as if God is parting the waters. All we need to do is this hand gesture and they [Palestinians] are already clinging to the wall very clearly, rather scared.

Knowing it’s not worth their while to start anything and be detained.

Were there any who wouldn’t move?

Of course. The annoying ones, yes. Those annoying ones that you have no patience for because then you’re walking the whole day, you’re basically dying… You’re walking, dying to finally get to sit down and suddenly this idiot shows up who won’t budge, so what do you do? You point your weapon at him. Obviously he’ll move.

Does it always work?

Usually it works. Along with shouting: “Go!” [in Arabic].

And inspections, whom would you inspect?

Usually off to the side, I remember a place called, not the butcher-shop, something similar. “The Rooster” it was called, it was across from the “Roosters’ Post”. On Saturdays, this “Rooster” post would be manned, on the Worshippers’ Path12. It was this dark alley, you’d go into a place where a tractor stood and it was always dark and creepy to go in there. We’d always stop there: “You cover in this direction, you cover in that direction,” and then some guy arrives, he’s all in shock because suddenly a sergeant stops him and says: “What’s your name? Give me your ID. What are you

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

doing here?”

Was there a specific profile for people you’d check or was it just anyone who entered the alley?

Not kids. Not at all. But there’s something I really remember from patrols. I remember once we went with the platoon commander. He had this thing where we had to be absolutely quiet, really good. So we’re walking along the street, no one notices us walking. We can surprise them, we’re snakes. So it was the middle of the night – night patrol – and we were walking. A guy is walking along, not towards us but in the same direction as we were, and we had to walk very, very quietly. I recall kneeling in the dark. He’d come along, we hid, so he wouldn’t notice us standing there in the dark, he passes us up, we’d follow him silently so he wouldn’t notice, and then startle him: “What are you doing here? Give me your ID.” It was this commander’s idea of fun, to make sure we’re a team… There was never anyone problematic, but that was his kick.

*** Testimony no. 21, 2010 Ambassador of the State of Israel I happened to be at demonstrations that leftist activists hold on Fridays. There’s the Gate No. 1 army post and the post near Beit Romano, which isn’t so high up. There’s an elevated post inside the Casbah, but overlooking it. There’s a post where you can come down, sort of in between. When those demonstrations take place, you stand there and lots of [settler] kids arrive, and adults, too, and you tell them that there’s a regional general command order closing it off as a military zone and they must not climb up here, and then you have to quarrel with them and block them physically.

What do they do up there?

They sit above during the demonstrations, and begin to yell at the tourists either in Arabic or in Hebrew or in English, to stir things up: “Bitch, son of a bitch, Arabs…” I no longer remember exactly what they used to yell but there’s this demonstration and you’re thinking: “It’s not helping anything that you’re up here, just get down.”

Do they do anything beyond yelling?

No. I’m not such an expert on the Territories and the settlers, but I do think the 37

settlers realized at some point that all the hell they raise does no good for their image, and I think we felt that in Hebron, that sometimes kids did things, and there were little outbursts, but somehow they started to show a bit more restraint in terms of things that actually injure people, like throwing stones and such. They could stand in the middle of the demonstration on top and laugh at the demonstrators: “You’re demonstrating and you’re actually forbidden to enter this area, we’re stronger than you, ha-ha-ha!” But they couldn’t do any more than that.

What would happen at those demonstrations?

The first time it happened, it was a bit ugly. It was a bit uncomfortable because it leaves a unpleasant impression. As soon as a tourist or demonstrator touches a soldier, you have grounds to arrest him. First off, just basically being a soldier in Hebron places you in an uncomfortable position. For them you’re an ambassador of the State of Israel.

For whom?

For tourists. You’re an ambassador of Israel, not only in demonstrations, everywhere.

In the Casbah, when you escort a tour. At a demonstration first thing you stand there, and the thing is we surround them. We don’t stand watch over the gate. There is Gate No. 1, they’re in a group and we surround them and then the whole blaming business starts of all those tourists who know what’s best for Israel and they know what’s best for the world and this starts all kinds of… In English they’re telling us: “You don’t have to do this, why are you doing this? You should be ashamed. We know you’re feeling bad about it so don’t do this.” There’s also: “Why don’t you live as two peoples in one state?” There were lots of accusations and diplomacy ideas, as if I’m supposed to be some decision-maker now. This places you in an uncomfortable, uneasy position because you’re not completely at ease with being there in the first place and on the other hand you are not supposed to talk to them.

To the demonstrators?

To the demonstrators. And you know that for the sake of public order you should look confident and they must not be able to tell from your face that you’re having a hard time.

How does this manifest itself?

Simply if what they said disturbed me or made me think about what I’m doing now and so on. Still on the outside I tried very hard to keep a straight face, to ignore them as it were. It’s weird because you’re estranged from what you really feel inside, it’s weird to be standing in that situation. www.breakingthesilence.org.il

Do you recall any specific incidents from one of those demonstrations?

Yes. At some point we began to shove them back.

The demonstrators? Why? Because… the truth is I have no idea, those were simply the instructions. At the time you don’t…

Was there any kind of rioting going on?

No, no rioting, but there was a demonstration. “Start moving away,” we said and started to make them disperse towards Palestinian Hebron. We were simply standing there and not letting them through. We’d say it was a demonstration without a permit, things like that. We didn’t always ask questions. Sometimes we were told: “Guys, you have to stand between them and this spot, and not let them through.” Or, say there’s a road that passes right below a Jewish neighborhood, in the Casbah, when you turn left from Gate No. 1. We would have to prevent demonstrators from getting there, no matter what.

Why? Because if they do, stones would be thrown at them, and there’d even be Molotov cocktails. There would be another problematic spot, and media, and diplomatic stuff.

Why not stand on the roofs and prevent the settlers from throwing stones?

I thought about that, too.

So what do you do?

Just stand there and hold hands. They do and we do and somehow we created a human wall and then we go: “Get ready! Set!” and shove them further and further into the Casbah. There were such incidents.

Were there any instances of violence then?

Yes, as soon as… Some soldiers are not that much in control. Say a soldier comes to the demonstration and he’s all riled up about something else. As soon as he is touched, he’ll go berserk on them. Even officers.

Have you ever witnessed this?

Not among friends of mine, but guys from other companies or officers or commanders.

He’d be touched by someone – great, that’s good enough for taking everything out.

And what happened?

He’d push the guy who touched him down to the ground, grab him, cuff him, bring other soldiers and take him out. I also caught someone by the legs, and he began to scream as if he were being tortured. It was like: “Relax, stop putting on a show for the

39

cameras.” You see the foreign press arrive, and they get it on tape and what can you do? You have to go on taking him off into the Jewish neighborhood on the other side.

*** Testimony no. 22, 2008 Sterile road What are the instructions regarding Shuhada Street6?

Arabs are absolutely prohibited from accessing it.

From where to where?

No access onto Shuhada Street.

Period?

Yes. Unless someone shows an Israeli permit, allowing him access. Then you call the patrol, detain him until the patrol gets there. The officer checks it, and then perhaps he’s allowed to proceed onto Shuhada Street, to get to Tel Rumeida.

And if someone lives on one side of Shuhada Street, may he open his door and cross over to the other side of the street?

No. They may not be on Shuhada Street. Absolutely forbidden. It was a sterile road.

That was the term?

It happened about three times that we’d seen someone walking on Shuhada Street, ran after him, chased him, and nothing. I mean we wouldn’t have caught him anyway, weighed down by our ceramic vests. Regardless of what shape we were in, not a chance.

Were you aware of the discussions about the street in the Supreme Court?

I remember hearing it was a topic of deliberations and two days later – we heard all this by way of rumor, and that there was no way to…we heard about it from our leftist parents. We heard about deliberations in the outside world and I remember being told about it. But people were also saying that on the other hand there was this reign in Hebron that the regional brigade commander could decide on everything, because this was a closed military zone, so he could decide what happened within his designated area, and I don’t recall even a single day in which there was an Arab on this road.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

What about nearby streets? The road going up to Jilber, Tel Rumeida? Were Palestinians allowed there?

There was a section where they were allowed? I think they were allowed access near the Police Checkpoint. I might be mistaken, but I seem to remember people there.

*** Testimony no. 23, 2008 As if they own the place I’ll tell you – first of all we came from a very specific background, so from my own outlook, Jewish settlement there is twisted. But that is not to the point. I’m there as part of the army, to protect them. I was committed to my mission, and from the onset it was clear that this is what I was going to do. Everything was directed at carrying out missions as best as possible, regardless of my political leanings. This was my mission, that’s what I also told my soldiers. Now, problems came up immediately with regard to this. They [settlers] feel as if they own the place and suddenly, you’re on patrol and someone begins to enter the Casbah, or someone wants to enter the Casbah, they’re hurling comments at you. There’s a certain relationship with the settlers. On the one hand they treat you really nicely, you’re hosted by them on the Sabbath, they’re hospitable. On the other hand, as soon as it backfires, meaning we prevent them from doing something, or say they see an Arab child throwing a stone and we don’t manage to catch him or don’t do enough in their opinion, that’s it. It begins with swearing at us, continues with yelling and I’ve even seen acts of violence.

So it’s not that… There was no violence directed at us specifically, but at the Border Police, there was real chaos. And there were lots of fights with her.

The settler woman.

With ***, yes. I’m trying to remember, there were lots of fights with her. There are places where both Arabs and Jews are allowed access, meaning they can all go there, mixed. For example, on the way to Tel Rumeida, places like that. There is friction. You try to prevent it. You don’t want that friction, your mission is to avoid it, to create as much calm as possible, and often the people creating that kind of friction are not the Arabs but rather the Jews. Mostly it’s the Jews, okay? Undoubtedly.

Anyone who was there will tell you that most of the friction there is caused by the Jews.

41

How? Comments, shoving. Now say I get there, and I take a side… I’m not judging but I go to the side that is creating the friction, which is usually the settlers. Then there’s tension, and she is mostly nervous and manipulative and has her say. In the beginning I would still talk to her, tried to be nice, but that didn’t help. It’s as though she knows how to talk and she immediately picks up on the fact that I’m from a kibbutz and that’s it.

Story over. She already knows exactly what I think and where I’m coming from, and the swearing begins, and you realize there’s no one to talk to. They’re there. They’re not budging.

Do you recall a specific incident where you found yourself in the middle?

I remember several cases. I’ll try to recall the main reasons, but first of all something happened in Purim13. ***’s son came and tore off our battalion commander’s ranks.

You were present?

I wasn’t there, but the story made its way around. I don’t want to mention names of those present, but he simply came along and tore them off following certain incidents.

There was once a terrorist attack, while we were there. The attack itself did not take place in Hebron, it was somewhere else, I don’t even remember where, and the settler children began to throw stones at Arabs’ homes.

In Tel Rumeida?

Not in Tel Rumeida, at Mitkanim11, around the 4-5 army post. We tried to stop them.

You go to the kids: “Why are you throwing stones?” and they go on doing it, not minding you one bit. Those kids are the toughest part of the story out there. They throw stones and all, and there is nothing you can do about it. What can I do? What can I do about kids? What, do I arrest them? No, I can’t. It’s not something you can actually do. You can’t even touch him. He can throw as many stones as he likes. You try to prevent this, you try to speak to him. I mean, if it’s something physical, you’ll prevent it, but he’ll continue. It’s the same children, I remember the name, it’s the son of *** [the settler woman].

How old were these children?

Around 12 years old.

And how did the story end, when they threw stones at the Casbah?

At first they began to throw stones, we tried to prevent it, they went on, swore at us, and continued throwing. We wanted to prevent this, so at some point we simply summoned their parents and they went home, the parents couldn’t care less. Same thing on Lag Ba’omer14. They had to get wooden planks somewhere. The Arabs’ www.breakingthesilence.org.il

shops in Hebron are broken into on a regular basis. They are shut, the Arab shops.

I don’t know when they’ll be reopened, but all the shops on Shuhada Street10, that whole area is closed and they break into those shops. There’s nothing you can do, it’s amazing. You try to prevent this, you call the police, nothing happens. The police say it’s frustrating, too. I remember talks with policemen, it doesn’t help. There’s nothing.

What do you mean?

Nothing to be done about it. The kids are stopped, then they get right back to doing the same thing. There’s no enforcement to speak of. There’s nothing you can do to stop those kids and those people in general from doing these things.

Because you’re a soldier? What were you told?

I’ll tell you what happens. Practically speaking, I’m not supposed to deal with the civilian population. Certainly not Jewish civilians. Meaning if there are any problems, I have to summon the police, but if I see something happening violently, I am going to stop it. Then you call the police. The policeman can’t do anything about it either. He can stop the kid, but everyone knows everyone there anyway. The policemen know the settlers, the policemen are frustrated, they know the kids, they know the parents, they know everyone – the stone-throwing continues, no change. We brought it up very often. I’m sure it’s been brought up a lot before, and after, and there’s no way to prevent these things from happening. That’s the most frustrating thing about Hebron.

This matter of trying to defend the settlers and working your ass off on missions and things that they have no clue are happening, these 6-615 shifts, the Casbah patrols.

It’s a grind, and they just don’t give a damn. They really don’t. It’s incredible…

*** Testimony no. 24, 2008 Mapping We did mappings of all the houses. I don’t know how the army stores that information, why we did it for every house there. I’m saying this because everywhere we went, people would say: “This is my tenth time already so what are you guys looking for here?”

You’d be sent to those particular houses?

Yes, that’s what was done. On every single mapping mission we’d be allotted a 43

certain block, some houses, and we had to ‘map’ everything.

What does that mean, ‘mapping’ a neighborhood?

Neighborhood would be a bit much. Say a block. It means entering the house, getting the people out, assembling them in a certain room, there is a form to fill out, and we have to photograph the rooms, photograph the people, along with their IDs and names.

You take a picture of a person as he holds a sign with his name.

Like that.

Profile, face on, everything?

Like handcuffed detainees.

Really. The entire family? Everyone living in the house? Including the kids?

I think the kids, I don’t recall whether the kids, too. I think so.

Men, women?

Yes. Even if it’s two o’clock in the morning?

Regardless of the time.

And even if it’s their third time.

Look, it might have been our third time, but it was their thirteenth time. It’s not that…

They’re used to this. In the Casbah they’re used to it. We had other missions, further away, with mapping of places that we were told were more serious, so we emphasized them a lot more. In the Casbah often we were sent to places where we already knew the people, so it was more superficial. I knew it, even the company commander I once went with said: “Forget it, we already know this.”

So how long does this take?

It depends on how thorough you want to be. In the Casbah around the Jewish settlement, I think it took about a quarter of an hour.

Per house?

Per house.

And a search is conducted, too?

Very rarely. If it’s needed. Searches are rather routine, nothing special about them.

Who would select the houses to be mapped? The company commander?

GSS9? You as commander on the spot?

Sometimes it was me, if it was something I initiated, or wanted to do. Sometimes it was the company commander. www.breakingthesilence.org.il

*** Testimony no. 25, 2010 An intimidation mission Abed is a guy who lives close to the Jewish neighborhood, and he constantly brings tourists up there, guiding tours for them about Hebron and the occupation. Every time he brings a group, you send Patrol 30 there. It was part of our routine. We’d report to the brigade war-room: “Abed has tourists up on the roof again.” Boom! We go there and stand on his roof for an hour, or half an hour. Station a patrol on his roof.

While the tourists are there?

I don’t know, I don’t know if they’re still there. I don’t think so. One day we really got tired of this, so the deputy company commander spoke with the regional brigade commander and asked him what to do about this. The brigade commander proposed that we carry out an intimidation mission, although we never called it that. The whole platoon went in there at one or two o’clock in the morning, the company commander and deputy wore black masks, and we simply went in through the Shalalah Barrier.

The company commander was with you too?

He and the deputy commander and our whole platoon, started walking towards his house. Then… it was not an arrest mission, it was just to scare them. Wild banging on the door with our weapons, telling them: “Get out now!” We took out Abed and his brother and some guys from the platoon entered the house and woke up the kids and the wife. I think the grandparents were there, too. Old people. Then the commander and deputy yelled at Abed and his brother outside, something like: “Stop doing this!” We were inside, there wasn’t too much to do. We were inside, they were yelling outside. His wife and kids were there, tired as hell, and nervous. We knew we shouldn’t conduct a search, and I don’t know who gave the order. It wasn’t really an order, it was more like: “Let’s behave as if we’re searching the house.” Like, let’s mess this place up. I remember that me and someone else began sticking our weapons into various spots in the house. You stick your gun barrel in the closet, mess up the clothes, open a cupboard, open drawers, use your rifle, as if you’re conducting a search, as if it’s justified. I don’t quite know why, I don’t remember whether it was the platoon commander or the deputy company commander. But it just was…if we’re already inside your house, let’s make believe we’re searching it. So we went through the motions, just for kicks… And that was that. Then we left. I think it worked for two 45

months, or a month, and then the guy continued.

Tell me more about the black masks. What was the point? Did you know they’d do this or you suddenly just saw these two Ninjas with you?

No, that came first. The company commander came out of his office with a mask on and then the deputy said to someone: “Listen, have you got a mask? I really want one, too.” So the guy went and brought him one.

*** Testimony no. 26, 2010 Those kids are naughty There was this bit about a Palestinian kid sitting in a spot where he was allowed, but there were some Jewish children who didn’t like it, and they said: “Soldier, get him out of here.” I began to argue with them. I wouldn’t have shut my mouth when people spoke in such racist terms about Palestinians, but we couldn’t, it simply happened…

You’re familiar with the home of the mute woman? Jewish children would throw stones at it, so you chase them a bit, but you know it makes no difference if you catch them.

Why not?

Because no one will do anything about them. Not the police, not your company commander, no one. I don’t know if the brigade commander says: “These kids are naughty, great. We’ll scold them and let them keep doing it.” But you could catch an Arab kid throwing stones, and you can take him outside the Casbah, blindfold him, handcuff him and take him into custody so he’ll get scared for a bit somewhere at the Hebron police station, I don’t remember exactly where in the station.

But suppose those Jewish settler children do things like this, and you know those kids, how does a situation arise where you catch the kid and then nothing happens?

Nothing happens. There was a boy called “Wild Joseph”. We nicknamed him so because he was a bit screwed up. He was… if a Palestinian passed by his house and wanted to climb up the “Desperation Stairway”16 which you’d approach from the post, he would begin to hurl various objects at him [the Palestinian] and rile things up. I personally never witnessed him throwing stones but was around when he swore or yelled at Arabs. If a boy threw a stone you could stop him with your body, but

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

you couldn’t cuff him, only restrain his hands so he wouldn’t throw stones. I don’t think we ever did that because you feel it’s not your place to do so. It relies on your personal judgment, that’s the problem. You think: “Frankly I’d like to grab his hands, but am I allowed to? Am I not allowed to?” Because what you have to guide you are mainly your rules of engagement. You don’t get instructions about dealing with such occurrences. There was a lot of anger in the company towards the settlers, especially since we were there to defend them. It was anger mixed with a lot of other feelings because you’re there for their benefit, but they don’t give a damn what you say. There were occasions where I was on the standby squad, where you only want to rest, and you want everyone to leave you alone, and then you’re alerted because some girls want to go up to the spring up the hill, which happens to be inside the Palestinian area. But it’s Abraham’s Spring so they have to go up because we are in control there and we’ll let them go up there. I don’t know the reasons.

Have you ever been present when a child or someone from the Jewish settlement did something to a Arab?

I happened to be at the mute woman’s house when they were throwing stones.

What happened?

It happened several times. Sometimes I heard her yelling at them17 and went to see what was going on, and then I saw them.

What, the children throwing stones?

At the house. Simply throwing stones at the walls of that house. Yes, I saw them throwing stones, and then you say: “Hey kid, come here.” You realize he might run away, perhaps he won’t but you know he’s not really afraid of you. You aren’t going to grab his hands because if you do, you don’t have anywhere to take him. You’re not going to tie him up and call the front command jeep to come along. There’s nothing you can do.

How did the episode with those kids end?

I started yelling at them and they ran off at some point. The problem is it’s never over.

These things keep happening over and over again.

***

47

Testimony no. 27, 2010 You stop thinking there’s an enemy What is an arrest mission?

It’s brought up already at noon or even a day before it is supposed to take place.

There’s a thorough briefing including complete details and where we’re going. Nothing about whom we’re about to pick up. There are drills, usually… I remember doing it only on my first arrest – we were constantly on standby so we couldn’t partake in the drills. I don’t remember drilling. We talk with whoever is going to do the arrest ahead of time, ask questions. Where we’re going, what route, what the security weak points are, what we’re we allowed to do, what we aren’t allowed to do, rules of engagement, etc. Then at dawn or at night we go on the arrest mission itself.

Do you recall a specific arrest mission?

I remember everything. I remember especially being disappointed that… On your first arrest mission you’re sure that it’s some big deal, and then it’s just bullshit. You enter Abu Sneina18 neighborhood or something like it, and… take in three kids. After all the “combat procedure” preparation – with your ceramic vest and helmet and all that nonsense – it’s all just to separate women and children. The army takes this so seriously and what you end up with is a bunch of kids. You blindfold them and handcuff them and take them in your vehicle to the nearby police station. And that’s it. It goes on for months, and you never… you stop thinking there are terrorists, you stop thinking there’s an enemy; it’s always children or boys or some doctor. You never know what their name is, you never talk to them and they always cry and shit their pants. I remember one time…there’s always those annoying incidents where you make an arrest and then there’s not enough room at the police station so you simply take the guy back to your army post, blindfold him, stick him in a room and wait till morning for the police to come pick him up. He sits there like a dog… We tried to be nice and get them a mat, some water, sometimes some food and they’d sit there with their hands tied and their eyes blindfolded, stay there like that till morning. And that was procedure. Or they’d be left in the war-room. That, too was procedure. Until morning. Until someone would come and pick them up.

***

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

Testimony no. 28, 2008 To really convince them Mitkanim7 army base is located on Shuhada Street6, right?

Yes. There was a time when we were told: “If an Arab wants to go by, he can. The Supreme Court has ruled in favor. But try to convince him not to, because he’ll have a rough time getting through because the settlers…” I don’t know.

Who explained this to you?

The platoon and company commanders, and whoever gave the briefings out there.

What do you mean?

The truth is that most people didn’t know. If someone came along you would tell him: “You can’t get through here.” And if he still wanted to go ahead, you couldn’t really prevent him from doing it. You had to explain to him that he’d better not because the settlers might… I don’t know what.

If anything happens to him on the road, would you protect him?

I remember we were told that essentially our mission was to protect the settlers, and we also have to maintain order in the area. We are seen as soldiers on behalf of the State, so the Palestinians have to be protected, too. But you have no tools to do that.

What do you mean?

Perhaps it wasn’t said to you in so many words, but it was obvious that you couldn’t handle a Jewish settler as violently as you could a Palestinian, you know?

For that matter, if a Palestinian runs towards a Jew holding a knife, what would you do?

I’d shoot him. If I can stop him without shooting I would.

And if a Jew ran towards a Palestinian with a knife in his hand?

I’d try to stop him with my body. Not shoot him.

Could you stop him?

I’d hit him with my weapon in the face, I don’t know. It seems pretty subjective to me because your superiors don’t talk to you about this. You know, it’s not… There was another time, cameras were set up or something. And the settlers wanted to sabotage the cameras all the time and did manage to do it once. And then we heard that if someone did this again…I saw a kid playing with it, I already knew his name. I called the police and told them it was him, gave them his name and everything. The police came and arrested him. But you know, the police try not to arrest him first.

49

They ask you: “Do you know his name?” I tell them: “Yes, it’s ***.” “Are you sure it was him?” Then you really have to convince them, you know.

*** Testimony no. 29, 2010 Kicked him on his way There was this place in Abu Sneina18, it was this junction, and one of the things we used to do a lot was look for stolen cars. Which was I think half to pass the time and half, - let’s face it, why not help Israeli police, show everyone we’re enforcing Israeli law in Arab territories, a bit of everything.

So anyway, the company commander was good at this, at locating stolen cars, one could say to his credit.

How do you locate stolen cars?

Generally when something looks suspicious to you, a new car, or one without a license plate, or a car whose license plates don’t add up, or a car driven by a kid not even 15 years old yet, stuff like that. So you stop him. You ask for documents, check them, ask him a few questions, check the license plate, there are ways to do it through the war-room, or you talk directly with the police. They tell you whether it’s stolen or not.

We found stolen cars several times, especially stolen motorcycles. Or there were missions where we would escort the police. They’d check especially where there were Israeli license plates. There are many Palestinians riding around with Israeli license plates because they buy the cars from Israelis, don’t manage to sell them, so they sell them in the Territories, and then they always replace the license plates with Palestinian ones, but sometimes they’re caught before they’ve managed to do that.

There are also situations where a guy would use masking tape and write the license number on that, weird stuff like that. Once we stopped at some junction, the “Spider Junction” in Abu Sneina. It has a lot of streets converging into it, and many stolen cars would be stopped there. So we saw two guys walking a motorcycle. We stopped and asked them what the story was. It was at the beginning of our stint there.

Still with ***, the company commander?

Yes. So he got off, asked them what this was, tried to understand whether the motorcycle belonged to them or not. Then a guy came along, some kid, I’m not

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

sure what he did exactly, but he made faces at him. So one of the soldiers said: “Come here!” He didn’t, he ran off. Again: “Come here!” and so on. Anyway, I don’t remember exactly what happened, but they caught him, slapped him around, kicked him, punched him some, and said: “This is the last time you’re rude to Israeli soldiers.”

I’m not quite sure what they were trying to tell him.

What did the kid do exactly?

I’m not sure. Later I understood he was provoking them.

How old was he?

13, 14, perhaps a bit younger, or older, I don’t know. *** was talking and the other soldiers were securing him from the side, so someone was looking out and then *** called him over and said: “Come here,” and he didn’t and ran off, or stuck out his tongue, made a lewd gesture, stuff like that. I’m not sure, I don’t think it even came to that. Usually children don’t provoke Israeli soldiers just like that. Anyway, they grabbed him at the back of the neck, the way you do when you spank your kid brother, but less jokingly. All three of them came at him, punched him, slapped him.

The company commander, too?

Yes. And kicked him on his way.

Serious beatings?

No. He didn’t limp away crying, but he left very scared and ran off.

And the company commander took part in this?

Yes. That was something that I heard from guys who spent more time with him in the front command group, from the officers, too… I don’t know if this was the way he did things, but generally speaking he was rather – he did things that I find less legitimate.

Even driving off into H119 to get falafel. Which was a prohibited area.

Alone or with the guys?

With the guys. No, he didn’t go alone. With the whole front command group. They crossed over, stopped at a falafel stand, got some, and then they said: “Quiet, don’t let anyone know about this, it’s forbidden," That’s it.

What else happened with him?

I don’t know, I think in general he was a lot more aggressive. Let’s say you’re talking about a protester at a demonstration, he might say something to you and then you can ignore it, the way you usually would. Like when they’d swear at you and you try to ignore that. He would immediately attack them, catch them. Like the kids he caught and forced to sit and wait at Gross [Square]20 – that was his idea. The ones I

51

told you about before, that crossed through the hole in the wall. [Earlier the testifier told about an order to detain Palestinian children who had crossed through holes in the wall over to the sector that was prohibited for Palestinians]. When we were on arrest missions, he’d be much louder, knocking with much more force. I mean he did stay in control, he wouldn’t trash their home, but he’d shout. For example, you’re carrying out an arrest mission or getting people out of the house. You go in, knock on the door, someone opens, you get everyone out, check their IDs, see if the person you’re looking for is there, trying to understand where he is. If you do, and realize this is the right house, often you can get an impression from what people are saying and understand that the guy just isn’t there, so let’s go. Often he would say: “Yes, let’s go in, they’re lying to us. Let’s look into this.”

And you would do it?

Yes. You go in, inspect the rooms, he’d check that you’ve looked into all of them, and go. Not going in and messing up all their stuff. It was like, insisting on going in to check. If some kid came out, this commander would yell and be a lot more aggressive.

*** Testimony no. 30, 2010 Use of force Did you happen to enter houses?

On patrols you go up on the roofs and often you pass through homes. They have a staircase inside the house so as you climb you look in the window and see what’s going on inside. They’re watching TV or sitting around in the living room and stuff like that. You actually pass in the spaces between their homes and can peek inside with just a wall between you.

Why would you be going there? What reason?

There are specific passages that you can use to get to certain rooftops. You can climb somewhere else and jump from roof to roof and get there.

So some of the house incursions were for practice?

Yes. But these were not actual house incursions but just going into those courtyards

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

where they have a stairwell. You know what the architecture is like in the Casbah, it’s all very crowded and there are stairwells and passageways, we never actually went in to anyone’s home there, but we came very close. If the door was open you could see into the house. You see what they were doing inside.

And these drills were frequent?

Yes, at least in the beginning because we had to practice where to go and what to do exactly when such things do happen.

Did it ever happen that people didn’t want you to pass through their homes?

Yes, there was one time when we went up to a roof with our platoon commander to lookout over one of the roads, and we were sitting there, not doing anything special.

There was a lot of laundry hanging there. A girl came along, looked at us, then a crazy old woman came and yelled at us in Arabic to go away, this was not our place, it was her home and she wouldn’t leave. At first we tried to calm her down, we yelled at her a little to calm her down. She was shouting and gesticulating: “Go away!” At some point we did get up and go, we weren’t there to disturb her. But it was like: “Calm down, okay, we’re going.” Before that, my platoon commander yelled at her: “Enough! Shut up!” Stuff like that. It didn’t help. She wouldn’t shut up. Finally we left and went somewhere else. As a rule, the friction with Palestinians was not easy, it makes you think. You make the rounds in the Casbah and go by kids or young Palestinians and think: “We’re not that different, there’s nothing different besides our culture and language.” And this whole bit of exerting force so they hate you, you’re simply a soldier and they hate you for it.

*** Testimony no. 31, 2010 Demonstrations Once, when I was guarding, I saw a few demonstrations. It was basically Jews and Arabs waving signs and shouting chants. There’s us – the guys that are guarding – and then there’s Border Police guys who know something about the demonstration and are actually inside it. You can watch all these demonstrations on YouTube. They wave signs, shout, not too many people, 30 to 40 people. And after two hours it breaks up…there were settlers, Jews up on the roofs pouring water down on the

53

leftist demonstrators. Once – there’s that passage, some street inside the Casbah, there’s the Casbah on one side, the Arab quarter on the one side and the roofs of Jewish settlement on the other…

Avraham Avinu?

Yes. So people were throwing stones down from there.

At the demonstrators?

I remember they threw buckets full of water. Once they nearly dropped a rock on a soldier’s head.

What happened?

The soldiers didn’t manage to catch the kid who threw it.

Almost?

The rock fell right next to the soldier.

It was aimed at him?

Yes. And that person was caught?

They tried, didn’t find him.

Were you present, you saw that they were throwing rocks?

I saw a few times.

As a soldier, how do you behave in a situation like this?

If the guy is still there you report it on the radio and the front command jeep comes to catch him, although even then there’s nothing to do with him.

*** Testimony no. 32, 2010 Meltdown Once we stopped – there was stone throwing going on at Gross Square20 so we were alerted and then the kid suddenly somehow showed up. So the lookout got on the radio and said: “Listen, stop, he’s right next to you.”

How old was this kid?

15 years old, Daoud was his name. We stopped him, stopped our vehicle, ran to him, and he was in total shock. We took him to Gross [Square], to the Jewish side, and www.breakingthesilence.org.il

he started crying, yelling, he was having a meltdown there on the floor. There was nothing to do with him because suddenly you have a crying kid on your hands who seconds earlier was throwing roof tiles at Gross, so you’re both dying to beat him to a pulp, being called to there in this heat, but he’s crying to you. We didn’t know what to do, so we took turns being with him, every little while someone else would take out his nerves on him and go. At some point when I was with him I tried to calm him down because he was tied, blindfolded, and crying, nose running and all, so I started shaking him, and then the deputy company commander tried, grabbed him and shook him: “Shut your mouth! Shut your mouth! Stop it!” We took him to the police station and he continued crying because the police didn’t come and he wasn’t taken in for questioning. It was so annoying, crazy story. In all this mess he’s crawling on the floor, so the communications guy takes out his Motorola device. You know what that is?

The communications device?

Yes. Boom! Uses it to hit him over the head. Not meaning to harm him, just after over two hours of having to hear unbearable crying.

This is happening at Gross?

No, at the Givat Ha’Avot Station.21 At some side spot or…?

No, out front where all the police vans… Outside the questioning room. At some point I was with him and the communications guy took a picture of me. I didn’t want to be photographed with him, it was a fucked up situation, you just don’t know what to do any more. We were terribly confused, and there was anger. Because you see the stones he threw, you know what he did, you know it was dangerous. Again, you keep experiencing bad things but the people doing them are people who, I don’t know…

How long was he at Gross until you took him to Givat Ha’Avot?

I don’t remember if it was an hour or fifteen minutes. I think that was it. The messed up part is that he was at the police station for a long time. The most messed up part is that you come in contact with these people. Every time someone does something wrong, one of the Arabs, you take him to the police station, and then he disappears.

He’s either taken to some army base or somewhere else for three, four days.

Do you know where?

I don’t know. We were always told it was somewhere in the Territories.

55

Ofer [Military Holding Facility]?

Maybe, I don’t know. We’d just leave them at the police station and forget about them.

They would just come back after a while. They weren’t really going anywhere.

Earlier you said that when you were at Gross, the deputy company commander shook this boy.

Yes, we all did. He went wild at him.

What does that mean? Why? Because they were such worms at a certain point, I just remember that we hated them, I hated them. I also was a racist there, I was so mad at them because of their filth, their being so miserable and that whole fucked up situation: “You threw a stone, why did you do that? Why did you have to bring me here and you here, don’t do that.”

And he’s crying and groveling on the ground. He had his hands cuffed and at some point we freed them because he was crying and pleading. He was screaming and all wet from sweat and tears and a runny nose. You simply don’t know what to do about it. The shaking was out of desperation. It wasn’t necessarily out of violence. I think we even began laughing, even now when I think of it, you’re so lost out there, in this situation.

You’re saying it was not only you and the communications guy, right? The deputy commander was also doing it?

Obviously, what do you mean? It’s not that we were shaking him endlessly… It was like: “Stop it, you’re driving us crazy!” and yelling at him: “Enough! Enough!” in Arabic.

You throw any word you know in Arabic, like “excellent” and “what’s your name?” and other such nonsense.

*** Testimony no. 33, 2008 Used to the routine … The Palestinians live a rather subdued routine there and they’re familiar with these things. I mean, they know that now there’s a tour of the Casbah and that they have to get out of the way. They know that if an Israeli army patrol shows up they move over. They know that I can enter their home and they’re used to it, every house there has had soldiers going through it thousands of times already. There wasn’t a www.breakingthesilence.org.il

single house I wasn’t familiar with, from the inside as well. And that’s what I wanted to mention also, in terms of our routine there. I was doing 8-820 patrols, meaning sometimes I was spending 16 hours a day inside the Casbah. I enjoyed it a lot, yes, it was even fun actually. Exhausting, but you feel free, you’re walking around and all.

We also took a lot of pictures there, we have lots of pictures. Nice photos. We could do whatever we felt like. Not violence, there was not really much violence except for routine inspections and stuff like that which we did a lot, and I personally did a lot. But even randomly, I mean even now I don’t…I think that operationally it was the right thing to do.

What do you mean?

Not random, I choose the kid, if someone looks suspicious, then yes, we go and check him out. We detain him on normal procedure, ask to see his ID, if we need to, maybe carry out a body search but we try not to.

How do you decide whether a body search is needed? Like if he’s wearing a jacket in the summer?

Perhaps, or if he looks suspect. At some point, you already know the routine, you recognize the faces, they recognize you, you know when things are suspect or not, you know who lives here and there. Things are rather clear, so at some point the checks also become less intense. At first we checked everything, afterwards things calmed down. The patrol routine is interesting. You walk on rooftops a lot, enter homes. You can enter a home through the roof, although you’re not supposed to. I mean, we had no other way to get there so we’d always go through houses.

It’s forbidden to enter homes?

It’s forbidden to enter homes.

This has always been the case or is this something new?

I know we were forbidden to enter houses without a special order, but we would always do it, we couldn’t not do it.

Because you can’t go between houses without…

Impossible. You can’t be walking only outside in the street. If you want to, you can, but no one would do that.

And that’s happening 24/7?

More or less, you could say.

57

How does it work? Sometimes you enter from the roof, at other times you enter through the door?

Usually I wouldn’t use the door, I’d find an entrance from the rooftop. There are plenty of abandoned houses, so through the roofs we knew we’d always come out through some house. Or by mistake. People are used to this routine there…

*** Testimony no. 34, 2010 It’s their home after all There’s a guy there named Abed who’s always bringing tourists up to his roof.

His building is adjacent to Beit Hadassah and looks over this school or yeshiva or something. So there he is, right on top of their basketball court, their basket is attached to the wall of his house. So he’s always bringing tourists up to his roof, and he’s not allowed to do that because someone might throw a block down from there or something.

Did this ever happen?

Not while we were there, anyway. Sometimes stones were thrown from his roof, in the very beginning of our time in Hebron, stones were thrown at our posts, not at the settlers. And that was that. But at first they said they’d forbid him from doing this. He speaks Hebrew and is very connected to these things, he knows what’s what. I think it’s his profession too, his business. Lot of tourists come over to his roof and he sells them souvenirs and stuff.

What’s the problem with taking them up to his roof?

It was a simple matter of deciding it was a security problem. I don’t even know who decided to prohibit this. Again, on the basis of things that happened before we were even in Hebron. At first, before I was posted to the front command group, I wasn’t really connected to all these things. Later I understood a lot more. I don’t know who really decided this and why, but it was decided to forbid him to do this. At first it wasn’t a big deal, and then everyone was annoyed, they went into his house at night, just to scare him. They must have behaved the way they do on arrest missions, taking out all the men, taking their IDs, yelling at him never to do it again, that next time he does he’ll be arrested – something to that effect. It helped, sort of, because then he didn’t

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

go up there any more. Later he did a bit, and then one of the objectives of the patrol was to go over and bring down the tourists that Abed takes up to his roof. So you go and tell him: “You know you’re not suppose to bring tourists up to the roof.” The tourists ask you why, you don’t talk to them. So you sit on that roof for a half hour or an hour or until either the patrol commander gets tired of this, or he gets confirmation from the company commander or deputy to get back to our routine and leave.

What did the tourists do up there on the roof? Take pictures of the army post?

Not the post, they couldn’t take pictures of it from there.

So what was the problem with their being there?

Simply because it’s a very strategic spot with regard to the Jewish settlement there.

For the tourists.

Yes. The point was you couldn’t really prevent people from climbing up to their own roofs, they also have laundry lines up there and all. It’s their home after all. But you’re saying: “Okay, fine, so only the actual residents can go up there.” At some point you’re pretty well acquainted with all the residents, and you go up there as little as possible. So there won’t be too much unnecessary army presence. If people wanted to photograph the army post they’d climb up in houses that were closer to it, all the CPT5 houses and such.

This mission, did it really help?

For a while, yes. He stopped taking tourists up to the roof. Then he started up again.

At first he did, then he didn’t, or once in a while. Even that too, like all things in Hebron, ended up finally with: “Okay, I don’t care, let the tourists go up, I really don’t care.” That was it in general, the attitude towards everything in Hebron. At some point, even little kids running away, scurrying through all those alleys in what’s called the Old Casbah, the little Casbah, the eastern one…

Arab kids?

Yes. They’d go through there instead of passing through the Pharmacy Checkpoint, just in order not to make such a large detour. I didn’t think they had that much to lose by being caught. At first we’d catch them and either make them go back or…first take them to the police, then send them back, or sit them down for some two hours in our posts and then release them elsewhere. Finally we got tired of them, too.

***

59

Testimony no. 35, 2008 Holidays in Hebron I remember Purim13 events that were very annoying.

Why? They filmed there that night. Two students came around to shoot a feature film, if I’m not mistaken, some love story between a Palestinian man and a Jewish woman or vice versa, I don’t remember. They came out of one of the houses next to the sterile road, and one of the [settler] Jews happened to come along at that moment, I think he was a bit drunk, too, telling by his smell and conduct as well. He went crazy about their opening the door and going out directly into the street, and it’s important to note here that none of the Palestinians set foot outside that door, they stayed inside because they knew their place very well. So it developed into a fistfight.

Was this an Israeli camera crew?

Yes. Not a large one. I think there were three people: camera, boom and director.

That’s it. That was during one of my first weeks there, perhaps my second week. I was a bit shocked, I didn’t understand what was going on, what my job was here, since this was actually a fight among Jews, so what was my position in this? But it was somehow obvious to me from the way our company commander handled the situation, that we could not afford to have that happening in our designated area at the time. Certainly not on Purim, in the whole chaos that causes. It had to be stopped. I stood facing that settler, trying to persuade him logically that it was okay, that no Palestinians came out and that these were Jews and it was alright. I don’t know whether he didn’t want to understand this or if he was just too drunk or nervous, but at some point he turned all his anger towards me and grabbed my rifle sights to pulled it towards him. I immediately remembered what we were told: that no matter what, no one may touch our weapon. This is the greatest danger. In hindsight, I think this is meant just for Palestinians, but at that moment the first thing that came up was that and I pushed him back with my rifle. At that point he went wild and began to yell that I was pointing my gun at him, like I was going to use my weapon against Jews and stuff like that. After calming down, I realized that the weapon would not be used, hung it on my body and went over to him to explain, manipulated him with the Purim holiday mood, reminding him that he had to be merry and I think he was drunk enough not to understand what I was talking about and moved on. In general, Jewish holidays in Hebron were weird situations. There was Lag Ba’Omer14 which was not

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

supposed to be anything special but there was this procession of Jews from Beit Hadassah, which is a bit above our post, towards Tel Rumeida. The settlers went down in the direction of Avraham Avinu where they organized a huge bonfire. From afar I saw them dragging a large doll dressed in black, and I thought this was very banal and superficial and to be expected, now they were going to burn a doll dressed as an Arab. As they came closer I realized their doll was holding a “Peace Now” sign so that did surprise me a little, it was somewhat more ‘creative’. This is what the holidays are like there.

*** Testimony no. 36, 2010 The Desperation Stairway You just said that the police there is in a stranglehold. What does that mean?

As I was saying, the situation there is extremely complex. It’s not like in the center of the country where citizens are disciplined and understand that they live in a place where they can only behave lawfully. There [Hebron] it’s less obvious, and creates a very… confused situation.

Do you recall an occasion where you witnessed this confusion?

Yes, sure.

Tell me.

It was towards the end of our time there.

Why are you smiling?

Because it’s really such a story… Our patience was at its end, we were the standby squad out there, it was Saturday and we were alerted by the barrier, at Beit Hadassah near the “Desperation Stairway”16: Jews had blocked the way to a Palestinian woman and began to throw stones at her.

Where did she come from?

She came from the stairs, so we rushed over there, with all our emergency gear and helmets and everything. We get there, see small [settler] children gathering. I came relatively late, I had been on my way to the bathroom so I joined them and saw my sergeant arguing with several kids who came up to about his navel, shouting at him:

61

“Son of a bitch! What are you doing out here? You’re not even protecting us! Whose side are you on?” Total mess. Their father stands on the side, inciting them against us because we told them they couldn’t go through there because the Palestinian woman was standing there and needed to proceed and they had thrown stones at her a moment earlier, with no reason. It was a real crisis, we didn’t understand what we were able to do about it. We began arguing and it was simply such a situation that… There were curses flying in the air…we didn’t know what to do. There was no solution.

How many children were there?

About seven of them, surrounding our sergeant and beginning to… He was already desperate, it was so surreal.

How old were they?

10, 11 years old.

And the Palestinian woman was still there?

No, she had already left. But we wanted to limit them so this kind of situation would not be repeated.

Do you know whether they had hurt her?

I didn’t see myself, I came after she’d been there. They alerted us on the radio, I didn’t get a detailed picture of what had happened beyond what we heard reported, that stones were thrown at a Palestinian woman and her way was blocked.

Let’s return to the situation itself. You’re with all your gear, running to this spot, tired, exhausted – what do you do about those kids?

There’s nothing we can do about them. My sergeant talked to them. I remember myself standing there and thinking: “What am I doing here? Am I their kindergarten teacher? I come here to protect them but they’re actually…” Situations like this happen all the time. It happened before our time and I’m sure it’s still happening. My thought was: “What is being done about it? Where’s the solution?”

So eventually you left and the kids stayed?

Eventually that’s what happens. There’s nothing you can do. What are you going to do?

Can’t you summon the police?

Okay, and then the police doesn’t show up, and if they do, what are they going to tell them? “Naughty boys, go home?” What would they say?

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

And people know about those kids?

Yes. I mean that whole settlement contains maybe 100 people.

No, I mean if those kids are the ones who do these things repeatedly, and you knew them.

Yes, sure, you know all the kids out there. They sit with you in your army posts one moment, and the next moment they throw stones, swearing. I think they’re the ones out there to be pitied the most. They grow up into such hatred, such a reality. They have no control over it.

How long did you argue with them out there?

10 minutes. It wasn’t too long, there was nothing we could do. Really. I’m asking you, what would you do? There’s nothing you can do. You face those kids and know what happened and there’s nothing you can do. Nothing at all.

Does the company commander give you instructions of any kind?

No. Nothing you can do. You report to your company commander, okay… He gives you an order just calming the situation on the ground, okay, stop the activity. There’s no long-term solution or anything. Nothing.

Have you ever detained an Arab child for something similar, or have you ever seen such a thing?

I saw, I don’t know if it was a child, I was at an army post and a child threw a stone at it. We chased him and caught him. We do chase and catch Jewish kids, too, right?

Okay, we caught him, made him sit next to the post, and told him: “This is not okay, not okay at all.” We tried to educate him, and he went on his way. There’s not too much to be done. He didn’t hurt anyone or have a weapon. It was this gray-area case.

There’s a lot of that in Hebron.

Now say you’ve caught an Arab child throwing stones. You would catch him, you said you’d make him sit for two to three hours, or half a day…

Less with children. At least in my experience. If someone actually came along and threw a stone and I saw him and caught him – though it didn’t happen often, they were very quick and hurried away successfully – then yes, obviously our point was to put an end to this situation, to the stone throwing, you want to disrupt them. So you don’t hit them and slap them around and go on your way. You catch them, detain them, that’s the only thing you can do. Under more severe circumstances you summon the police and open a record for them. But that’s it, you move on.

*** 63

Testimony no. 37, 2010 Just to scare them I happened to be at Gross Square20 several times when Palestinian children would burn weeds at the cemeteries or roll tires and throw stones.

Towards the Pillbox Post?

Towards the pillbox or the Jewish settlement. The front command jeep would be alerted – the patrol – they’d be caught, and until the police arrived they couldn’t just stay outside with them. So they would take them into the ground floor of the pillbox and they’d stay there. Once they stayed there for a few hours, and the door was locked from the outside. There’s the door upstairs that’s locked, so no one can get in or out. They were there for a few more hours alone downstairs – there’s an incredible stench inside, infantry who were there before us would piss there on the floor and it stank to high heaven. They stayed there for hours without water, no food. Just that stench, it was disgusting. They cried and started calling people on the phone, and one of the soldiers who had sat at another post came to stay with them inside so they wouldn’t mess around on the stairs. They made plenty of trouble and weren’t supposed to use the telephone but they did anyway. I didn’t want to use force so I called the war-room, and there was just a commanders’ meeting going on in the company so the company commander came to the post.

Alone or with the deputy battalion commander?

Alone. He came, opened the door, and began to yell and swear at them in Arabic, and slap them around a bit. How did it end? There was nothing the police could do about it.

That case with the company commander? He slapped them around and what?

No, then they kept quiet, they were scared of him. They stayed still and three hours later they were released, it was all meant to punish them, scare them. They’re not afraid of the police. There are 16-year-olds there with 19 police citations.

That’s the usual age group? Or younger?

Younger, older, from 10 years old and up. But older ones, too. The police has nothing much to do about it. They say: “Okay, we’ll open a record, and they’ll spend a night here, but otherwise, there’s nothing we can do, they’re minors.”

How long did they sit in the pillbox?

Three hours, but there were many cases where they’d sit and wait for the police to

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

pick them up and then one of the soldiers would go with them to their interrogation, or the police would go straight there.

And that whole story where they sat inside the pillbox because they rolled some tires?

They rolled tires, threw stones, made a fire.

Did the stones hit you or the pillbox?

No, they didn’t.

The tires they rolled were on fire?

Once there was this burning tire, but they’re not supposed to do that. It’s like an educational thing. As long as you allow a kid to do something that is wrong, he’ll go on doing it. They know they’re not supposed to do it, and as soon as they see that no one reacts, they simply go on doing it because they see that it’s okay.

What is the point?

No point. If they see that no one jumps at them, that it’s okay to roll tires, then they’ll do it. It will be burning tires, and then eventually stones.

What were your instructions regarding those kids?

Scare them. The police, too, said there is nothing they could do about them. Just open another citation for them, but that wouldn’t really bother them. It’s not like it would keep them from being accepted to college or some job or the army… That’s it, so there’s nothing to do except scare them.

And this happens routinely?

It’s not like he punched them or got them down to the ground or broke their bones or anything. Just slapped them around some. I’m not saying it’s okay but that’s what they understand.

Do you think, based on your time there, that it really changed things? Did they throw fewer stones or burn fewer tires?

No. They know, they hear somehow which battalion is on duty, if it’s Golani Infantry – who they’re more afraid of, apparently because they’re more violent than the Nahal Brigade – and after that came Kfir Brigade… And then both the settlers and the Arabs, guys who talked to us, would say we’re arriving, that we’re this kind of…

The “vegetarian” battalion?

With a higher moral standard. Out there you’ve got to make an impression that you’re not just standing around your posts on the lookout, but that you’re active. There were lots of initiatives in Abu Sneina18 and the Casbah, and stuff was caught and

65

prevented, both. In general there weren’t too many incidents in that half year.

Do you recall more occasions where people were detained for educational purposes?

This was not educational punishment. It was to scare them.

*** Testimony no. 38, 2008 A routine thing What are targeted missions?

If it’s an arrest mission, it involves going into a place that we usually don’t go into. Say there was an entry into Bani Na’im village, near Hebron. It was also often things that came down to us from the GSS9. Most of them were arrests, but they could also be a large demonstration of presence, like in Bani Na’im or similar places.

Were there entries into H119?

Yes, every day the army entered H1, to the home of Na’atsha’s parents.

Na’atsha?

Yes, something like that, I don’t remember the precise name. Before we got there [Hebron], there was a terrorist attack, two civilians were killed. All the intelligence info from the GSS pointed to Hebron as the place where the assailant came from, so he had to be caught.

So his parents’ home was entered every single day?

Yes. Not at regular hours. Never at regular hours, so they wouldn’t expect it. So that if he did come there, they wouldn’t be able to warn him that we were coming.

Who would go in?

One of the older company's commanders, with an auxiliary company commander, another patrol force, two vehicles.

What would they do there?

Arrive, bang on the door: “Where is he? Where is he?” Naturally he wasn’t there and they’d come back. Straight-up harassment, so the family would pressure him, make him come back, give information, something like that.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

It lasted the whole time you were there?

With short pauses, but yes.

Was it by order of the battalion or brigade commanders?

Brigade commander. It was a routine thing.

*** Testimony no. 39, 2010 Disrupting lives Was it a frequent occurrence that a street would be closed off?

There were the Saturday tours that were most… We hated that the most. How does it work? There’s this large group of people from the settlement who come to tour the place [Casbah]. It happened all the time. The guide is… I don’t know, he is a great distorter of history, claims there is this love-story between the Nazis and the Palestinians, stuff like that. It happens all the time. Every weekend. Usually before the demonstration22 and there were people who would show up for it regularly, Jewish tourists from America, or from all over Israel and settlers always join them. We pass them, there’s something on the wall, we walk through the Casbah and the guide says: “Here’s a stone carved in the shape of a Menorah, so probably this is where Abraham… ”Somewhere he sees something reminiscent of a Swastika so he says: “Now I’ll tell you a love story, not between a man and a woman but a love story between Arabs and Nazis.” Really, these are moments when you wonder: “Why do they listen to him?”

How do these tours work?

At first we’d simply walk, surrounding them in a circle and walking along with them and they said it didn’t make too much sense. So now some forces flank them, and others close the tour, and some are scouting ahead. And some soldiers are running on the rooftops.

How many men does this involve?

You take half a company to do this.

How many men is that?

Command group and half a company – that could amount to 30 to 40 men. And there

67

are the standby squads and the patrol. That’s their job at the moment. And there’s a squad running on the rooftops, which is exhausting, I don’t know how they managed to do it, and there’s the squad closing off the procession. First off, it’s annoying because you cannot possibly accept this fact that you must quarrel with Palestinians in the Casbah. “No passage through here, go there, don’t get close to me, don’t get close to them!” For the sake of this tour you’re disrupting lives, for this miserable tour that doesn’t really mean anything…It’s hard to explain in words, but when you’re there you simply tell yourself it’s not fair, every time they feel like it, we said we’re strong and we’ll protect them so they simply conduct this tour whenever they feel like it. There were occasions where…say one of the settlers is in the army. So he came out with his weapon to show how cool he is and all, that he’s so important.

And you let him?

Can’t help it. You can’t tell him not to come with his gun.

Not even the company commander?

I think he was just asked to stay calm.

*** Testimony no. 40, 2008 They didn’t think it was funny Rooftop patrols – we’d climb up to the rooftops. I loved it. We did five such patrols where the idea was to cross the whole Casbah just on rooftops. Each time we’d come from a different direction and then when something happens we’d know how to come around using their roofs. I remember once we went with our sergeant on the roofs and there was nowhere left to go. So we entered a house, jumped from the roof into their porch, screaming of course. They weren’t on the porch at the time.

We’d scream, they’d come out and see it’s the Israeli army on their roof. “Come on, open the door!” we’d yell, jumping down one after the other, and even if he had intention to harm us this was his chance because you’re jumping from the height of about two meters with the weight of all your gear, smashing on the floor, you’re not really a threat… He didn’t try… If he’d wanted to harm us that would be the time, and apparently he didn’t want to. He was terribly scared, right in front of his wife and kids.

That’s it. We entered their house, came down the stairs, and out into the street.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

Entering homes on patrol? Is it embarrassing?

It’s embarrassing. Especially… I remember constantly thinking: “Obviously they hate us, that’s so obvious. A kid sees me pointing a gun at his dad – why? Because I had nowhere else to go. It was terribly embarrassing.

Was it common?

I had this trick of making faces. I remember it…I wanted to make them feel…I remember walking inside the house and kids would come by, lots of kids. They’d pass, a whole line of them, standing and looking at you, I don’t know if they understood or whether they were used to this, and then I’d make a funny face at them, and naturally they wouldn’t find it funny.

*** Testimony no. 41, 2008 She offered us cookies Once we were on Avner Patrol, all the way up the hill and suddenly we hear that there were shots at the Pharmacy Checkpoint. Everyone goes wild. “Gunfire!” Everyone’s running, of course not exactly knowing what’s going on, but this was with our former sergeant. So people start asking: “What do we do now?” Finally it was a kid who had thrown a firecracker at his window. What madness. Those were the days I hated most. It took three hours. It could have continued all day, such an incident.

What happened then?

We’d search all the Casbahs, alert the standby squads, everyone. Really, no one is given a second to rest, all the markets are closed off. The western Casbah, Abu Sneina18… The Al Sheikh neighborhood. Jabal Juher, everything. All the patrols show up, alerts, standbys. That’s it. There’s nothing you can do about it, you simply have to inspect everyone on the street.

What does that mean, ‘closing off the markets’? How do you do that?

Two men, the sergeant and someone else, stand together in front, stopping the traffic on the street, another two close it off at the other end, and another two patrol and secure them.

69

So the entries and exits are all blocked, the companies are alerted, and then there are searches. How is this done?

I remember very few occasions where we’d search the whole Casbah. I remember many incidents where we’d block off streets. A person arrives, the force goes through the Casbah properly, opening and all, but fast, half-running. Looking for the person whose description we received over the radio, finding someone who resembles him, searching him… Continue. Run, run, run, and then you don’t find a thing.

They knew it was a BB gun.

They said a boy… at some point they already knew it was…there was no hole in the window.

First they knew it was a boy but not exactly what happened.

They knew it was a boy, perhaps they thought he used an air gun because there was a mark on the window, but no hole. “It’s dangerous, why does he have a BB gun? Go on, run, search.”

You entered houses, too, or was it just a street search?

In that specific incidence…we didn’t enter people’s homes so much. I mean, I remember there was someone’s house where we jumped over the wall and entered her yard. I don’t know why we did that. We entered the yard, so in order to get out of there, I mean, would we hop over the wall again? We exited through her house. I remember she was very nice and offered us cookies. It was really weird. I try to think of a person whose house is entered by six soldiers with all their gear… I guess they were used to this. It happens there quite a lot, for some time now. But still, six soldiers entering their home.

Did you knock on the door or was it open?

No, we knocked. I must admit that even though it’s the army and we’re all psyched up and all, even our sergeant, still it’s Battalion 50, meaning the lefties, so… We enter, go through, exit, don’t say… anything, just continue running, looking really serious and important. The truth is that except for that one occasion, it wasn’t so much like that. There weren’t so many such incidents, not so many explosions.

How long did this go on, until someone finally told you: Listen, it was just a BB gun, get back to normal?

I don’t remember exactly. Something in the order of two hours, three hours.

All that time people couldn’t come out of the Casbah?

They can’t come of the Casbah anyway, ever.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

*** Testimony no. 42, 2008 Keep that plate to yourself What were your relations with the Jewish settlers like?

That depends to a great extent. There were people who really connected with them and went to Chabad House on Friday nights and sat with them on their guard shifts. I looked to it personally that when they came to me at my post, I’d make them turn back and didn’t relate to them too much, didn’t accept food or drink from them.

Why? At first I did accept hot drinks from them. At some point I remember one of the settler children coming around, who was the main star on these occasions. He came to me on my shift with a plate of food and as he was approaching he saw a little Arab boy on the road, so he spat on him and then came to me a few meters later with that plate. I told him: “You can keep that plate to yourself.” After that, I never took anything from them.

Was it a young child?

Grade-school age, yes.

Were there instructions what you could and couldn’t, to what extent you could interact with them?

Not really. Only talking among us. Some people felt more comfortable with it, some less. There was an army post where two tiny little Arab sisters hung around, and guys started giving them food, and then we talked about that, too, and how it looked, and stopped that as well.

What was said about this?

That it was not our place. It came to the point where they would come over to the post and ask for food. That was out of line. It began nicely, they were really cute. They would play around near us and when you’re standing six hours on guard duty, it’s fun and you have some candy in your pocket so you give it to them and then when they start asking for food…

***

71

Testimony no. 43, 2008 We try to find the solution ourselves There were Arab kids who’d come in to steal metal, they needed metal.

Where were they going into?

Into the shops.

Okay, those same shops where the Jewish settler kids would steal from [referring to an episode recounted earlier by the testifier]?

Yes. They have their spots. Kids will be kids, you know. They come in, they steal and we were tired of this. You take them to the police once, they go back, their parents might be beating them up and they are forced to go out and bring things home. We have no solution, so we blindfold and tie them up, they sit in the post, get food and water. First time, for five hours, second time longer. That’s how we punish them.

After the police picked them up we try to find the solution ourselves. They don’t get beaten up. It would certainly have helped, but we don’t do that. So their punishment was often detention until they’d be picked up. They were placed in the sentry post, but again, they were all treated decently, no beatings, never…

*** Testimony no. 44, 2010 I wanted conflict with them I remember Thursdays on *** Road. It’s a route that you use to go up the hill once or twice a week to visit the Pillbox Post in Abu Sneina18. Thursdays there’s this weird market there of the strangest goods, I think they’re stolen. Repulsive stuff, piles of clothes and market food stuffs, it’s always on Thursday, and packed full. Hundreds of thousands of people would come there, the street would be jam-packed, but that’s exactly when we’d come by in our jeep, I don’t know whether it was intentional or not, but it became a bit, like if you’re driving uphill on *** Road with all the… The jeep has two sirens, one a normal honker and another with the most irritating noise. Say you’d be driving there and your vehicle is moving two kilometers an hour because you’re making your way in a crowd and honking the whole time, then they begin to throw stones at you. You’re in this armored vehicle and they’re throwing stones at www.breakingthesilence.org.il

you the whole time and you’re cracking up laughing, I remember this as a lot of fun.

We would honk on purpose, really loud. You drive, make your way uphill, and the whole time there’s this sound of stones hitting you, boom. You don’t even get out to chase them, first of all you can’t possibly, you’re surrounded by thousands of people, and secondly, because you really don’t care, it’s an armored vehicle and you’re in the middle of a market with thousands of people, hundreds of people, I don’t know.

So why do it?

Because you have to visit the pillbox, change shifts there. And also, we’d have all those jokes about the market… I guess I hated Arabs so badly by that time. They made me sick, I was disgusted by their stench, their filth, and the fact that they were always so servile and… you keep wanting to quarrel with them, you want them to…

I kept wanting to be violent with them, to confront them, I wanted them to hit me and I’d hit back and not just stand facing them with my rifle. But it never came to that, they were always subdued, miserable, repulsive. I just hated them for it… I was so mad at them all the time…

*** Testimony no. 45, 2008 Playing around with the soldiers … Beit Hadassah settlement. Arab children had thrown stones at Beit Hadassah.

That was a hell of a story! Suddenly all these things come up, you’re taking me back to it. Arab children or an Arab child threw a stone at Beit Hadassah, broke a window, suddenly – boom! I was on patrol at the other end of town, and – boom! Reports are coming in about 15 settlers running into the Casbah, looking for Arabs to beat up.

They broke a shop door. We’re alerted, rushing over and when we got to Shalalah there was no one there any more, just Arabs, angrily showing us the damage. “They were just here, look what they did to my door.” We went to Beit Hadassah, looking for the boys, didn’t find them. But there were stones thrown. Jews threw stones at Arabs in the Casbah.

What happened to those who ran in?

They got away. Before we got there. Came, broke doors and stuff, and ran off.

73

And then there was stone throwing between the Casbah and Beit Hadassah?

That continued. Even as we got there we saw a stone flying into the Casbah, so we want to start a search in Beit Hadassah, but searching them? You can’t tell who it was. v

*** Testimony no. 46, 2008 Golani comes to Hebron … So about Tel Rumeida, what do you remember?

Golani infantry get there, they came into the area after a long time. In hindsight, I’m telling you that the Jewish settlers just loved us. In front of Baruch Marzel’s house we’d be told all the time: “This is the best battalion we ever had here.” Then Golani showed up. They hadn’t been in Hebron for a long time, we replaced the Nahal Brigade and there was always this rumor that the Nahal men would hand out chocolate milk [to Palestinians] at the checkpoint, but they’d say: “We’re not like that, Golani’s here now!” Totally. Golani was now in Hebron.

Who was saying this? The settlers or you?

We were. Totally. That’s how we’d be indoctrinated. Golani is now in Hebron.

Indoctrinated? That’s how your commanders would talk?

Yes. And it’s true, we toughened everything up.

What does that mean?

That if before lines were not drawn, now we did draw the lines where everyone [Palestinians] was supposed to stand [while they were waiting to be checked].

Draw them literally, on the ground?

Yes. And checkpoints that had not existed before, I mean you know Hebron pretty well, don’t you? So if you go up from Police Checkpoint to Tel Rumeida, there’s an army post, and we came along with a bucket of paint, there’s a three-street intersection there, so we’d paint a line from where the Palestinians would come down, another line for where they came up, everything got tougher. Order and… But the way people were treated was not like in Nablus. Nablus was rough, we were really tough there.

Here it was different. People were treated a bit better. At least that’s what I recall from

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

the foot patrols. Nahal would do them in the small Shalalahs, or the big Shalalahs, I don’t exactly remember what you call it. We went in, I saw all of Hebron: I saw the minarets, the banks, we really went inside the markets. We were not allowed to be near the Palestinian policemen. We’d walk around inside, totally. You know we had these permanent markers with us [for marking tourniquets]. We’d doodle over all their ATMs. As individual soldiers, not as a general order. We’d enter the market, there was a table with Palestinian police, they’d see us, get up all four of them, put on their weapons, and whoever took this patrol out got scared and said: “Okay, we’re going back.”

No one was detained? Palestinians caught on the Tel Rumeida Road where they were not supposed to walk?

I have to try and remember. Yes, there were rules about how long you could detain someone who rioted or disturbed you. I do remember that once we made several youngsters sit because you know how it is, they come around making faces because you’re a soldier and you only try to get it out of them, make your point. So they were kept there for a few hours and finally released.

I’m missing the middle of the story here. They come around scowling and then they’re sitting there, handcuffed. How come?

It very much depends on the soldier there. “Go stand over there” and then he does it on purpose. Or he cursed, I don’t remember. There was no hitting. Either they swore or tried to show a bit of rebelliousness within the limitations without endangering themselves and for that they were forced to sit there.

You mentioned the doodling on ATMs – was this an expression of boredom?

No, I remember something, I’m trying to think of how to word it. Once on a Saturday we got permission to go to the pool in Kiryat Arba11, the army’s. When we got back we went up to Tel Rumeida and these two guys seriously intended to catch an Arab, beat him up and leave. And I’m thinking how I… Guys on your patrol?

No, no. Three guys, I told you we went out and came back. They were a bit screwy.

Finally both of them were discharged. I remember trying to prevent this by talking to them. I think they didn’t do it in the end, but there is something I do remember… Guys took mats from somewhere, I told you.

What was the story? Where did they take mats?

From one of the houses. Near Tel Rumeida, I don’t recall why they were there to

75

begin with.

Where did they put them, in the lounge?

No, they took them home.

Is this something that was known in the company or was it under the table?

Under the table.

*** Testimony no. 47, 2008 To deter them We had mapping missions, which means going into the house and mapping it, making a drawing of its layout. It was up to the company commander at the time.

Was this a common type of mission?

Yes. It could happen three to four times a week.

Where?

In the Casbah, and in Abu Sneina18 as well we had mapping patrols where you go from house to house, you get a list of eight houses and map them. If you don’t find the entrance, could be that that house has changed since it was mapped last. You go on. I remember that on a patrol in Abu Sneina, when we were on a mapping mission – this was early on there – about a month after we arrived, we heard: “It’s just been done in my house two months ago, what do you guys want now?” And we reply: “Why would we be sent to you if your house was mapped as recently as two months ago?”

But that was part of the deal, to deter them. To enter the house, be seen, so they’d realize we know exactly what goes on in those houses.

Was it always in neighborhoods around the Jewish settlement, or sometimes deeper inside?

Deeper inside as well.

Where? Actually within H119? In the area that is under the control of the Palestinian police?

No. More around the Casbah. Once we went into a house that was really on the borderline, in H1.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

*** Testimony no. 48, 2008 Prepared for the situation We had an episode with Shihab Na'atsha who was somehow related to some terrorist attack. He was one of the heavies, we really hoped to catch him – finally someone who’d really done something – and our battalion would send out an arrest mission on a regular basis looking for him. The advance company, especially, as well as the auxiliary company were targeting his home every day. One day our deputy company commander had apparently fought hard enough to get the okay for us to go on an arrest mission to his parents’ house. We got there at night, spread out around the house, checked that no one was coming out of a window, the whole procedure. Knock on the door: “Everyone out!” and before you even finish talking, the door opens, everyone is already out. Since they’d already had so many arrest missions they knew what to expect. They had chairs ready outside, and water bottles, they were simply prepared for the situation, it must have been very regular there. I think that about a month or two weeks after we left Hebron, he was executed by a special forces unit or Duvdevan, I don’t recall. One of the officers in our company could identify people of the family by their look, he could stop people in the Casbah and say: “This is a Na’atsha.” He’d open their ID and he was always right. That guy had so many arrest missions against him.

And you never caught him?

No. No one from our battalion caught him. I also think those arrest missions were meant to draw him out, thinking there is a limit to how much a man will let his family suffer on his account. But that’s my personal opinion.

*** Testimony no. 49, 2008 As if you’re trash The only thing for me is this strong feeling of frustration – you’re there to protect people who don’t give a damn, who brutalize you, use their kids to be mean to you.

77

No appreciation whatsoever. The fact that they ask you to escort them, and you do it on Saturday, is not the point, even if they do bring us snacks all that time, because it’s not worth it if right after that they’re swearing at me and even throwing stones and acting violently. These things are unbearable; it’s a nightmare, something that doesn’t happen in the rest of the Territories. I mean this attitude, as if you’re trash for all they care. It is especially visible with their kids. They have no shame, they can say anything they like, no one pays attention to them, there is nothing to be done about them. They’re the lords of the terrain, they do whatever they like. These kids who broke into a shop, there was nothing we could to stop them, it was amazing. It is so frustrating to watch a kid breaking into one shop after another, smiling, not caring, and even if you say something to him, or stop him once, it makes no difference.

The next day you’ll see him again, and the police officer is frustrated, too. They’re surrounded by frustrated people who can do nothing about it, so the situation out there is totally absurd. I mean, one can still argue about the yeshiva out there, but the situation this creates, the attitude towards the army is…

*** Testimony no. 50, 2008 Not letting them rest for a moment … There is initiative. The company commanders have an interest in initiating things – security activity – so as not to fall into routine and not make do just with the patrol – to do more, extra. So mapping missions are one such initiative, not just as a show of force – it does have certain security value and sometimes the GSS9 is involved as well. Less around the Casbah because the GSS knows the Casbah very well, everyone knows what goes on there.

So where did you go on mapping missions besides the Casbah?

All the towns around. There were several missions. Because we’re a relatively young company, we did less, other companies did more. But specifically my own platoon took part in several mapping missions.

Where?

There was a large operation in Bani Na’im. It wasn’t just mappings, it was on a bigger scale.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

Mapping in Bani Na’im.

And there was another village, I remember that very well, right at the junction, the northern entrance near Halhul. We did mappings there, a large mapping operation.

We really took people out of the houses, carried out searches.

Who ordered this operation? The GSS? It came down from the brigade commander and the GSS. Was it carried out during the day or at nighttime?

Nighttime. All these things happen at night. I don’t remember ever doing a mapping during the day.

You’d go into H119?

Sure, we went everywhere. Not on patrol; on special operations, sure. Plenty of times.

Mappings were also done in the areas around…

I don’t recall specific places right now. Most of the mappings were carried out near the Casbah because they were not that significant, except for some major operations where we did carry out mappings. There was one very large operation carried out by the battalion, by the brigade – we entered the northern part of Hebron and mapped a bloc of houses designated by the GSS. But it was a really major operation, as if we were going to war.

But this operation was all mapping missions.

All mappings, and I can imagine that some companies carried out arrests. Specifically we carried out mappings in houses designated to us by the GSS. And was there any special reason for this operation in northern Hebron?

Look, sometimes there are reasons, which to me are quite understandable. I mean, often there’s an area, which is advantageous intelligence-wise. For the GSS it’s very good, it shakes things up. People begin to talk and stuff. It also demonstrates presence, it shows we’re in charge, although the army no longer likes this phrasing, ‘demonstrating presence’. But it’s also a part of it. And the battalion was excellent at doing this, this is what it did. This initiative of doing, of constant action, not letting the other side rest for a moment, keep initiating operations and more operations. That’s why the battalion did so well out there, as I understood it.

In this operation did you do a search?

We did, we entered houses, trashed them, I mean we tried to proceed gently but you can’t keep from doing it.

79

What, flipping drawers upside down?

Yes. Find anything?

No, nothing there.

What is the definition of ‘finding something’? I mean, if you find a Hamas poster, for example.

Pass it up. You’re told in advance what you need. Arms, obviously. Propaganda, that’s important, you’ll pass it up. You need to catch the person, of course. That’s the kind of stuff you look for.

*** Testimony no. 51, 2008 Free reign … I’ll tell you that within a very short time I began to feel that I was much busier protecting Arabs from the Jewish settlers than protecting Jewish settlers from the Arabs.

How is that manifested on the ground?

I don’t know what Hamas does inside Hebron, but whenever there was tension in the mixed neighborhoods, or mixed streets, I never witnessed a situation where Arabs harassed Jews. I mean, there was no violence on the part of Arabs, they didn’t harass the Jews. I think this was mainly out of fear. Because whoever was there before us handled them very roughly. The Jews, however, would really drive the Arabs crazy.

They’d throw diapers full of shit into their gardens, throw their garbage into their yards. If an Arab kid was walking in the street and ran into three Jewish kids, they would beat him up or just harass him and all. There were lots of such harassments.

Annoying things, like some religious neighbor lady comes to us saying she saw her son’s toy tractor down in the garden of her Arab neighbors, they stole it. Go figure.

The company commander hears this: “What do we do? Go in.” So we go into the Arab woman’s home to retrieve the tractor, the stupidest thing. And you know, suddenly this group of soldiers – say we’re standing three, four soldiers outside – and the platoon commander enters the house with another soldier, begins to argue – it’s so idiotic for the army to be dealing with this to begin with, he starts to tell this Arab www.breakingthesilence.org.il

mother that her little son’s tractor actually belongs to the Jewish woman. I don’t even know, it’s hard to believe. There’s no reason for an army to intervene in a dispute between neighbors.

How did it end? Did you take the tractor? Bring it to the Jewish woman?

Something vaguely tells me yes, but I don’t remember how it got out of there. At the moment the platoon commander listened to the company commander but I remember him feeling awkward as well, just as we did. There was an argument. Or, once we were standing guard at night and this young Jewish religious woman from the neighborhood showed up. Next to the Tel Rumeida army post there’s a building, we were standing close by and she said that on her way down Arabs bothered her, and that next to the post she was bothered again and it was one o’clock at night, so she wants us to call the police. We deliberated what to do and asked: “Are you sure?” because we knew that sometimes the girls say they were being harassed. Finally we did summon the police, they didn’t make a big deal out of this, talked with the Arabs a bit and left. It was nice because it was our last month there and from then on she would sit with us on our guard shifts and we got to talking. Differences create interest, it was good.

Was she young?

Yes, a year or two younger than me. It was funny because four months earlier on a Friday night – the settler families would invite the soldiers over for Sabbath dinner – I didn’t yet know her at the time but we were guests at her family’s dinner, myself and another friend.

Is it a tradition that at some point the soldiers are invited to homes of the Jewish settlers?

It works out so that two to three Sabbaths are spent at the post, and one Sabbath we get home leave. So nearly every Sabbath you’re invited, the platoon commander comes around and asks: “These and these families are inviting, who would like to go?” If it’s not while you’re asleep or on duty, why not go and have a decent dinner rather than eat at the post? So we sat there and things came up for discussion like the fact that we’re leftists and about the Rabin assassination. It was interesting. Their views are tough but it was fun.

Were you told what to do when you see them throwing a diaper into a Palestinian yard or their children assaulting a Palestinian?

Listen, we always try to separate them, calm them down, keep things calm. What do you do when you see someone throwing something like that? You can tell them: 81

“Guys, this is out of line. You’re not going to enter the yard and pick up that diaper, and you’re not going to tell them to go in and pick it up. I think our conscience and our morals really kept us in one piece out there. We said to them: “Guys, this is not right.”

I think that the settlers in Hebron know that when the Nahal Brigade is around they can’t create as many disturbances. The Jews there know they have less freedom of that sort because the Nahal soldiers are less violent and more left-wing and when Golani infantry are around they have more free reign…

*** Testimony no. 52, 2008 Arrest missions There was another time, the largest arrest mission we had. We caught the man, we’d made a mistake, the mission got complicated, we took the people out and didn’t put them inside one room, so all the neighbors woke up and saw what was happening.

We took the son, they began to shove us and tried to prevent his arrest. His mother fainted; I swear we didn’t touch her. Afterwards they said we did. She fainted, my medics treated her, we had two medics with us and they treated her, and then we left as fast as we could, as soon as we saw that she was okay. Later we were accused first of all of hitting her and that she’d fainted and we had a whole story with the DCL and we were accused of not helping her and we should have waited for an ambulance to arrive. Maybe that’s true. That’s it.

What ever happened with this complaint?

We have our opinion.

Did military police investigators question you?

They questioned the officers… the deputy company commander.

Those two guys, the son of the woman who fainted, do you know the reason for his arrest?

Yes, I know. He was arrested because he was on his way to lay an explosive charge.

And the guy before that, at the first arrest you mentioned, whose father shoved you.

I don’t know why he was arrested, no idea. Something to do with Hamas, I don’t

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

remember. Usually I wasn’t informed, but here specifically they looked for a long time.

There was some explosive charge on the way [to being set] and they searched for all the people who were even tangentially related, so he was one of them. It was obvious to us we had to catch him no matter what.

And these were the kind of people you were arresting usually, as far as you know?

Yes, he was the most serious case, but we would arrest people who we understood were accomplices and things like that.

Were there cases where you were sent to arrest people’s relatives?

Yes. What do you mean?

I don’t remember exactly, there was this guy they were looking for, Na’atsha, which incidentally is the largest clan in Hebron, so all those IDs have the name, “Na’atsha”, on them. Anyway that was his name and I was on relatively few arrest missions but guys from other companies, they constantly caught his uncle or his cousin, the main thing was to obtain information. Two weeks after we left Hebron…

He was caught?

Killed.

*** Testimony no. 53, 2008 Life there is very cheap If I’m not mistaken there was this clan fight at Jabal Juher and all hell broke loose, there was crazy gunfire. I remember a bullet hit very close to our post, but it was from that fight, there was no suspicion of us being targeted. A bullet hit near the post.

First of all, it was an incident where snipers took down three men, snipers from our battalion.

Where were you during the clan fight at Jabal Juher?

I was at a post… Our marksmen were alerted. I was a marksman, too, but I was not alerted. They went up to the post. I remember it all on the radio, it was crazy. We directed the snipers to the armed men. One of ours. They went up there with huge

83

binoculars and directed them until they hit three.

What was said about them? Why was this done?

Because they’re endangering others. If a guy is armed he must be a terrorist. There’s no reason for an Arab to have a Kalashnikov. They know it’s forbidden. It looks very…

I say this now – life there is very cheap. If he’s armed, he’s got to die. Apparently he’s a terrorist, he must die. Those were the rules of engagement, too. You see someone armed, you shoot. There’s no deviating from this. If he is armed, in a second he’ll be firing at Beit Hadassah.

That was the…?

Excuse. He might go out and shoot a Jew right now, who knows? Or your buddy on the post, and then it effects you, too.

But the Palestinian policemen are armed, aren’t they?

No way! They couldn’t carry arms. And even if they do, it’s only in areas where we have presence.

Most of the time.

Yes, but when we’re around….

*** Testimony no. 54, 2008 Casbah tour The most frustrating time is Saturdays, I don’t know if this still happens. It’s those Casbah tours, I think.

What are those?

On Saturday, two o’clock in the afternoon, they [Jews] enter the Casbah, and we secure them. A guided tour enters the Arab Casbah, to see where Jews once lived, and show mezuzahs23 or just… They come in their Sabbath best, all the children, parents, everyone together, and we have to secure them. They come in, meaning we have to clear the whole street for them. The whole western Casbah, we spread out over rooftops, everywhere, and they go right in, a real guided tour as in the Old City. This is a tremendous security risk. It takes place every Saturday at one or two p.m., we try to vary the routine a bit, change the time, but there’s not too much room

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

for variety and we really resented that. We were mad. It was obviously approved by the brigade commander, by the higher echelons, but mission-wise it was very problematic. It’s hard to secure such a large number of people right in the midst of an Arab population.

What does ‘such a large number’ mean?

Up to forty or fifty. Entering an Arab neighborhood.

And they have their guide? Who shows up for these tours? I suppose the local Jewish settlers came once or twice.

Right, but there are always guests, people who come to spend the Sabbath with them on a regular basis.

Sometimes the tours are guided in Hebrew and sometimes in English?

I don’t recall if these were English or Hebrew speakers, but I’m certain that every Saturday and holidays there’d be these Casbah tours. It was our biggest nightmare.

Holidays, too?

Sure. Twice even. Because after all, on Passover the place is closed. We were moved over from the post to houses inside the Casbah, the Casbah was shut down completely and I think the tours happened even twice a day. Passover, Shavuot, Chayei Sarah, and there was the Cave of the Patriarchs, too.3 So the Casbah tour happened every Saturday at around two p.m., leaving from one gate to another, or from 4-5 Post or whatever that place is called? The “Doctor’s House”, nearby.

How long does such a tour last?

About an hour. It’s limited in time, because security-wise it’s very problematic. First of all it requires us to put a complete halt to the lives of the Palestinians there, their whole life routine. Saturday is a relatively busy day there and you know the narrow alleys of that Casbah, there’s no room really, everyone has to move off, there’s a force in front, a force in back, a force flanking the tour, and soldiers on roofs. I mean, the whole army unit comes out to secure this tour.

So where are the Palestinians? You said the Casbah is cleared, what does that mean?

We move them into the shops. They go inside, waiting for us to pass by.

They have to fold up their stands, and move inside? Or just the people themselves?

No, the stands are no problem. Just the people.

85

Meaning that wherever this tour goes inside the Casbah, there aren’t any Palestinians visible.

Of course not.

And how do the settlers behave in all of this?

Like landlords.

Meaning?

Their whole demeanor there is as though they own the place. It’s been taken from them, as far as they’re concerned. I come along, they tell me what to do and whom to catch and if I don’t do things right they’ll command and be angry and say: “It’s a pity that Golani isn’t here instead.” Stuff like that. They’re very ambivalent, on one hand loving, on the other hand hurtful. They’re very hypocritical. Most people living there are hypocrites. Once some settler slapped an Arab girl and ran off, simply ran off.

It was this redhead and we didn’t know what to do. We entered the Avraham Avinu settlement, one of the houses, and suddenly I catch myself and realize – what do I do now? Okay, say I see him, and? I tell him to come here? I’m no authority for him, even if I were a policeman. These people feel like landlords, on the Casbah tours as well.

They’re not just doing the tours for the sake of doing them, it’s an act of rebellious opposition; to show that they’re here, it’s their turf, and that’s why they insist on it.

Even if only five people showed up, they’d still do those tours every Saturday, no matter what.

*** Testimony no. 55, 2008 “He bothered me” You mentioned going on arrest missions once in a while. Did you have any idea who you were arresting?

Generally speaking. “His name is so and so.”

Were you told what he had done?

No. We’d be told he was tied to Hamas in some way. There was information that was accessible and information that was inaccessible. Sometimes we’d be told he’s involved in or wanted for something. In general, to give us background. Like some caterers at a wedding who hear a little bit about the bride and groom. www.breakingthesilence.org.il

So how is the arrest carried out?

We bang on the door, there are two soldiers outside, and something like two soldiers with the platoon commander telling whoever opens the door: “Who’s this and that guy? We have to pick him up.” Usually he can’t do anything, you’re armed, so he yells a bit and gets angry and they come along, what else can they do.

And he comes with you, cuffed and blindfolded?

Usually handcuffed. Look, at riots when we arrested people it would be both cuffed and blindfolded and they might be sitting in our sentry post the whole night long, we’d bring them some scratchy army blanket or something, and they could spend a good many hours handcuffed and blindfolded. Which is scary, let’s face it. You have no control over your hands or eyes and soldiers can bully you all they want. I must say we were particular about this. We might have given them a cigarette because we saw how tough they had it. They waited like that for a bunch of hours and then they’d be taken in. At some point the Abir [APC] would arrive and pick them up. On arrests I think I remember handcuffing less, I don’t remember blindfolding. I suppose there was.

The guys who came to the post for a few hours were only those you remember from riots, or were there other situations in which a Palestinian could find himself cuffed and blindfolded in the sentry post?

Only if he threw stones or did something more serious. But listen, the Jewish settlers would react to the smallest peep. Say you were patrolling the street, and Arabs were walking there, and a Jew would come up and tell you: “He bothered me.” The Arab would be instantly detained. Not always blindfolded or cuffed, but standing at the side for 20 minutes, and then some leftist foreigner would come along and say: “You’ve been holding him there for 20 minutes without food or water, that’s beyond the pale,” although I was usually glad when that happened. Because soldiers know they have to mind it when those people are there. Even if they are extreme. Generally, they’re hated. Usually these are not Israeli activists. They’re these weirdos, all kinds of international anarchists.

Where would the APC take them? Back home, or to the police station, or to the Ofer military base?

I think that at first they’d be taken to Harsina, to battalion HQ. From there they’d be delivered to the military police or something like that, but that interested us less. Like I told you, on simpler occasions, if a Jew complained about something, they’d be taken inside the APC, yelled at and let off further away.

87

*** Testimony no. 56, 2008 Security conception The purpose of the patrol is first of all to protect the Jewish settlement. Meaning there’s this security conception – you have a primary defense line, it’s this line of patrol where you gather intelligence information, deter potential enemies – meaning potential terrorists – and eventually your patrol is the most effective means because it is not too visible. At night it is hardly noticeable, unexpected. In the morning it’s visible, but at night… It’s dynamic, not a static post. A post is something you see, you know it’s there 24 hours a day, there’s not too much new going on there. In fact it does the job. I remember at the beginning when we just got there we detained someone, he had a knife on him and the GSS9 agents arrived, and that was all.

A knife?

Listen, the guy knew where the barriers were, right? Perhaps he passes through there, but because this was a patrol, it caught him by surprise. We just came out of some alley, so we stopped him and found it.

Was it like a real dagger or…

I don’t think he was about to stab anyone. Can’t tell you. I have no idea what his intentions were, nor do I speak Arabic. But he had the knife at a location where he is not supposed to be carrying a knife.

Which is the Casbah.

It’s the Casbah. He shouldn’t be carrying a knife because if soldiers stop him he’d be sent right to the GSS. So he had this knife, perhaps he wanted to settle accounts with some buddy of his, or show off – I have no idea. But just to show you that the patrol does have a critical significance. I recall I was one of the big supporters of this, it’s important to do the patrol seriously and not too visibly; to hang around in hidden places and surprise people, give them the feeling that we’re unpredictable.

Psychologically, if someone is on his way to commit a terrorist attack, he doesn’t know where you’re going to be coming from. So the patrol definitely has security relevance.

Did you also carry out intelligence warfare while you were on patrol?

Sure, plenty. I was really good at that.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

What, like let’s light up ‘goosenecks’ [fuel-filled barrels], throw grenades?

No, that’s nonsense. I invented lots of procedures there, I mean there are all kinds of actions like hiding and then leaping out from somewhere.

And then what? Checking people?

Yes, a large number of people at once. What was most popular? There were all kinds of… Sending out two patrols at once from two different places and then suddenly you have a larger number of soldiers all arriving, or patrolling together so suddenly the Palestinians see twelve soldiers rather than six. Those things made a difference. I don’t recall ‘gooseneck’ stuff too much. Perhaps once or twice. It’s nonsense.

That all happens in the Casbah? Say you sent out three patrols instead of one.

Mostly in our designated area, yes. Unless some other company needed reinforcement.

And when the patrol went by and a Palestinian happened to be standing in the street smoking a cigarette, he’d have to get inside the shop just like during a Jewish tour, or he could stay standing out there?

Look, the patrol as a security force is important, but you’d prefer not to enter a bustling street in order not to get entangled. I’ll tell you we didn’t have too much trouble with that. Because they know. They’re already accustomed so that when a patrol comes by, they move. They know not to enter between two lines of soldiers on patrol. If someone does, we throw him out of there. So that was less relevant. I think that as for affecting the population, this was nothing special for them. They see a lot of men, they could raise an eyebrow but they’re already indifferent to this. It doesn’t interest them that much out there. I mean, regarding the population, the hotter matters there are issues of construction. They’re not allowed to build near the Casbah, there’s some law against that.

*** Testimony no. 57, 2010 Not our job What do you mean when you say ‘an insane reality’? Do you have an example?

Yes. Generally speaking there are no laws out there, and even the ones that do exist are not enforced. Beginning with traffic laws and on through laws regarding

89

the way things are run. It’s all very open, heeding the army is a recommendation as it were. Unless someone is arrested. Hatred is evident all over. It’s the thing I felt was present most strongly: the tension between Arabs and Jews, between Jews and Arabs, between Jews and soldiers, between soldiers and Arabs, Arabs and soldiers.

Everyone there hates everyone else. Because the situation is simply absurd, living so close to each other, with such terrific tension – not much good can come out of it.

Lifting a stone is as trivial as giving a hand slap. It’s like saying hello.

Both sides?

Both sides. Mostly the Jewish settlers as far as I saw them. Arabs there are more frightened. The Jews are not afraid because the army backs them up.

You just said that heeding the army is just a recommendation. On whose part?

The Jews.

How is that manifested?

The army has no authority over the Jewish settlers there.

What does that mean?

It’s not its job.

What do you mean?

The job of the army there is to protect the Jews but very often, the Jews are like Israeli citizens, the civilian police are supposed to be in charge of them. For that matter, if a Jew did anything wrong, we are not authorized to detain him. If we comment, it’s merely a recommendation, and it’s not our job there. If anything happens to a Jew, God forbid, then it’s the [civilian] police that arrive at the scene, and not us.

Did you have the authority to act if a settler committed a violation?

No, it wasn’t my job.

Is this an official definition?

Yes, it’s official. It is not my job.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

Notes and Clarifications 1. Annual day of commemoration of the displacement which followed Israeli independence in 1948; marked with demonstrations.

2. Annual day of Palestinian protest commemorating appropriation of lands in the Galilee in 1976.

3. There are a number of holidays and occasions every year (both Jewish and Muslim) when the Cave of the Patriarchs, normally split into a mosque and a synagogue, is open exclusively for either Jews or Muslims. Passover, Shavuot, and Chayei Sarah are some of these “Jewish Exceptions”.

4. Temporary International Presence in Hebron: European-sponsored civilian observer mission in Hebron.

5. Christian Peacemaker Teams: international volunteer organization with monitoring presence in Hebron.

6. Main street in the Hebron city center (in Israeli-controlled Hebron); under various degrees of closure to Palestinian traffic and pedestrians since 1994 (see Testimony no. 3 and 23).

7. Golani military base inside the Israeli-controlled section of Hebron, on Shuhada Street; a small number of settler families reside inside the base itself (see Testimony no. 4 and 38).

8. Rams’ horns which produce sound when blown; used in Jewish ritual.

9. Israeli General Security Services (also called “Shin Bet” or “Shabak”).

10. Settlement point in Hebron erected in 2007 and removed by the IDF in 2008; also known as the “Peace House” (Beit Hashalom).

11. Jewish settlement with a population of about 7,500; adjacent to Hebron (see map).

12. Pedestrian path that connects the settlement of Kiryat Arba to the Cave of the Patriarchs.

13. Jewish springtime holiday on which children dress in costume; often associated with heavy drinking.

14. Jewish festival; involves the building of large bonfires.

15. Nickname for a shift schedule; indicates hours on-duty followed by hours offduty.

16. Nickname given by soldiers to the stairway between Shuhada Street and a Palestinian girls’ school; so called due to the frequent friction at the site.

91

17. Though she is nicknamed “The Mute Woman” by soldiers, she is in actuality deaf and not mute.

18. A neighborhood in the Palestinian-controlled section of Hebron (see map).

19. The Palestinian-controlled section of Hebron (see map).

20. Major intersection in the center of the Israeli-controlled section of Hebron.

21. Israeli civilian police station serving Hebron; located inside the Givat Ha’Avot settlement (see map).

22. See Testimony no. 5, “Illegal Demonstration”.

23. A religious article placed on the doorposts of Jewish homes and buildings.

www.breakingthesilence.org.il

To protect and encourage the Israeli settlement in Hebron, Israel applies a “principle of separation” – the segregation, both physically and by law, of Palestinians and settlers in the city. This discriminatory policy results in protracted and severe harm to Palestinians living and working in the center of the city, and results in some of the gravest human rights violations committed by Israel.

Palestinians in the City Center are subjected to severe restrictions on movement and repeated attacks by settlers. They also suffer arbitrary treatment by commanders and soldiers in house searches, detention and delays, and harassment, as well as violence at the hands of police officers and soldiers.

Over the years, Israel’s policy in Hebron has led to the expulsion of thousands of Palestinian residents and merchants from the City Center, who were left with no option but to get up and leave. This expulsion, the greatest in magnitude since Israel occupied the West Bank in 1967, constitutes a grave breach of international humanitarian law.

GHOST TOWN B’TSELEM - The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories 8 Hata’asiya St., Talpiot P.O. Box 53132 Jerusalem 91531 Tel. (972) 2-6735599 Fax. (972) 2-6749111 www.btselem.org • mail@btselem.org

Israel’s Separation Policy and Forced Eviction of Palestinians from the Center of Hebron Association for Civil Rights in Israel P.O. Box 34510, Jerusalem 91000 Tel. (972) 2-6521218, 1-700-700-960 Fax. (972) 2-6521219 www.acri.org.il • mail@acri.org.il

May 2007

Ghost Town Israel’s Separation Policy and Forced Eviction of Palestinians from the Center of Hebron

May 2007

Researched and written by Ofir Feuerstein Assistance on legal issues by Attorney Limor Yehuda Data coordination by Suhair ‘Abdi, Antigona Ashkar, Maayan Geva, Shlomi Swisa Fieldwork by Musa Abu Hashhash, ‘Issa ‘Amru Translation by Zvi Shulman

ISSN 0793-520X

B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights thank Dr. Eyal Gross and members of ActiveStills, Bnei Avraham, Yesh Din, and Breaking the Silence for their contribution in the preparation of this report.

This report was made possible through the generous support of the Minister of Development Cooperation, Representative Office of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Table of Contents

Introduction

5

Chapter One

History of Israeli Settlement in Hebron

Chapter Two

Palestinian Abandonment of the City Center

13

Chapter Three

Restrictions on Palestinian Movement and Closing of Businesses

17

Refraining from Protecting Palestinians and their Property from Violent Settlers

41

Chapter Five

Harm to Palestinians by Soldiers and Police Officers

53

Chapter Six

Israel’s Policy in Hebron from the Legal Perspective

67

Chapter Four

9

Conclusions

75

Appendix

79

Responses of the Israeli Authorities

87

Maps

102

3

Introduction

Hebron is the second largest city in the West Bank and the largest in the southern West Bank. It is the only Palestinian city with an Israeli settlement in the middle of it.1 The Israeli settlement in Hebron is concentrated in and around the Old City, which traditionally served as the commercial center for the entire southern West Bank.

For years, Israel has severely oppressed Palestinians living in the center of the city. The authorities have created a long strip of land that partitions the city into southern and northern sections and is forbidden to Palestinian vehicles. Parts of the strip are also closed to Palestinian pedestrians. The settlers, on the other hand, are allowed to move about freely in these areas. In the areas open to Palestinian movement, passersby are subject to repeated detention and humiliating inspections every step of the way. Since the massacre of Muslim worshipers in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, carried out by the settler Baruch Goldstein in 1994, the Israeli military commander has ordered the closing of many Palestinianowned shops, which provided a source of livelihood for thousands of persons. To aggravate matters, the Israeli defense establishment has knowingly and routinely protected countless acts of settler violence against Palestinians in the city.

These restrictions, prohibitions, and omissions have expropriated the City Center from its Palestinian residents and destroyed it economically. Most of the shops in this area have been forced to close. Having no option, many families have left their homes in the City Center. Israel’s ongoing restrictions and prohibitions make it impossible for Palestinians to renovate and rejuvenate the area.

This report does not deal with all of Hebron, or even with those parts of the city that Israel directly controls. The report concentrates on the City Center, the area comprising the Old City and the Casbah, in which most of the settlement points were established, in which Israel imposes the most severe restrictions on Palestinian movement – an area that Palestinians have abandoned more than any other. What was once the vibrant heart of Hebron has become a ghost town.2

1. Other than East Jerusalem, which Israel annexed immediately following the occupation, in 1967.

2. See below, “The City Center.”

5

Palestinians have left the area primarily as a deplorable result of the “separation policy” Israel has implemented there. Oppression of the Palestinians in the City Center is part of this policy, which is openly aimed at protecting Israeli settlers in Hebron by separating them, by physical and legal means, from the Palestinian residents. This objective is clear from the reasons the army gave for rejecting the suggestion of external Israeli security experts to protect the settlers without a physical separation, a suggestion that was intended to enable rehabilitation of the Palestinian fabric of life in the city.3 The army responded to the suggestion as follows: It seems that the basis of the opinion [of the security experts], whereby it is possible for Palestinians to live a normal life in the area alongside that of Israelis, is inconsistent with the principle of separation that underlies the security forces’ plan to safeguard the space…

Would anyone think it possible to protect the Jewish residents in the area of the Jewish neighborhoods when these neighborhoods are isolated from each other and between them is an area in which Palestinians live a regular and routine life? How is it possible to prevent friction in the space encompassed by these neighborhoods when on their doorstep (and in most cases, even under or alongside them) regular Palestinian commercial life is taking place?4

A senior official in the defense establishment described Israel’s policy on the center of Hebron as “a permanent process of dispossessing Arabs to increase the Jewish territory.”5 This report describes in detail this process of dispossession.

The first chapter briefly describes the history of settlement in Hebron and control of the city over the years. The second chapter presents the findings of a survey conducted in preparation of this report that illustrates the degree to which Palestinians have left the areas adjacent to the settlements in the city. These figures include the apartments that became vacant and the shops that closed, either following an army order or as a result of other implications of Israel’s policy in the city.

This policy is discussed in the following three chapters, which deal with the factors that have led to Palestinians leaving the areas near the settlements in Hebron. The factors are not all inclusive, but they provide the main explanation for Palestinians leaving the City Center.

3. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel attached the suggestion to its letter of 27 August 2006 to the attorney general and the defense establishment.

4. Letter of 31 January 2007 from Harel Weinberg, legal advisor for the West Bank, to Shai Nitzan, of the State Attorney’s Office.

5. Amos Harel, “Report to Sharon and Ben Eliezer Recommending Enforcing the Law on Hebron Settlers,” Ha’aretz, 11 August 2002.

6

Chapter Three discusses Israel’s severe restrictions on Palestinian movement in the city, including the continuing curfew it imposed in the parts of the city under its control during the first years of the second intifada, and the closing of streets in the City Center to Palestinian pedestrians and vehicles. The chapter then discusses the large-scale closing of Palestinian businesses in areas near the settlement points and the death blow it dealt to Hebron’s commercial center in the first years of the second intifada.

Chapter Four discusses the failure of the Israeli authorities to enforce the law against settlers who harm Palestinians and damage their property. Chapter Five deals with violence, abuse, and humiliation of Palestinians by police officers and soldiers, the seizure of Palestinian houses for operational purposes, and the searches, delays, and harassment by the security forces. Chapter Six examines Israel’s policy from the perspective of international humanitarian law, international human rights law, and Israeli law.

The report ends with conclusions and recommendations.

7

Chapter One

History of Israeli Settlement in Hebron On Passover Eve of 1968, less than one year after Israel occupied the West Bank, a group of Israeli civilians rented a hotel room in Hebron for forty-eight hours, and then declared that they did not intend to leave the hotel. Although the act violated official government policy at the time, after a few days passed, cabinet ministers visited the new “neighborhood” in a show of support. In the months that followed, the government refrained from removing the squatters, while the army equipped them with weapons and even trained them in their use.6 The settler-Palestinian-military triangle began to take its current shape already then, as Akiva Eldar and Idit Zartal explain: A pattern of hostile and violent treatment of the local residents began, and with it came a sample of the Israeli reaction. At first, the settlers settled in the heart of the Arab population; long-time city residents, who naturally did not welcome the penetration of Israelis into the area in which they lived, tried to rebuff the unwanted guests, local skirmishes took place, large numbers of military forces were needed to defend the handful of settlers and to protect the Jews from the danger of violent confrontation, veteran Hebron residents were removed from their homes and shops.7

The government refrained from removing the squatters, while the army equipped them with weapons and even trained them in their use

Some six months later, in September 1968, the Ministerial Committee on Hebron and Gush Etzion [the Etzion Bloc] officially approved the establishment of a Jewish neighborhood in the city. The decision states that, for purposes of expanding the settlement in Hebron, it is necessary to consider the possibility of using Jewish-owned land. Three months later, the Ministerial Committee backed off its decision and

6. Response of Defense Minister Moshe Dayan to an inquiry by MK Uri Avneri, Knesset Record, Vol. 29, session of 12 June 1968, 2230-2232.

7. Akiva Eldar and Idit Zertal, Lords of the Land: The Settlers and the State of Israel 1967-2004 (Kinneret, Z’mora-Bitan, Dvir, 2004), 38-39 [The quote is translated from the Hebrew version. An English edition of the book is in preparation.] For an extensive survey of establishment of settlement in Hebron, see Eldar and Zeral, Lords of the Land, 31-39, 327-333; Shlomo Gazit, Gullible Persons in a Trap: Thirty Years of Israeli Policy in the Occupied Territories (Z’mora-Bitan, 1999), 224-226.

9

decided to establish a Jewish neighborhood near the city. In March 1970, the Knesset approved the establishment of the Qiryat Arba settlement, situated close to Hebron, and in the second half of 1971, the first fifty families moved into the settlement. Within a few years, Qiryat Arba contained hundreds of housing units available for Israelis.

The big push to solidify the Jewish settlement in the heart of Hebron came in 1980, following two attacks by Palestinians that killed seven yeshiva students in the City Center. The year before, female settlers from Qiryat Arba squatted in Beit Hadassah, which is located in the City Center. After a yeshiva student was killed in the Old Market on 30 January 1980, settlers from Qiryat Arba squatted in buildings in the City Center that had previously been owned by Jews. Prime Minister Menachem Begin did not remove them.

In March 1980, the government decided to build a structure for a yeshiva in the City Center and add a floor to the Beit Hadassah settlement for use as a school.

With these actions, the government gave final approval for the establishment of the Jewish settlement in the heart of Hebron. In 1984, a number of Jewish families established a settlement point in the Palestinian neighborhood of Tel Rumeida.

Over the years, the Jewish settlement in Hebron grew, and now a few hundred settlers live in a number of locations in the Old City, primarily in and around what was the city’s commercial area (see the map, p. 102).8 Each of the settlement points is a building or small group of adjacent buildings. The settlement in Hebron is primarily comprised of the Avraham Avinu neighborhood, Beit Romano, and Beit Hadassah, in the Old City, near a-Shuhada Street, which was the heart of the Palestinian commercial district, and Tel Rumeida, near the Old City.9 In the pre-dawn hours of 25 February 1994, the settler Baruch Goldstein killed twenty-nine Muslim worshipers and wounded more than one hundred others in the Ibrahimi Mosque, located in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, in Hebron. Following the attack, Israel gradually adopted an official policy of separation of Palestinians and Israelis, first in and around the Tomb of the Patriarchs, and later elsewhere in the City Center.

In the interim agreement signed by Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization in 1995, the parties agreed to leave the city under Israeli military control, while the army retreated from the other cities in the West Bank.

In 1997, the Protocol Concerning the Redeployment in Hebron was signed. This

8. The precise number of settlers in the City Center has not been made public. Also, the number fluctuates, since many of the residents in the settlement are yeshiva students or foreign visitors.

9. In addition, there is the “Givat Haavot� settlement, which lies a few kilometers north of the Old City and is considered part of Qiryat Arba. The Israeli police station of Hebron is located in the neighborhood.

10

agreement divided the city in two: H-1, which comprises some eighteen square kilometers, in which most of the city’s residents live (about 115,000), was given over to the control of the Palestinian Authority, and H-2, which comprises 4.3 square kilometers and contains some 35,000 Palestinians, was left under the direct control of the Israeli army, with the Palestinian Authority being given only civil powers over the Palestinian residents in the area.10 H-2 contains the Old City and all the Israeli settlement points. The Old City contains the city’s commercial center and also served as the city’s north-south traffic artery.

In addition to the administrative division of the city, Article 9 of the Hebron Redeployment Agreement specifies that Israel and the Palestinian Authority shall strive for the smooth movement of the city’s residents: Both sides reiterate their commitment to the unity of the City of Hebron, and their understanding that the division of security responsibility will not divide the city. In this context, and without derogating from the security powers and responsibilities of either side, both sides share the mutual goal that movement of people, goods and vehicles within and in and out of the city will be smooth and normal, without obstacles or barriers.

In September 2000, the second intifada erupted. This led the army to expand the limited separation policy it had adopted following the massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, and apply it in the entire area in which Israeli settlements are located.

The separation entailed unprecedented restrictions on Palestinian movement in the city, primarily a continuous curfew and closure of main streets to Palestinian residents.

The level of violence in Hebron, as in the rest of the West Bank, rose sharply with the outbreak of the second intifada. During the course of the second intifada, Palestinians killed seventeen Israeli security forces posted in Hebron and five Israeli civilians in the city, among them an eleven-month-old infant. In this period, Israeli security forces in Hebron killed at least eighty-eight Palestinians, at least forty-six of whom (including nine minors) were not taking part in the hostilities when they were killed. In addition, two Palestinians were killed by Israeli civilians: one was shot immediately after he killed a settler, and another, a fourteen-year-old girl, was shot in her home by settlers who had entered the house (see Chapter 4).

The second intifada led the army to expand the limited separation policy it had adopted following the massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, and apply it in the entire area in which Israeli settlements are located

Simultaneously, the distinction between H-1 and H-2 gradually blurred, and the declared commitment to free movement and unity of the city was rendered

10. PCBS 2005 mid-year projections of the Palestinian populations in the two areas.

11

meaningless. In April 2002, during Operation Defensive Shield, the Israeli army invaded and established positions in H-1. The Palestinian Authority gradually lost its ability to operate in H-1 in respect of the matters over which it was given control in the Hebron Redeployment Agreement.

The commercial, cultural, and social center of Hebron became, as we shall see below, a ghost town.

12

Chapter Two

Palestinian Abandonment of the City Center Over the years, many Palestinians have been forced to leave the City Center for locations farther away from the settlement points. Also, many merchants have been compelled to close their shops near the settlements.

The City Center, once a commercial district serving the residents of Hebron and the entire West Bank, has all but disappeared

The City Center, once a commercial district serving not only Hebron’s residents and merchants but merchants from the entire southern West Bank. Now, this commercial district has all but disappeared. Most of the shops are closed, and Palestinian commercial activity has moved elsewhere, away from the area of the settlements.

In November and December 2006, in preparation for this report, a survey was conducted of over one thousand structures in the area encompassing the neighborhoods in or next to which settlements have been established, and in the areas adjacent to the roads used by the settlers and the Israeli security forces (see the map of the survey area, p. 103). Most of the structures lie in H-2.

The survey covered the structures in the Casbah, the area near the Tomb of the Patriarchs, in the Tel Rumeida neighborhood, around the Avraham Avinu, Beit Romano, and Tel Rumeida points, along a-Shuhada Street, on the lower part of the Abu Sneineh neighborhood near a-Sahla compound, along the roads settlers use to go to and from the City Center and the Qiryat Arba settlement, including the Qiryat Arba road and “Worshipers’ Way,” in Wadi al-Hussein, which runs between these roads and Qiryat Arba, around the Givat Haavot settlement (north of the contiguous settlement points in the City Center), and between the settlements Qiryat Arba and Givat Haharsina and adjacent to Givat Haharsina, which lies to the north.

The survey also covers two small areas inside H-1: the southeast portion of the Bab a-Zawiya neighborhood, whose residents and merchants were under Israeli army control for a long time during the second intifada, and the eastern part of Qarnatina Road, adjacent to the Avraham Avinu settlement, whose residents were detached from the commercial district during the intifada.

13

The statistics were collected by sixteen persons, who went door-to-door and documented all the residential dwellings to determine if they were occupied or abandoned. The same was done with every business establishment. The information was derived, inter alia, from inquiries conducted with some 550 residents and merchants who remained in the areas surveyed.

Separate data were obtained for housing units that were unoccupied before the second intifada and those that became vacant subsequently. The same was done for the businesses in the relevant areas.

Number of Palestinians who left the area The survey’s findings show that at least 1,014 Palestinian housing units had been vacated by their occupants.11 This number represents 41.9 percent of the housing units in the relevant area. Sixty-five percent (659) of the empty apartments became vacant during the course of the second intifada.

Regarding Palestinian businesses, 1,829 were not open for business.12 This number represents 76.6 percent of all the business establishments in the surveyed area.

Of the closed businesses, 62.4 percent (1,141) were closed during the second intifada.13 At least 440 of them closed pursuant to military orders.14 In practice, the number of apartments left by Palestinians is higher than the survey’s figures.

The collapse of Palestinian neighborhoods near the settlements led to a dramatic decline in the housing and living costs in these areas. Many poor families from distant parts of Hebron who did not have the money to pay rent moved into the Old City or other neighborhoods near the settlement points in the city. Since

In practice, the number of apartments left by Palestinians is higher than the survey’s figures

11. This number includes fifty apartments that became uninhabitable during the course of the second intifada because the army destroyed them or as a result of wear and tear.

12. This number includes commercial warehouses. Among the closed businesses were twenty-nine shops and commercial warehouses that became unusable during the course of the second intifada either because the army destroyed them or as a result of wear and tear.

13. Some of the businesses that ceased operations prior to the outbreak of the second intifada were closed on army orders the following the massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, in 1994.

14. The number of businesses closed by military orders is based on figures the army submitted to the court in HCJ 11235/04, Hebron Municipality et al. v. State of Israel et al., Statement on Behalf of the Respondents, 16 November 2005. The orders were extended at the end of October 2006 (letter of 19 December 2006 from the office of the legal advisor for the West Bank to the Association for Civil Rights).

The number of businesses and warehouses that were closed by order is larger than the number provided to the court since the latter does not include shops as to which the orders closing them were cancelled after the shop had already closed. Also, some shops were closed by military command without a formal order having been issued. Following a petition filed by the Association for Civil Rights in the High Court of Justice regarding the closing of shops in the Shalala compound, in 2003 the army cancelled orders it had issued to close more than one hundred shops in the compound, and in 2005 the army cancelled additional orders it had issued regarding shops in other areas. Despite the removal of the prohibition on opening for business, many of these shops remained closed for the reasons described below.

14

Housing Units

Businesses

659 (27%) abandoned during the second intifada Abandoned apartments 1,014 (42%)

1,141 (48%) closed during the second intifada

Inhabited apartments 1,406 (58%)

Open businesses 559 (23%)

668 (29%) closed before the second Closed businesses intifada

355 (15%) abandoned before the second intifada

1,829 (77%)

poorer families moved into houses that had been vacated, the survey’s findings reflect a more limited abandonment of the area than actually occurred.15 Testimonies indicate that, in many instances, the persons and families who continued to live and work in the areas near the settlements did not have the economic means to leave. Bahija Sharabati, a mother of six, who lives in Tel Rumeida, related that: Many families were forced to leave this area because of attacks by settlers and actions of the Israeli army. We can’t leave the house because we are poor. My husband’s salary is barely enough to meet our family’s basic needs. At times, I consider leaving because of the pressure and the tension, but rent in a safe place in Hebron is at least 1,500 Jordanian dinars [about 9,000 shekels, or $2,250] a year. We have no alternative and have to suffer these living conditions.16

‘Eid al-Jabarini, 66, owner of a dairy-products shop in the Old City, said in his testimony: More than once I have considered closing the shop in the Old City and renting a place in H-1, but to do that I need thousands of dinars, and I can’t make enough profit from selling my goods. I have to remain in my simple shop, open it every day, and wait for customers.17

15. New occupancy of abandoned apartments was possible only in certain parts of the City Center, where the restriction on Palestinian movement was not total, and the friction with settlers did not occur daily, as was the case in parts of the Casbah.

16. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 31 December 2006.

17. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 29 December 2006.

15

Analysis of the survey’s findings indicates that, in at least some of the cases, more Palestinians left areas in or next to which settlement points had been established, while in neighborhoods farther away from the settlements, a smaller percentage of Palestinians left their homes and shops.18 For example, thirty-two housing units are unoccupied on Old Shalala Street, in the section on which the Beit Hadassah settlement sits on one side and the Beit Romano settlement on the other side. These apartments comprise 74.5 percent of the apartments in this area; a large majority (twenty-three) of them was abandoned during the second intifada.

An even higher rate of abandonment occurred in the Bab al-Khan area, which is located north of a-Sahla, between the Avraham Avinu settlement and the Tomb of the Patriarchs, an area in which whole buildings became vacant. The Bab al-Khan area contains twenty-eight Palestinian apartments. Twenty-four of them were abandoned during the second intifada, and three were vacated previously. One Palestinian family remains in the area. The area also contains forty-three shops: all were closed by army orders during the intifada. Not one shop remains open in the entire Bab al-Khan area.19 In the Shuhada Street area, the heart of the City Center, part of which was closed to Palestinian traffic and commerce as far back as 1994, following the massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, there are 304 closed shops and warehouses (at least 218 of them were closed by military command) and a central bus station that Israel seized for use as an army base. Not one shop in the area is open for business.20 Non-commercial entities that provided important services to the residents and were located in the commercial district moved, for reasons of operational efficiency, during the course of the intifada to areas less affected by the presence of settlers and Israeli security forces. The Ministry of Supply, the Ministry of Information, the Waqf, the Farmers Association, the Women’s Association, and other such entities formerly operated in the markets area, in the Shuhada area, and in the Casbah. In recent years, they moved farther away, most of them to H-1.21 During the second intifada, a few medical centers in this area also closed.

18. Some neighborhoods farther away from the settlement points were shelled by the army during the first years of the second intifada during exchanges of fire, and a substantial number of residents left these areas as well. Unlike Palestinians from areas near the settlement points, many of the residents from the more distant neighborhoods returned to their homes. Prime examples of this phenomenon are the Abu Sneineh and Haret a-Sheikh neighborhoods, most of which lie in H-1. The apartments in these neighborhoods are not included in the survey.

19. In this area, the army also prevents the residents from returning to their homes (see Chapter Three).

20. The Shuhada Street area includes a-Shuhada Street from the Bab a-Zawiya checkpoint to the alIbrahimiya school and the markets facing the street, including the wholesale market, the camel market, and Bab al-Khan.

21. OCHA, Humanitarian Update (July 2005), 2.

16

Chapter Three

Restrictions on Palestinian Movement and Closing of Businesses In 1994, immediately after the massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, Israel imposed a curfew on Palestinian residents of Hebron. Since then, Israel has restricted the movement of Hebron’s Palestinian population in the vicinity of the settlement points in the city.22 In the autumn of 2000, with the outbreak of the second intifada, Israel increased the severity of the restrictions, making Palestinian movement in large areas the exception and almost impossible. The authorities imposed a more intense curfew, prohibited the movement of Palestinians in the City Center, and issued orders closing Palestinian-owned shops. Other Palestinian-owned businesses were forced to shut down because of unofficial restrictions imposed on their operation or because of settler violence and the severe restrictions on movement. These factors made life in Hebron, particularly near the settlement points, unbearable.

Curfew At the beginning of the intifada, the curfew placed on H-2, especially in the vicinity of the settlement points, became routine. Many Palestinians in the area under Israeli control were required to stay in their homes day and night for weeks and months, except for a few hours once or twice a week to enable them to replenish their provisions. Generally, the curfew was imposed on all of H-2, and at times on H-1 as well, or on certain neighborhoods in the center of H-2. A curfew was never imposed on the settlers in Hebron.23 When the intifada erupted, the army placed a three-month curfew on Palestinians in H-2. After that, the army repeatedly imposed prolonged curfews. The reasons

22. In 1994, immediately after the massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin decided on the harsh restrictions on movement on Palestinians. He also rejected the proposal to evacuate the settlers from the city, despite the dangers facing them that Israeli intelligence sources anticipated.

23. For further information on curfew and other restrictions on movement of Palestinians in the first days of the second intifada, see B’Tselem, Civilians under Siege: Restrictions on Freedom of Movement as Collective Punishment (January 2001).

17

varied. On 26 March 2001, a Palestinian sniper fired from the Abu Sneineh neighborhood, in H-1, and killed the infant Shalhevet Pass, who lived in the Jewish settlement in Hebron. Immediately, the army imposed a curfew on Palestinians in H-2 that lasted three weeks. In subsequent months, the army placed curfews on the area time after time, on various pretexts. On 15 November 2002, nine Israeli security personnel and three members of an emergency-alert squad of the Qiryat Arba settlement were killed by Palestinian ambush fire on Worshipers’ Way in Hebron. Following the incident, Israel imposed a continuous six-month curfew on Palestinians in H-2 and on the Bab a-Zawiya neighborhood, which lies in H-1 near the border of H-2 and had come under the control of army forces during Operation Defensive Shield, in April 2002.

During the first three years of the intifada, the army imposed a curfew on H-2 for a total of more than 377 days

During the first three years of the intifada, the army imposed a curfew on H-2 for a total of more than 377 days, including a curfew that ran non-stop for 182 days, with short breaks to obtain provisions. On more than five hundred days, the army imposed a curfew that lasted for a few hours up to an entire day.24

The primary reason for the curfew was to enable Jewish settlers in the heart of the city to carry out their daily routine and to safeguard the security forces protecting them. The army, which stated that the curfew was imposed for security reasons, imposed the curfew as an immediate, easy, and cheap measure. The curfew was also used to collectively punish Palestinians in the city: there were times that the army placed a curfew on H-2 in response to gunfire at settlers that came from H-1. The army also imposed curfew during large-scale celebrations that Hebron settlers held in the city’s streets. The army has argued more than once that curfew is intended, among other reasons, to protect the Palestinians themselves.

Harm to the Palestinian residents Curfew, which imprisons people in their homes, is an extremely harsh restriction on movement. The absolute prohibition, imposed for days on end, on going outdoors directly harmed every aspect of Palestinians’ lives. Naturally, the longer the curfew, the greater was the effect on their daily routine. The resultant economic and emotional hardship suffered by the families is obvious, especially for the poor families living in overcrowded conditions in the Old City.

The effects of the prolonged curfew were primarily economic devastation, loss of livelihood, poor nutrition, tension inherent in a family being confined at home for a long period of time, and severe harm to the education, welfare, and health

24. The calculations are based on information obtained from a few sources. B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights contacted military officials a number of times to obtain precise figures on the number of curfew days in H-2, but were told that the army was unable to provide figures of this kind.

18

systems. As a result, the prolonged curfew was one of the major reasons for the mass movement of Palestinian residents from areas near the settlements in the first years of the second intifada.

Samir al-Qawasmeh, 56, and his family were forced to leave their home in the Tel Rumeida neighborhood, and he had to close his grocery store. In his testimony, he related that: I lived in this house for forty-five years. I spent my childhood and grew to manhood here, I got married and became father to ten children… In the beginning of the second intifada, the situation changed. The Israeli army imposed frequent prolonged curfews in our area. They usually let us go out to buy provisions for only two hours every two weeks. Sometimes, the curfew lasted for a whole month. The curfew was generally lifted suddenly, without informing us in an orderly way. Sometimes, they lifted the curfew in the morning and sometimes at night. There were instances in which we didn’t know that the curfew had been lifted and did not have time to buy provisions.

No one can imagine what it is like to be closed in with twelve persons in a tworoom house. Because of the curfew, [my] grocery was closed. I opened it only when the curfew was lifted. Sales dropped. The expiration dates on products passed, and I began to lose money.

Three of my sons, ‘Abd al-’Aziz, Fadi, and Firas, left the house in Tel Rumeida and went to live in a house we are building in H-1. They wanted to flee living in a prison, and the dread, and the unemployment forced on us by the curfew. My other children couldn’t go to school. Our life became intolerable. To support my family, I had to take money that was intended to pay the rent for the grocery store. I still owe the owner of the grocery 5,000 [Jordanian] dinars.

The harsh restrictions on movement in Tel Rumeida and the settler violence caused us to leave the house. In 2003, on ‘Eid al-Adha [a Muslim holiday], we went to live with my family in the Dahduha neighborhood, near the Movement’s office, north of Hebron. I rented another grocery store on a yearly lease...

My family can’t return to Tel Rumeida. We built our new house, and I am working in the new grocery store. But I really long for the old house. Ever since my father died, in 2004, my mother has been pressuring us to return to the old house. She said that she wants to spend her last days in the house in which she spent most of her life.25

The curfew severely impaired health and access to medical treatment of many residents in the City Center, because emergency treatment was not available during the curfew and because of the long-term consequences of curfew on the medical systems and on the general health of the residents. Medical clinics

25. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 24 January 2007.

19

and centers that had served residents of the City Center closed, and access of city-center residents to areas where medical facilities continued to operate was impossible because of the prolonged curfew. Sick persons, pregnant women, and the elderly, who required regular visits to clinics and hospitals for treatment and follow-up care, were left without the necessary services. In certain cases, pregnant women had to leave their homes toward the end of their pregnancy to enable them to reach the hospital and give birth there.

Dr. Taysir Zahada, 52, formerly ran a small hospital in the Tel Rumeida neighborhood, which he had to close because of the protracted curfew. In his testimony, he stated: When the second intifada began, the situation started to deteriorate. At first, they let us drive our cars in the area after an inspection and search and proof that we lived in the area. But this situation didn’t last long. The army set up fixed checkpoints and closed the roads leading to the area.

The Israeli army started imposing prolonged curfews. Our houses turned into prisons. The curfew lasted days and weeks. It was lifted for only a few hours, once every two weeks or month. My children and I took the risk and climbed down walls and snuck out to buy food. My children didn’t go to school, and I closed the hospital because people couldn’t get to the area.

I opened a temporary clinic in the Bab a-Zawiya area, in H-1. But the situation there wasn’t very different. The confrontations reached there as well, and the Israeli army expanded the curfew to cover H-1. Whenever somebody threw a stone, they [soldiers] came to Bab a-Zawiya and forced the merchants to close their shops. For the first four years of the intifada, my clinic in Bab a-Zawiya operated without much success. My original hospital remained closed.

I thought the situation would change back to the way it was. But I was wrong.

I realized that I wouldn’t be able to reopen the hospital. I sold my medical equipment and materials at wholesale price. Some of the equipment went very cheaply…

I was not the only one harmed. The whole area suffered from this. The hospital primarily served women who went into labor at night. Now, women about to give birth have to walk by foot to the closest place where a car can come, and then ride to the hospital in H-1.26

26. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 25 January 2007.

20

Lethal curfew Palestinians found outside their house during curfew – whether they did not know the curfew was on, or for any other reason – risked their lives, given the army’s policy to open fire with live ammunition at Palestinians who ostensibly violated the curfew. In some instances, soldiers fired gas grenades at Palestinians outside their homes during curfew. At times, the firing was a way to inform people about the curfew, no prior notice having been given. In other cases, soldiers fired tear gas to punish Palestinians who ostensibly violated the curfew.

At the peak of the intifada, 2002-2004, soldiers killed in this way at least thirty-five Palestinian civilians throughout the West Bank, and wounded many more. Most of the fatalities were minors. At least three of the fatalities died in Hebron: Basmah Qeysiya, a thirty-five-year-old woman, was killed on 17 April 2002; ‘Abd a-Rahim Tawil, 40, was killed on 3 August 2002; and Gharam Mana’a, a one-year-old infant, was killed on 26 September 2002.

The infant died when soldiers fired tear gas at curfew violators in the Bab a-Zawiya neighborhood. One of the grenades struck her grandmother in the head. Gharam, who was in her grandmother’s arms, inhaled the gas and died within a few minutes.27

Cessation of the extensive use of curfew In January 2003, the Association for Civil Rights petitioned the High Court of Justice to lift the prolonged curfew on the Palestinians in Hebron.28 The petitioners argued that the protracted curfew imposed on Palestinians in H-2 was illegal; that the army did not inform the residents when there were breaks in the curfew; that when the residents were informed of a break, they were prevented from leaving their homes; and that the decision to impose such a prolonged curfew ignored the severe harm to the population and took into account only security considerations.

In its response to the petition, the state contended that breaks in the curfew enabled the residents to obtain provisions, that the curfew was intended to

27. For further information on this subject, see B’Tselem, Lethal Curfew: The Use of Live Ammunition to Enforce Curfew (October 2002).

28. HCJ 854/03, Dr. Sufiyan ‘Abd al-Rahman Sultan et al. v. Commander of Military Forces in the West Bank. The petition also dealt with the curfew imposed on the neighborhoods al-Bawir, Azzun, and alBiqa, which lie near Hebron.

21

prevent harm to settlers, Palestinians, and security forces, and that it was a legitimate military means. In its decision, given on 9 July 2003, the court rejected the petition. However, the decision stated that curfew is a drastic means, and that before imposing it, the military commander must take into account its effect on the civilian population.

Although the petition was rejected, in 2004, the army stopped imposing curfews on the city for long periods of time. Many Palestinians had already left their homes and shops near the settlement points. In 2004-2005, a curfew was placed on H-2 and on certain neighborhoods in H-1 for no more than a few days at a time. These curfews followed violence by Palestinians or were in response to settler violence, or to enable settlers to hold public events, which generally take place around Jewish and Israeli holidays. Curfew was also imposed on Palestinians during funerals of settlers.29 in 2004, the army stopped imposing curfews on the city for long periods of time.

Many Palestinians had already left their homes and shops near the settlement points

Beginning in 2006, official curfews ceased being imposed on a regular basis.

At public events in which many settlers take part, the army informs the few Palestinian families that an event is about to take place in the immediate area of their home, and that they won’t be allowed to leave or enter their home for a few hours or for the whole day.

Prohibition on Palestinian movement in the City Center In February 1994, immediately following the massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, Israel closed a section of a-Shuhada Street to Palestinian vehicles claiming that the restriction was needed to ensure the safety of the settlers. Entry by vehicle to that section of the street, which is the main thoroughfare in the City Center, was open only to Palestinians who lived there. The dozens of Palestinian shops along this section of the road were closed by military command (see the next section). The two gas stations on the street were also closed. In following years, the section was opened and closed sequentially.30 When the second intifada began, in September 2000, Israel again prohibited Palestinian movement on this street and many other roads.31

29. For example, on 18 December 2005, a curfew was imposed on Palestinians in the City Center to enable a funeral in the Jewish cemetery in the city to take place.

30. See, for example, Amos Harel and Yair Sheleg, “A-Shuhada Street Opened to Traffic; Settlers Demonstrate in Reaction,” Ha’aretz, 20 August 1999; Amos Harel and Nadav Shargai, “Tracks of Perpetrators of Attack near Tarqumiya Lead to Area B,” Ha’aretz, 1 November 1999.

31. As a rule, in 2001, only residents of a-Shuhada Street were allowed to walk on the street.

22

As the intifada continued, the army increasingly restricted Palestinian movement on other streets leading to the settlement points. In addition to the section of a-Shuhada Street on which Palestinian vehicular traffic was forbidden, now almost the entire length of the street is closed to Palestinian vehicles. Palestinian vehicular and pedestrian traffic is forbidden on streets near the Avraham Avinu settlement and on most of a-Sahla Street. Palestinian vehicles are also forbidden on other main roads, such as streets in the Wadi al-Hussein, a-Salayme, and Tel Rumeida neighborhoods, the roads that circle the Salayme neighborhood, and the Qiryat Arba road, which Palestinians formerly used.

The restrictions on Palestinian movement are enforced by a large network of staffed checkpoints and physical roadblocks. In August 2005, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) counted 101 physical obstructions of different kinds in H-2.

The staffed checkpoints prevent Palestinians from H1 to enter H-2 by car and restrict crossing by foot.

During most of the second intifada, Palestinians living on the other side of the checkpoint had to register with the army to be allowed to get to their homes.

As the intifada continued, the army increasingly restricted Palestinian movement on other streets leading to the settlement points

This network of barriers created a contiguous strip of land in the City Center, along which Palestinian vehicles are completely forbidden. This strip, which stretches from the Qiryat Arba settlement in the east to the Jewish cemetery in the west, is separated from the rest of the city, and the army controls and restricts entry of Palestinians to it. The middle of the strip contains many sections of road that the army forbids even Palestinian pedestrians to use. The most important of these sections of road is the aforementioned a-Shuhada Street, which is closed to Palestinian vehicular and pedestrian traffic between the Beit Hadassah and Avraham Avinu settlement points.

The declared purpose of the extensive prohibitions is to separate Israelis and Palestinians in Hebron, as appears from the state’s response to the High Court of Justice in November 2005: Since the fighting began in September 2000, the security situation in Hebron has been special, characterized by terror incidents and extensive combat – events that have resulted in the shedding of much blood, both among the Jews living in Hebron and among the Palestinian residents. These events took place in H-2 for the most part, where the Israeli population and the Palestinian population live side by side.32

32. Hebron Municipality et al., supra, Statement on Behalf of the Respondents, 16 November 2005, Section 22.

23

Later in the response, the state speaks of the means needed, according to the army, to protect the settlers in Hebron – the creation of protective spaces in the heart of the city: The operational conception of IDF forces in Hebron dictates that there is a need for “protective space” near the places where terror attacks habitually occur, among them the neighborhoods of the Jewish community in the city, where large gatherings of people usually do not take place, and where it is easier to notice hostile persons seeking to approach their target, and to thwart the intended attack.

According to the assessment of the most senior IDF commanders, there is a security and operational need for such protective spaces, both to safeguard IDF soldiers and the lives of the Jews living in Hebron….

The checkpoints and physical roadblocks are employed to implement the separation conception mentioned above: separating the city of Hebron from the area referred to as the “Jewish-community area.” But this area is the heart of the Palestinian city, covers main streets, and includes thousands of Palestinian dwellings and hundreds and hundreds of businesses.

Passageway between the wholesale market and the Casbah, 1990s

Passageway between the wholesale market and the Casbah, 2007

Photo: Na’if Hashalmon/al-Watan Center

Photo: Keren Manor/ActiveStills

24

Harm to the Palestinian residents Closing of the main streets greatly disturbed Palestinian life and infringed their rights to work and earn a livelihood, to health, education, family life and social life, and to obtain basic services.

The effect of closing streets goes far beyond the closed area. The strip of road on which vehicular traffic is forbidden is a kind of partition that severs the traffic arteries between the northern and southern parts of the city. These arteries were regularly used by all residents of the city and surrounding areas; now these people have to use long bypass roads to reach their destination. Obviously, the primary losers are the residents of the City Center. For example, a resident of the Old City wanting to go from one side of a-Shuhada Street to the other has to go around the entire City Center, cross checkpoints, and walk uphill.

Closing of the main streets greatly disturbed Palestinian life and infringed their rights to work and earn a livelihood, to health, education, family life and social life, and to obtain basic services

Raja Khatib, from Tel Rumeida, related to this problem in her testimony: All the roads to the neighborhood are closed, and the checkpoint facing the house makes movement difficult. Basically, we live in an area that is completely closed. We can get home only by foot, and not by car.33

As a result of the prohibitions on movement, and the prohibitions on opening shops and businesses, thousands of residents lost their source of income.

Commercial activity in this area died. As shown below, many shops were closed even in the absence of an army order requiring it: the army, without an official order, prohibited the shops from operating, or it was no longer worthwhile to operate a shop in an area inaccessible to customers and suppliers.

In 2001, the army gradually began to close all the entrances to the houses of residents along a-Shuhada Street and some of the entrances to Palestinian houses near the Tel Rumeida settlement. For example, soldiers soldered shut the doors facing the street. The residents had two options: either use alternate paths, which entailed harsh and dangerous ascents, sometimes crossing the roofs of neighboring houses, or move out of the area.34 Hanaa Abu Heykal, who also lives in Tel Rumeida, related in her testimony that: Since November 2004, we have been forbidden to enter through the main entrance to the building, via the settlement, so all this time we got home by going through

33. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 21 January 2007.

34. In 2007, the army allowed the four remaining families on a-Shuhada Street to use the main entrance to their homes.

25

Left: Zahira Qafisha, 55, resident of a-Shuhada Street, in the City Center, forced to leave her house via the neighbors’ roof because the street is closed to Palestinian movement. Right: Door of her house facing the street, which the army soldered shut. Photos: Musa Abu Hashhash and Oren Yakobovich

the olive groves that are on a hilly patch of land behind the house. My mother suffers from heart and blood pressure problems and diabetes… It is very hard for her to walk along that path… We are locked in our house as if it were a prison.35

Decrees of this kind have been made every day of the year on many persons, including the elderly, pregnant women, the sick, and children. The Association for Civil Rights has repeatedly raised this matter with the relevant authorities.36 In some instances, the army prevents Palestinians from returning to their homes. This happens, for example, in the Bab al-Khan area, which is situated between the Avraham Avinu settlement and the Tomb of the Patriarchs. Fahriya al-Turk, who owns a building in Bab al-Khan, related that, “We didn’t succeed in returning to our house. Every time we tried, we were told it was a closed military area and that it was forbidden for us to be in, or approach, the area. Our furniture and things are still inside the house.”37 Accessibility of Palestinians in the entire City Center, and especially near the settlement points, to necessary services has greatly deteriorated

Accessibility of Palestinians in the entire City Center, and especially near the settlement points, to necessary services – such as health, education, and sanitation – has greatly deteriorated. For example, B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights know of cases in which the lack of access to medical services caused pregnant women to leave their homes near the settlement points and move to other areas of Hebron.

35. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 26 January 2007. In January 2007, the family was allowed to enter their home through the main entrance.

36. Among the officials to whom the Association for Civil Rights wrote were the legal advisor for the West Bank (29 April 2003 and 15 June 2003) and the attorney general (1 March 2004, 29 November 2004, and 27 August 2006).

37. The comments were included in her affidavit of 12 September 2005.

26

The prohibition on Palestinian vehicles traveling in the City Center also severely impairs emergency and rescue services in the city. Palestinian ambulances are not allowed to enter H-2 unless they coordinate entry with the Israeli authorities. When Palestinian residents from the City Center need emergency medical treatment and there is not enough time to coordinate the entry of an ambulance to take them to hospital, the persons must go by foot to an area where vehicles are permitted, and from there are transported to one of the hospitals in the city. Naturally, persons requiring emergency treatment would find it difficult to make their way by foot to an area outside the City Center. The Palestinian Red Crescent estimates that the roadblocks in the Old City have added an average of ten minutes to the time needed to get to patients in H-2. When coordination with the army is needed to enable the ambulance to go via a certain route, generally via a staffed checkpoint, it takes an average of forty-seven minutes to reach the patient.38 Similarly, Hebron Municipality vehicles are not allowed into the City Center without prior coordination with the Israeli authorities, which might take several days to obtain. The ability of municipal crews to quickly repair electricity, telephone, water, and sewage problems has been severely impaired, and some families have been left without water or electricity for a number of days.

The army does not permit pupils and teachers at the Cordova Girls School to use a section of a-Shuhada Street that leads to the school. As a result, for a long time the pupils have had no choice but to use a long, steep, and dangerous dirt road to reach the school. In using this path, or the stairs recently built along the path, they are subject to constant assault by settler children, while the soldiers stationed in the area look on. During the course of the intifada, the number of pupils in the school dropped by fifty-five percent.39 Two other schools – al-Ibrahimiya and al-Fihaa – are located on a-Shuhada Street as well, and their pupils suffer from similar restrictions.

In her testimony, Siara Bitar, a widow with seven children, who lives near the Tomb of the Patriarchs, stated: Each time I want to return home, Border Police officers at the checkpoint near my house detain me. They ask me who I am, where I live, and search my belongings, even the food bags. Each time, I have to explain to them where I live, and that I own the house facing the checkpoint… It is easy for us to leave the house, but hard to return… The hardest thing for us is to be separated from family and friends, who are not allowed to visit us… I have never considered moving, regardless of the circumstances.40

38. OCHA, Humanitarian Update (July 2005), 2.

39. This figure was provided by the Hebron Education Department. The decline was measured from the 1999/2000 school year to the 2004/2005 school year.

40. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 8 January 2007.

27

The restrictions on Palestinian movement also cover the roads linking the City Center and the Qiryat Arba settlement. Hisham Abu S’ifan lives with his family in Wadi al-Hussein, alongside which the Qiryat Arba settlement was built. In his testimony, he related that: In 2002, the army closed the road leading to Wadi al-Hussein. Since then, it has been forbidden to enter the neighborhood by vehicle. This has caused us great hardship in our daily routine. For example, we have to carry provisions for the house, such as food and cooking-gas canisters, by hand and pushcart. Also, there is always a water shortage in our neighborhood, and we used to buy water from tankers that came to the house and filled the water tanks on the roof. Since the army closed the road, the tankers can’t get to us. Closing the neighborhood to vehicles also impedes our access to medical services.41

Lack of justification on security grounds and collective punishment Some of the restrictions on movement placed on Palestinians in the City Center can protect settlers from attacks by Palestinians.42 In some cases, however, it is clear that the movement restrictions imposed on Palestinians in Hebron have nothing to do with the attempt to prevent attacks on Israelis.

In some cases it is clear that the movement restrictions have nothing to do with the attempt to prevent attacks on Israelis

In many cases, even after Palestinian pedestrians underwent a comprehensive security check and it was found that they were not a threat and were not suspected of anything, they were not allowed to move about on streets in which Palestinian movement was forbidden. In other cases, soldiers prevented Palestinians from traveling city streets even though they knew the Palestinians could reach their destination by using alternate routes.

An illustrative case is described by a soldier who served in Hebron during the intifada. He gave his testimony to the organization Breaking the Silence: Our job was to stop the Palestinians… To tell them that they are forbidden to cross… We knew that they had a way to cross. So on the one hand, it was forbidden for us to let them cross, and on the other hand, [there were] various elderly women who had to cross more or less to get to their homes, so we pointed out to them where the opening was… through which they could cross without us seeing. It was absurd… Our officers also knew about the opening; they told us about it…

This made us really wonder why we were at that checkpoint. Why was it forbidden?

It was a pure case of collective punishment. It was forbidden to cross because it was forbidden to cross. If you want to carry out an attack, then go there, there to

41. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 12 December 2006.

42. It should be noted that this fact is not legally sufficient to warrant restrictions on movement. See Chapter Six for a discussion of this issue.

28

the right, and turn left after that. But if you don’t want to carry out an attack, you have to make a very big bypass, or you can’t get there at all.43

Prohibitions on Palestinian movement imposed without a legal order For most of the intifada, the army did not issue official orders restricting Palestinian movement in Hebron, and the orders to impose the restrictions were given to the soldiers verbally. It was not until the end of 2005, following a petition to the High Court of Justice, that the military commander issued a series of formal orders restricting Palestinian movement, in accordance with the “protective spaces” plan that was presented to the court.

However, the army continues even today to place extensive restrictions on Palestinians in the City Center that are not covered by official orders, even though the army agrees the action exceeds its authority.

Extensive restrictions on Palestinians in the City Center are not covered by official orders, even though the army agrees the action exceeds its authority

For example, for most of the intifada, Palestinians were forbidden to walk along a-Shuhada Street, which is the main street of the City Center, without any official order empowering the soldiers to impose the prohibition.

Soldiers who prohibited Palestinian movement on this street contended that they had been given explicit orders that the street was a “sterile route” along which Palestinian movement was completely forbidden.44

Given the long period these prohibitions were in force, and from additional information, it is clear that the prohibitions were not a result of the capriciousness of the soldiers in the field, but of orders given by the command echelon, which, lacking an official order, exceeded their authority. It appears that the army officials in charge consistently exceeded their authority, and even breached the army’s commitment made in the High Court to impose restrictions only pursuant to official orders.

In December 2006, following a letter from the Association for Civil Rights to the legal advisor for the West Bank, army officials admitted among themselves that the movement of Palestinians along a-Shuhada Street had been prohibited for years without an official order having been issued, this, they claimed, “by mistake.” The legal advisor’s office stated that a new directive had been issued canceling the prohibition.45 43. Breaking the Silence, Testimonies from Hebron, 6.

44. To the best of our knowledge, no written order has ever been issued prohibiting Palestinians from walking along any street in the city.

45. Letter of 25 December 2006 from Harel Weinberg, of the office of the legal advisor for the West Bank, to the Association for Civil Rights. The claim of “mistake” appeared as far back as August 2002, in the state’s response to a petition opposing the closing of the Bab al-Khan and Huzq al-Far markets, which lie adjacent to a-Shuhada Street: “Due to a malfunction, no closing order was made in writing.”

See HCJ 4639/02, ‘Abd Alsallem Qatsrawi et al. v. Commander of IDF Forces in Judea and Samaria and Minister of Defense, Supplemental Response on Behalf of the Respondents, 5 August 2002.

29

In the days following this admission, a small number of Palestinians managed to walk on a-Shuhada Street. Soldiers let these Palestinians use the street only when escorted by a massive number of soldiers and not before they were detained for a long time and underwent body searches.

Within less than a week, soldiers on the street informed Palestinians wanting to use it that they could no longer do so. Subsequently, it was learned that the Hebron Brigade commander was the official who had issued the conflicting order.

The legal advisor for the West Bank then issued an amended statement: “The IDF is now reexamining the question of opening certain sections of this street.”46 Months later, Palestinian movement is still forbidden on a-Shuhada Street. Thus, the order currently given soldiers regarding Palestinian movement on the street still deviates from the orders given by the commanding officer and from the commitment that the army made to the High Court.47 Giving orders of this kind without a written order supporting it and exceeding authority in the matter of restrictions on Palestinian movement in Hebron are especially grave and compound the sin: as if the harm caused to Palestinian residents of the city, who are not allowed to move about freely on the streets in their city, is not enough, the army’s practice provides an opening for arbitrary infringement of their human rights, without control and without transparency, making it difficult for the residents whose rights have been infringed to exercise their right to object to the harm caused them.

Hebron settlers and the restrictions on the Palestinians “I am not willing to have an Arab pass next to my house.” (A child residing in the Beit Hadassah settlement, September 2005)48 In an interview with the press, a senior army officer who served in Hebron spoke about the connection between the brigade commanders in the city and the settlers: “They [the commanders] certainly represent the interests of the Jewish residents there. The Jewish residents embitter their lives, and they try to reduce the friction with them. There were brigade commanders who wanted to cozy up to the Jewish community, but on the whole, the military commanders are a tool in the settlers’ hands.”49

46. Letter of 31 January 2007 from Harel Weinberg to Shai Nitzan, of the State Attorney’s Office. The letter was attached on 31 January 2007 to the State Attorney’s Office’s response to the letter of the Association for Civil Rights.

47. A video of the opening and re-closing of a-Shuhada Street is available at www.btselem.org/english/ video/20070311_shuhada_closed.asp.

48. The remark was made on 12 September 2005, during a tour of Hebron by the Association for Civil Rights.

49. Meron Rapoport, “Ghost Town,” Ha’aretz, 18 November 2005.

30

With the outbreak of the intifada, the heads of the settlement in Hebron prepared a document for the Hebron Brigade commander that contained a list of demands to close streets to Palestinian pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The document states, in part, that, “The movement of Arab vehicles will be forbidden on the following streets: a. TRP”T [1929] b. King David, c. Emek Hebron (Tnuva), d. Esther, e. Route 160 from Qiryat Arba to Ma’akeh, f. Prophets’ Way.”50 The document also states, in Section 3, that: Arab pedestrian movement shall be forbidden in the following sections: a. The road above A. Yadi (behind the guard) (except for local residents); b. King David Street between the gas station and Beit Kastel (except for local residents); c. Small Shalala [Street]; d. Tnuva Lane; e. In the Casbah – Einav Lane (next to Jewish houses) (except for local residents); f.

Erez Lane.

The demands presented in the document are almost identical to the restrictions that the army ultimately placed on Palestinian movement in the City Center. The practice of closing streets to Palestinians in areas near the settlements, along with the open declarations of the settlers in Hebron about their intention “to Judaize” the city and live in an area “free of Arabs,” show that the source of the prohibitions on Palestinian movement in this area apparently relate to the army’s surrender to the racist demands of settlers.51 A soldier who served in Hebron in the beginning of the second intifada told of the circumstances in which the army decided to expand the prohibitions on movement of Palestinians in a-Sahla: Until 2001, Esther Route [the street demarcating the southern edge of a-Sahla] was open to Palestinian movement. Not pedestrians, but vehicles. In late 2001 or 2002, I don’t recall exactly, the settlers began to use that route, though they could have gone via the Tnuva route [the street demarcating the northern edge of a-Sahla]. Our platoon understood that they used that route to expand their territory. They complained to the army that stones were thrown at them, so they [army commanders] quickly told us to close down this street also to Palestinian

50. “Restricting Arab Movement, Recommendations to the Brigade Commander,” 1 November 2000, Section 2. The settlement’s heads refer to the streets with the Hebrew names they have given them.

51. See, for example, the video available at www.btselem.org/english/video/20070416_Tel_ Rumeida.asp.

31

pedestrian travel. The street became sterile. This is the term used in briefings. It was clear to us as soldiers that we had to protect settlers and to do that we had to close this road as well.52

Taysir Abu ‘Ayesha, a resident of Tel Rumeida, where a settlement was established next to his house, told about an incident that took place in the beginning of the second intifada that indicates the link between settler demands and army policy relating to restrictions on Palestinian movement: One day, the wife of the settler Eitan Fleischman took her car and blocked entry to the street leading to the settlement and our house. She wouldn’t move the car until the army closed the roads to Palestinian traffic. The same day, the army closed the roads leading to Tel Rumeida, and they remain closed. Palestinians are forbidden to travel in this area in their cars. We can only go by car to a place two or three hundred meters from our house. I have to carry gas balloons and food on my shoulder from the Bab a-Zawiya checkpoint on the road that leads up to the house.53

Settlers’ demands also affected the return of Palestinians to homes they had left.

A presentation prepared by the Civil Administration describes in brief the army’s policy on “Camel Lane,” near which lies the Avraham Avinu settlement: “The area is abandoned, the IDF does not allow Palestinians to return because of the Jewish opposition.”54

*** As of now, the many letters sent by the Association for Civil Rights, B’Tselem, and other organizations, and petitions filed in the High Court of Justice have not led to cancellation of these prohibitions and restrictions on Palestinian movement in the center of Hebron.55 The state admitted in court that the prohibitions on movement exist, and explained that the security forces were acting to separate Palestinians and Jews.56 Israel contends this separation is needed for security reasons, i.e., to protect settlers and Israeli soldiers from attack by Palestinians.

52. The testimony was given to Ofir Feuerstein on 15 April 2007.

53. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 4 January 2007. The complete testimony appears in the Appendix.

54. Civil Administration, “Breaking the Law – Jews in the ‘Ebb and Flow’ Events – City of Hebron” (presentation).

55. The petitions, which are still pending, were filed in Hebron Municipality et al., supra, and in HCJ 6869/05, Hebron Development Committee v. State of Israel.

56. Hebron Municipality et al., supra, Statement on Behalf of the Respondents, 16 November 2005, Section 22.

32

The army has capitulated to the racist demands of Hebron settlers to enable them to conduct their lives in an environment “free of Arabs,” and the attempt to Judaize the area by separation based on ethnicity

As shown above, however, the term “protective spaces” entails the systematic impairment of Palestinian freedom of movement in the city. The harm is intended to enable the settlers to live a normal life, although they live there in contravention of international law (see Chapter Six). Thus, the only basis for distinguishing between persons in Hebron, regarding freedom of movement and other rights, is the ethnic group to which they belong.

Therefore, underlying the prohibition on Palestinian movement in the City Center is the army’s capitulation to the racist demands of Hebron settlers to enable them to conduct their lives in an environment “free of Arabs,” and the attempt to Judaize the area by separation based on ethnicity.

Closing of Palestinian businesses The area in and around the Casbah used to be one of the West Bank’s important commercial districts. Now, most of its shops are closed, some by army directive and some because of the severe restrictions on Palestinian movement in the area and the resultant economic recession that hit the area following the outbreak of the second intifada. During the intifada, the curfew and other restrictions on Palestinian movement prevented customers from entering the area regularly. As a result, many business owners and their families lost their source of livelihood.

The restrictions led to a situation in which almost nobody entered the area, killing the economy not only for owners of shops that were closed by army orders and for owners of shops on streets that were closed to Palestinian traffic, but on a much wider area, including the entire Old City and more.

A total of 1,829 Palestinian businesses in the area of the settlements in the city are now closed. These businesses and warehouses constitute 76.6 percent of the businesses surveyed for this report (see Chapter Two). Of the closed shops, 62.4 percent (1,141) were closed during the second intifada, at least 440 pursuant to army orders.57 Over the years, Israeli security forces set up positions on the roofs of some of the abandoned shops, and settlers squatted in at least twenty-eight of the Palestinian businesses.

In 1994, following the massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, the army ordered the closing of a section of a-Shuhada Street – from Gross Square to the Beit Hadassah settlement – to Palestinian vehicles, contending the closing was needed

57. See footnote 14.

33

to al

e

to ensure the safety of the settlers. Some sixty shops on the street were closed by army command. For similar reasons, the two gas stations on the street were closed. In addition, the meat market and the wholesale market, which were near the Avraham Avinu settlement, were closed. The wholesale market had contained fourteen large produce shops.

As previously mentioned, with the outbreak of the second intifada, the army imposed a three-month curfew on Palestinians in this area. The curfew destroyed, among other things, most of the economic activity in the City Center. At the end of the three-month period, the shop owners faced unprecedented restrictions on them and their customers. As noted above, Israel closed more and more streets to Palestinian traffic and repeatedly imposed curfews on the residents. The attempts of most of the shop owners to recuperate and reopen their shops failed.

In March 2001, following the killing of the infant Shalhevet Pass, settlers destroyed an improvised Palestinian market that had opened near the wholesale market that had been closed. Ever since, the army has refused to allow the market to be reopened. The army also ordered, following the killing of the infant, closing of the gold market, which was situated next to the Beit Hadassah settlement, and seventy-three shops in Bab al-Khan and Huzk al-Far. In defending the closing before the High Court, the state raised the cynical claim that, in any case, H-2 was under curfew, “which prevents commercial activity anyway.” The state also contended that the markets could not be re-opened because the settlers who had taken possession of the Palestinian shops had to be protected.58 In 2001 and 2002, scores of businesses closed on Old Shalala Street, over which is situated, on a separate level, the Beit Hadassah settlement. Some of these businesses closed pursuant to army command and others because of the prolonged curfew.59 Since the 1960s, the al-Karki family had operated four clothing shops in the Shalala compound. Taysir al-Karki spoke about the circumstances that led to the closure of the shops during the second intifada: In the past, people from Yatta, a-Samu’, and Bani Na’im [towns near Hebron] used to park their cars on a-Sahla Street and walk along Shalala Street to Bab a-Zawiya. The street was crowded with people during the day.

When the intifada began, the Israeli army imposed a curfew in the Old City. There was also a curfew in Bab a-Zawiya, and in New Shalala and Old Shalala. The curfew 58. ‘Abd Alsallem Qatsrawi, supra. In October 2002, the High Court recommended to the state that it consider compensating the merchants in these markets. See Moshe Gorali, “Let the Ones who Closed the Market Support the Merchants’ Families,” Ha’aretz, 20 November 2002.

59. At first, only verbal orders were given to close the businesses. A written order was issued only after the Association for Civil Rights petitioned the High Court. After the petition was filed, the military commander stopped the forced closing of more than one hundred businesses in the Shalala compound, except for nine shops under the Beit Hadassah settlement. Despite this, many of the businesses did not reopen for the reasons described above and because of frequent harassment by settlers of Beit Hadassah.

34

lasted a long time. People stopped coming to the area. The economic situation continued to deteriorate because of the restrictions on movement along a-Shuhada Street, in the Huzq al-Far market, and the barriers inside the Old City…

Despite the restrictions on movement and despite the settler attacks in the Shalala compound in the first two or three years of the intifada, we tried to make a go of it and keep the shops open when there wasn’t a curfew. We hoped that the situation would improve, but it got worse. People moved from the Shalala compound and from the Old City. Now, only people who live near here and those who have to use these streets come here. All the merchants lost money. We started to use our savings. When we realized we wouldn’t make money, we closed the four shops…60

The Fruit Market, 1999

The Fruit Market, 2007

a-Sahla compound, near the Camel Market, 1999

a-Sahla compound, near the Camel Market, 2007

Photo: Na’if Hashalmon/al-Watan Center

Photo: Keren Manor/ActiveStills

60. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 11 February 2007.

35

At the peak of the intifada, in April 2002, army forces took control of the Bab a-Zawiya neighborhood, in H-1, which was part of Hebron’s commercial district.

From that moment until at least the end of 2003, the neighborhood was treated the same as H-2: the residents were put under curfew and their movement was restricted. As a result, commerce in the area died for some two years. Many of the merchants in Bab a-Zawiya formerly had shops in the Casbah, which is in H-2, and they moved to Bab a-Zawiya because of the difficulties in the Casbah. B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights know of cases in which business owners, who were forced to leave the Casbah and move to Bab a-Zawiya, closed their doors once again.

The army generally refused to let shopkeepers return to their shops, not even to remove the merchandise that had been left there. The doors of many shops were soldered shut; barbed wire, iron gates, and other obstructions were placed around the markets, blocking all access to them. Some of the shopkeepers who managed at some stage to get to their shops to remove their merchandise found that the shop had been broken into, robbed, and in some instances torched. In many cases, the persons who broke into the shops were Hebron settlers, a fact that the state confirmed in the High Court.61 As a result, many business owners lost not only their source of livelihood but also valuable merchandise. Also, when they were able to return to their shops, after the orders closing them had been canceled, there was no point to reopen, inasmuch as the area no longer functioned as a commercial district.

61. The Israel Police confirmed that Hebron settlers’ property crimes involving shops in the market that had been abandoned was a problem and believed that minors were responsible for a large percentage of the offenses. ‘Abd Alsallem Qatsrawi, supra.

36

Restrictions on movement of Palestinians and closing of shops and markets – major events 1994, Massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs •

A-Shuhada Street is closed to Palestinian vehicles from Gross Square to the Beit Hadassah settlement. Palestinian shops along this section of the street are forbidden to open, as are the markets near the Avraham Avinu settlement.

1997, Hebron Protocol •

A-Shuhada Street is opened to Palestinian vehicles. Prohibition on operation of Palestinian shops remains.

1998 •

A-Shuhada Street is again closed to Palestinian vehicles (following the killing of Rabbi Raanan in Tel Rumeida)

2000, Second intifada begins •

A continuous curfew is placed on Palestinian residents for three months, beginning on 1 October.

•

A-Shuhada Street is closed to Palestinian vehicles.

•

Roads leading to settlement points are gradually closed to Palestinian vehicles (the process ending in 2001).

2001 •

A-Shuhada Street is closed to Palestinian pedestrians, except in unusual cases.

•

The continuation of Worshipers’ Way in the Old City, known as Erez Lane, is closed to Palestinian movement.

•

The army closes the gold market under the Beit Hadassah settlement, and the Bab al-Khan and Huzq a-Far markets.

•

Settlers destroy an improvised market near the closed markets, and the army prohibits its reopening (following the killing of the infant Shalhevet Pass).

•

More than 100 shops on Old Shalala Street are gradually closed, a process lasting until 2002, some because of the prolonged curfew and some pursuant to military command.

•

Nine Israeli families squat in the closed wholesale market, and the army refrains from removing them.

37

2002 •

The Banks Intersection, near the Shalala compound, is closed to Palestinian vehicles.

•

In the framework of Operation Defensive Shield and Operation Determined Path, the army imposes an almost continuous curfew on Palestinians in the city for about 240 days, extending into 2003.

•

A-Sahla street, which leads to the Ibrahimi Mosque, is closed to Palestinian pedestrians.

•

Exit by foot from the Casbah is closed by physical obstructions and staffed checkpoints.

•

Settlers kill the Palestinian girl, Nivin Jamjum, and wound others, burn a residence also used as a museum, and take control of another house (following the killing of the soldier Elazar Leibowitz, who lived in a settlement in the city).

Israeli security forces were unprepared for the expected vengeful attack.

•

The street on which the Beit Romano settlement is located is closed to Palestinian pedestrians.

•

Following the incident on Worshipers’ Way, the road is paved, a barricade is built along its entire length, and Palestinian vehicles are forbidden to use it.

•

A street in Tel Rumeida is gradually closed to Palestinian pedestrians, a process that continues until 2003. Palestinian residents on the street have to cross through gardens, terraces, and openings.

2003 •

Prohibition on operating shops in the Shalala compound is cancelled, except for nine shops near the Beit Hadassah settlement (following the petition to the High Court filed by the Association for Civil Rights).

2004 •

Part of a-Sahla Street is opened to Palestinian pedestrians.

2006 •

Nine settler families leave the market (following an agreement with the army).

A few months later, settlers return to the market and squat there.

2007 •

The western section of the Shalala compound, inside H-2, is opened to Palestinian vehicles (following the request of the Association for Civil Rights).

38

Effect of the overall restrictions on Palestinians – the economic aspect The inability to move about freely and gain a livelihood raised the level of unemployment among Palestinians in Hebron and increased the number of persons living under the poverty line. In 2002, the harsh economic situation led the International Committee of the Red Cross to begin a food-distribution program, in which it provided food to some two thousand households in the Old City, including all households in the market; in 2004, the program was extended to cover 2,500 families.62 In 2005, average monthly income for Palestinian households in H-2 stood at only 700 shekels [about $150].63 ‘Eid al-Jabrini, who has a dairy-products shop in the Old City, whose testimony was quoted in part above, stated: I rented a shop in the Laban [dairy-products] Market … At the time, the Old City was full of life. When the intifada began, everything changed. The Israeli army closed the part of Bab al-Khan that leads to the Laban Market. For long periods of time, it imposed a closure or curfew on the Old City. During closure, the army sets up checkpoints and only Old City residents are permitted to move about there. In cases of curfew, people are forbidden to leave their homes.

Settlers attacked the residents and damaged shops repeatedly. Some families were forced to leave their homes. People stopped working and were reduced to ruin. Some families in the Old City survived on the food they received from the soup kitchen… When there was a curfew, I sold my products to neighbors who came via the roof. Our economic situation deteriorated… The Laban Market has between forty to fifty shops, but now only three are open.64

The Hebron Brigade deputy commander admitted, in 2003, that “the economic burden is not incidental, it is part of a long process to pressure the residents of Hebron to get them to rid themselves from the terror in their midst.”65 This statement is an admission that the measures taken against the Palestinians in the City Center are intentional collective punishment given that they aimed at large numbers of persons in response to the acts of a few.

The prolonged curfew imposed in the first years of the intifada on Palestinians in houses near which settlement points had been established made normal living conditions in these areas impossible. This alone may have been sufficient to force many of these families to leave their homes for more distant areas, and it certainly played a crucial role in the massive closing of businesses in these neighborhoods.

62. The figures are based on page 285 of the ICRC’s annual report, and on OCHA, Humanitarian Update (July 2005), 3.

63. The figures, which were given by the Palestinian National Economy Ministry, relate to July 2005.

See OCHA, ibid.

64. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 29 December 2006.

65. Yoman, Israeli Channel One Television, 7 February 2003.

39

The various restrictions on Palestinian movement in the City Center as a whole and the prohibition on operating shops there brought economic ruin and damaged the fabric of life there. These extreme prohibitions and restrictions continue today, preventing the rehabilitation of the City Center.

40

Chapter Four

Refraining from Protecting Palestinians and their Property from Violent Settlers “Protecting the safety and property of the local residents is among the most basic obligations imposed on the military commander in the field.” (High Court of Justice, 2004)66 Israeli security forces generally act harshly in repelling attacks by Palestinian individuals on settlers and their property but refrain from protecting the Palestinian residents and their property from attacks by settlers in the city

Since the beginning of the Israeli settlement in Hebron, there have been numerous violent incidents involving settlers and Palestinian residents, some of which were bloody. Over the years, dozens of Israeli civilians and dozens of Palestinian civilians have been killed in such incidents.

Israeli security forces generally act harshly in repelling attacks by Palestinian individuals on settlers and their property. They use very oppressive means against the Palestinian civilians, including, as was shown in previous chapters, sweeping and extreme restrictions on their movement.

The manner in which security forces respond to violations of law and order by Palestinians is the exact opposite of their mode of operation – or, more accurately, lack of operation – regarding settlers. The Israeli security forces as a rule refrain from protecting the Palestinian residents and their property from attacks by settlers in the city.67

66. HCJ 9593/04, Rashed Murar v. Commander of Military Forces in the West Bank, Judgment, Paragraph 33 (not yet reported).

67. See Yesh Din, A Semblance of Law: Law Enforcement upon Israeli Civilians in the West Bank (June 2006) and the B’Tselem reports Foreseen but not Prevented: The Performance of Law Enforcement Authorities in responding to Settler Attacks on Olive Harvesters (November 2002), Free Rein: Vigilante Settlers and Israel’s Non-Enforcement of the Law (October 2001), Tacit Consent: Law Enforcement towards Israeli Settlers in the Occupied Territories (March 2001), Law Enforcement vis-a-vis Israeli Civilians in the Occupied Territories (March 1994).

41

Against this backdrop, a phenomenon of routine and sometimes extremely violent settler abuse of Palestinians developed in the city. Settlers in Hebron have declared more than once that they are engaged in expanding the settlement to other parts of the city, and it appears that this objective is the reason for the violence: these settlers seek to embitter the lives of Palestinians in the City Center, make their lives intolerable, and get them to leave the area.

The Israeli authorities have from the beginning been well aware of the failure of the security forces to enforce the law on violent settlers. The subject was raised in a petition to the High Court as early as 1981.68 Recently, the attorney general, Menachem Mazuz, admitted this problem existed: Enforcement of the law in the Territories is not only unsatisfactory, it is very poor… This reality has existed from about the beginning of settlement in the Territories to the present time… The State of Israel does not invest sufficient resources on this subject…69

In response to a video that B’Tselem released to the media, showing a soldier refraining from enforcing the law on a settler who was assaulting Palestinians in Tel Rumeida, and on settler children who were throwing stones at the home of a Palestinian family (hereafter “the Tel Rumeida video”), Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said, “Clearly, this is not the first time. Only this time there was a camera, but there were certainly more cases.”70 Despite criticism by official Israeli entities, non-enforcement of the law against settlers continues

Official entities – such as the Karp Committee, in 1982, the Shamgar Commission, in 1994, and one attorney general after the other – have sharply criticized the failure of Israeli authorities to enforce the law on Israelis in the Occupied Territories, and in Hebron in particular. Yet, the policy remains the same.

68. In HCJ 175/81, Al-Natshe v. Minister of Defense, Piskei Din 35 (3) 361. The security forces’ failure in handling settler violence against Palestinians in Hebron was discussed in many reports, governmental and non-governmental, among them the Karp Committee Report which was submitted to the attorney general on 23 May 1982, the State Commission of Inquiry on the Massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, 5754 – 1994 (the Shamgar Commission); B’Tselem, Tacit Consent: Policy on Enforcing the Law on Settlers in the Occupied Territories (March 2001), and countless requests by B’Tselem, the Association for Civil Rights, and other organizations to investigate cases of violence and the authorities’ failure in their handling of these cases.

69. The attorney general made these comments in response to a question at a talk he gave at a conference of the Public Law Association, held in Caesarea on 24 November 2006.

70. The prime minister made these comments at a cabinet meeting. See Roni Sofer, “Olmert on the Violence in Hebron: I Saw It and was Ashamed,” Ynet, 14 January 2006.

42

Settler violence and property damage Although the authorities have been familiar with the problem for years, the helplessness in handling settler violence that characterized the first years of the settlement in Hebron has grown worse and worse, and with it the violence has increased. Repeated assaults and violent abuse have become routine for residents living in the City Center near the settlement points.

Ian Christianson, who headed the international observer force in Hebron (TIPH), described the reality in Hebron as follows: “The settlers go out almost every night and harm whoever lives near them, break windows and cause damage…”71 Repeated assaults and violent abuse have become routine for residents living in the City Center near the settlement points

The settler attacks include physical assault, including beatings, at times with clubs, stone throwing, hurling of refuse, sand, water, chlorine, empty bottles and other objects, occasionally using sharp objects, destruction of shops and doors, shattering of windows, thefts, cutting of fruit trees, destruction of merchant’s stands, and verbal insults. Also documented during the second intifada are cases in which Israelis were involved in gunfire, trying to run people over, poisoning of a water well, breaking into homes, spilling of hot liquid on the face of a Palestinian, and the killing of a Palestinian girl.72 In his testimony, Ahmad al-Hadar, 10, told about an incident that took place on 4 February 2006: I saw six or seven settlers dressed in black. They had stones in their hands and were running at us. I looked at them and was hit by two stones. One hit me on the top of my head, on the right side, and the other hit me above the right eyebrow… I tried to flee, but I fell from a one-and-a-half-meter-high fence that was next to the house. I fell down on the stones. My right hand hurt and I couldn’t move it. The area around my right eye hurt and my head was bleeding.

It all happened very fast.73

On some occasions, civilian security guards also take part in the violence. S’adi Jabber, whose house is situated near the Givat Haavot settlement and the alMuhawel checkpoint, related what happened one day when he and his wife approached the checkpoint:

71. Arnon Regular, “Head of Observer Force in Hebron: Hebron’s H-2 Area is being Cleansed of Palestinians,” Ha’aretz, 16 February 2004.

72. Fourteen-year-old Nivin Jamjum was shot to death by an Israeli civilian on 28 July 2002. See B’Tselem, Standing Idly By: Lack of Law Enforcement on Settlers in Hebron, 26-28 July 2002 (August 2002).

73. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 5 February 2006.

43

We saw two of the checkpoint guards beating ‘Amar [our eldest son] while he was sitting on the ground. The checkpoint is run by armed civilians. They apparently are part of the settlement’s security apparatus. ‘Amar screamed… Within a few minutes, more civilians came to the checkpoint, and everyone beat ‘Amar. I think they were settlers… ‘Amar lay there on the ground, and his mother and I tried to rescue him from the attackers. They beat and kicked him and stepped on him.

We ultimately managed to get him on his feet, and we began to walk from the checkpoint. Suddenly, I felt a sharp blow on the right side of my head. I think it was the butt of a pistol that struck me. Lots of blood flowed from the wound, but I did not leave ‘Amar, and I started pulling him to the other side of the road. The attackers tried to pull him from me, but I didn’t let him go. A large dog belonging to a settler came over to me and ‘Amar, and ‘Amar kicked it. The settler threw stones at us, and one of them hit me in the foot.74

A large percentage of the attacks and abuse are carried out by minors. Taleb Jabber, who is in the transport business, told B’Tselem about an incident that occurred on 19 June 2006, in which youths from the Hebron settlement attacked him when he was in a-Sahla, the area next to the Tomb of the Patriarchs and the police station next to it: A group of fifteen or twenty settlers about 13-16 years old arrived at the site, and stood around me… After I picked up a big tin container and put it onto the wagon, a stone hit me in the face, under the left eye. It bled a lot and the blood flowed onto my shirt and hands. When the youths saw the blood, they moved back a few meters and threw stones. I told my son to run away, and I hid behind the donkey. A few stones hit the donkey in the neck.75

Taysir Abu ‘Ayesha, whose testimony was quoted in part above, stated: The settlers attack us all the time. They swear, throw stones, beat us with sticks, and spray water at us. Everybody in my family has been injured by their attacks…

Most of the soldiers ask us to go into the house when there is a confrontation between us and the settlers. Some of the soldiers identify with us, but they can’t do much. They shout at the children who throw stones…

Sometimes, we call the police and they don’t come. There are settler attacks all the time. The parents, who stand alongside them, encourage the children because the law doesn’t apply to minors. We try to avoid contact with them. We try to avoid going into the street, except when we have no choice.

74. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 28 September 2006.

75. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 21 June 2006.

44

Offenses committed by minors who are not subject to punishment Under Israeli law and the law applying in the Occupied Territories, persons under age twelve are not criminally responsible for their acts. The trouble is that children under this age commit many of the violent offenses carried out

by Hebron settlers. In an interview with Ha’aretz, the Hebron District police commander, Commander ‘Ali Zamir, stated: “We have a major problem here.

They [the settlers] understand our weak point – and they use children under the age of criminal responsibility, under the age of twelve. They do this intentionally.

The children throw stones, break walls. They are the tactical wing, even the strategic wing, of the adults.”76 Rather than carry out their function of enforcing the law on minors, lawenforcement officials pounce on this fact, granting absolute immunity to these children and to their parents, and systematically refraining from taking any measures to prevent the violence. For years, the law-enforcement authorities have refrained from detaining the perpetrators and taking them to the police station. Also, they do not assign welfare workers to get delinquent minors to change their behavior. In addition, they refrain from issuing supervision orders, which would require the parents to post a bond that would be forfeited if their children commit a subsequent offense.

Lack of soldiers’ intervention Acts of violence by settlers against Palestinians have been occurring undisturbed for years, despite an enormous presence of Israeli forces throughout H-2.77 Generally, soldiers are present at all times on every street near the settlement points. In many cases, settler assaults on Palestinians take place right in front of their eyes.

In the late afternoon of 27 January 2007, settlers broke into the house of the Abu Hata family in the neighborhood of a-Salayme. In her testimony about the incident, Basemah Abu Hata, 40, related that: I saw more than thirty settlers, men and women, all of them young. They were beating my children. I shouted for help… The children tried to push the settlers out of the house, through the door they had entered. The attack lasted about fifteen minutes.

While this was happening, I saw two army vehicles that had stopped opposite the house. Some soldiers were standing next to the vehicles. During most of the 76. Meron Rapoport, “Ghost Town.”

77. Many hundreds of troops are permanently stationed in the area. They staff guard posts, lookouts, and checkpoints, and patrol the streets and passageways.

45

attack, the soldiers did nothing. Only at the last moment, when my children had already managed to push most of the settlers out, a few soldiers came into the house and helped them…

I think that the settlers would not have entered our house if they didn’t feel the Israeli army was protecting them and waiting for them by the door. The army interfered in the attack to protect the settlers, not to protect us.78

Ghandi Bader, 27, who lives on a-Shuhada Street, told about an incident in which settlers beat him on his way home from work on 26 November 2005: I was in the Muslim cemetery, about 150 meters from my house. This is about the only way I can go without crossing the DCO [Bab a-Zawiya] checkpoint.

Suddenly, three young settlers came out from behind one of the tall monuments.

One of them grabbed my chest and hands from behind, and the other two hit me in the face. The blows were sharp and hard.

I tried to get out of his grasp, but the settler was stronger than me. I shouted to workers in the cemetery for help. They ran over to me. The three settlers let me go and ran to a-Shuhada Street, toward Gross Square.

When they beat me, the soldier closest to me was at the post on a-Shuhada Street, about 125 meters, I estimate, from me. The soldier had a dog and was giving it water from a bottle. When the settlers beat me and I shouted for help, he continued to give the dog water and did not react.79

On 21 November 2006, Ziad a-Rajbi, a sheep and goat dealer in the city, was preparing fodder in the Jabber neighborhood, next to the Qiryat Arba settlement.

In his testimony, he spoke about what happened to him.

When I got back to the car to move more fodder, I saw four settlers, two men and two children, throwing stones at my car and at other vehicles that were next to the obstruction. An Israeli army patrol jeep was there. The soldiers saw the settlers throwing stones at the vehicles, but did nothing to get them to stop.

After a few minutes passed, three more settlers came and threw stones…

After a while, more army vehicles appeared. The settlers moved and went toward our farmland in the wadi. The soldiers followed them to protect them…80

A soldier who served in Hebron during the second intifada told Breaking the Silence about an incident he witnessed in the City Center: An Arab from Abu Sneineh… who appeared to be sixty years old or more, who had a cane, came to the intersection… Suddenly, three kids aged 16-17 knocked

78. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 12 February 2007.

79. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 30 November 2005.

80. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 31 January 2007.

46

him to the ground in a second’s time, took a stone and smashed him in the head.

That is, they began to kick him on the ground, to crack his head open. A sixtyyear-old man, his head bleeding badly. They were kicking him… An officer came with the patrol. He didn’t know what they did, so he didn’t grab them. They simply fled.81

The commanders consistently refrain from instructing the soldiers to protect Palestinians from settler violence, and at times even brief them not to do so. In his testimony to Breaking the Silence, another soldier who served in Hebron during the intifada stated: One of the things that really upset us was really the powers that they didn’t give us to cope with the settlers. I am a soldier. I don’t know how to stop a person, a Jew. I don’t know what the law is. They didn’t tell me that I would some time have to do such a thing, and in Hebron, they essentially told me, “This is not your function. This is why the police are here”… I remember that the police commander explained to us that they don’t have the money for enough police officers to respond to every call. So we essentially were helpless, and this decision was made from above.82

Another soldier told about a case in which a settler’s child told him that he intended to harm Palestinians: A small child, a child who was six years old, passed near me… and he told me, “Soldier, listen, don’t get upset, don’t try to bother me. I am now going to kill Arabs.” I looked at him, and didn’t really understand what I was supposed to do in that case… I had nothing to tell him. Nothing. I was empty inside.83

Noam Toker, another soldier who served in Hebron, in an interview with Ha’aretz, told about an incident that occurred in 2003: The Jewish children sent a small girl to taunt young Palestinian girls and then beat them and throw stones at them from up close… I couldn’t do anything to the settlers, because according to orders, I was forbidden to arrest settlers.84

The soldiers’ impression that they were forbidden to detain or arrest settlers assaulting Palestinians or damaging Palestinian property was strongly and publicly supported by senior government officials. In response to the airing of the Tel Rumeida video, Prime Minister Olmert said, in addition to his remarks quoted above, “I felt great discomfort in seeing a soldier stand aside without the authority to act. One gets the impression, false in fact, that the whole incident was

81. Breaking the Silence provided the testimony to B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights without mention of the witness’s particulars.

82. Breaking the Silence, Testimonies from Hebron, 14.

83. Breaking the Silence, “Combatants Tell about Hebron: Photo/Video Exhibition,” transcript of soldiers’ testimonies (June 2004), 8.

84. Meron Rapoport, “Ghost Town.”

47

carried out under government auspices.”85 Defense Minister Amir Peretz described the incident in this way: “A soldier stands there helpless, without being able to interfere, because he does not have enforcement powers.”86 On another occasion, Peretz emphasized: “Legally, he [the soldier] is helpless.”87 This is not true. Under the law in the Occupied Territories, soldiers have the power, and even the obligation, to enforce the law on everyone, including violent settlers. Section 78 of the Order Regarding Defense Regulations empowers soldiers to arrest, without an arrest warrant, every person who violates the order. These regulations classify the following acts as offenses: assault, throwing objects, and intentional destruction of property.

The Procedure for Enforcing Law and Order on Israeli Offenders in the West Bank, which was published by the attorney general, clearly states that the security forces have the duty “to take every action necessary to prevent harm to life, person, or property,” and also “to detain and arrest suspects who might flee from the scene.”88 Section 6(3) of the procedure specifies that the army is responsible for handling events that develop without prior warning, until the police arrive and the responsibility for handling the matter is handed over to them.

Under the law, soldiers have the power, and even the obligation, to enforce the law on everyone, including violent settlers

Failure of police to enforce the law The Hebron Police Department, whose sole function is to enforce the law in the city, has acted with abominable helplessness over the years. A soldier who served in Hebron described the police’s action in an incident in which he and other soldiers were requested to trap an “unruly Jew,” as the individual was classified over the radio transmitter:

85. The comments were made at a Cabinet meeting. See Roni Sofer, “Olmert on the Violence in Hebron: I Saw it and was Ashamed,” Ynet, 14 January 2007. Following the airing of the video in the media, the Cabinet decided to establish a ministerial committee to examine and suggest “proposals relating to legal tools for the police and security forces to enforce the law in Judea and Samaria.” Cabinet Decision of 14 January 2007, Section 1046 (see below).

86. Uri Yablonka, “Olmert: I Saw the Humiliation and Simply was Ashamed,” nrg Ma’ariv, 14 January 2007.

87. Avi Issacharoff, Amos Harel, Ha’aretz news service, “Peretz: All the Easing of Restrictions at the Checkpoints are Nothing in Comparison with One Female Settler in Hebron,” Ha’aretz Online, 22 January 2007.

88. Attorney General, Procedure for Enforcing Law and Order on Israeli Lawbreakers in Judea and Samaria and in the Gaza Strip, Section 11(a)(5)(c). Following publication of the procedure, the army formulated its own procedure. It, too, specified that “every soldier who is witness to the commission of an offense by an Israeli, either against a person or property, shall take immediate action to prevent and/or stop the offense, and, if necessary, detain and arrest the persons suspected of committing the offense, document the scene and preserve it” (letter from Harel Weinberg, of the office of the legal advisor for the West Bank, to the Association for Civil Rights, 31 July 2005).

48

They inform us that they caught him inside Avraham Avinu. The operations room says: “Call the police, so they’ll come and take him”… Five minutes later, the commander comes over to us: “The police aren’t willing to enter. Take him out”…

“We take him out of Avraham Avinu, how is that? What? We smack him? We remove him from Avraham Avinu by force? What are you talking about? We are not allowed to do such a thing. You come to Avraham Avinu.” Then the operations room tells us, “OK, the police don’t agree to enter Avraham Avinu. They are afraid of creating a provocation, and they are afraid they [the residents there] will throw eggs at them”… Then my commander says, “OK, there is nothing to do. Let him go.”89

Ghadah Hirbawi, a mother of ten, related in her testimony that: For more than five years, settlers from Qiryat Arba have been assaulting and annoying us to drive us out of our house. In 2001, they torched the house and shattered the windows. In 2004, they broke into the house and stole furniture. In addition, they assault us, throw stones at us and chop our trees. Once, they came to our house and told us that it belongs to them and that we had to leave.

On Friday, 28 April 2006, when my son Fadi, 16, and I were on our land surrounding the house, three men from the settlement’s security team arrived.

One of them said that he saw us steal the fence separating our house from the settlement. The fence had not been built, and parts were lying on the ground.

The three of them came over to us and started to slap and kick Fadi. They also pushed me a few times. At that moment, an Israeli police jeep arrived. The settlers told the police officers that we stole the fence, and as they talked they continued to push us. The police officers tried to move Fadi and me toward the house, and then my husband came out, and the settlers pointed to him and Fadi as the thieves. The police officers went over to my husband and told him and Fadi to go to the jeep. They simply believed the settlers.90

In general, the police do not investigate incidents of settler violence where a complaint has not been filed, a fact confirmed by the Hebron District police commander, Commander ‘Ali Zamir.91 At least once, it was contended that, “when the police know an offense has ostensibly been committed, and if it is informed of the facts of such a case, it will certainly investigate and gather the facts.”92 But countless testimonies and videos obtained by B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights prove without doubt just the opposite: police officers and other security forces are regularly present when Hebron settlers carry out violent acts

89. Breaking the Silence, Testimonies from Hebron, 29.

90. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 11 May 2006.

91. Letter of 5 October 2006 from Commander Zamir to the SHAI [Samaria and Judea] Police District legal advisor, who sent a copy of the letter to the Association for Civil Rights on 17 October 2006.

92. Letter of 17 October 2006 from Chief Superintendent Yonatan Lahav, legal advisor for SHAI Police District, to the Association for Civil Rights.

49

against Palestinians, witness them and are thoroughly aware of them, yet the offenses are not investigated.93 Many Palestinians refrain from filing complaints of settler violence. One reason is the lack of trust in the law-enforcement authorities and the Israeli justice system.

Therefore, the number of complaints and investigations opened by the police do not nearly reflect the full extent of settler violence in Hebron. Daud Jabber, who lives in the City Center, stated in his testimony that, “We did not file a complaint with anyone. Who should we complain to? We have complained a lot and nothing has happened.”94 Bahija Sharabati, who lives in Tel Rumeida, related in her testimony that, “We already filed dozens of complaints with the Israeli police, but nothing changed. I don’t believe in complaints any more.”95 In recent months, B’Tselem has repeatedly requested the police to provide information on the handling of Palestinian complaints of Hebron settler violence in 2006.96 The police have not yet provided the precise information.97 Recently, the police claimed there had been an improvement in law enforcement on Hebron settlers, but the claim has not been supported by relevant data.98 A study made by the Yesh Din human rights organization indicates that some ninety percent of police investigations of settler harm to Palestinians in the West Bank in which the investigations were completed (or where investigations were not conducted at all because the files were lost) were closed without the filing of

93. Israel conducts two separate systems of law for Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank, flagrantly discriminating between the two populations. The two systems differ substantively and procedurally, with different standards and rules. A Palestinian suspected of committing a violent offense against a settler is tried in the military court, under the military legislation, while an Israeli suspected of committing the identical offense against a Palestinian is tried under the Israeli penal law, by Israeli lawenforcement authorities, and is tried in the Israeli civilian courts. In this reality, Palestinians suspected of committing a violent offense can expect to be detained until the end of the criminal proceedings against them, while Israelis suspected of a similar offense are detained only in exceptional cases.

94. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 31 January 2007.

95. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 12 December 2006. For the full testimony, see the Appendix.

96. The first letter requesting the information was sent on 18 December 2006.

97. In a letter of 20 February 2007 from Yaron Shetrit, assistant to the head of the SHAI District Investigations Department, to B’Tselem, the police provided statistics on complaints of settler harm to both Palestinians and to security forces, without separating the two. Regarding 2005, the police indicated they had opened 178 investigations into cases of Israeli offenses against Palestinians throughout the entire southern West Bank. Apparently, a large majority of the offenses took place around the settlement points in Hebron. Letter of 10 January 2006 from Shlomi Sagi, spokesperson of SHAI District, to B’Tselem.

98. Letter of 24 October 2006 from Itzik Rachamim, of the Investigations and Intelligence Department of SHAI District, to Shai Nitzan, of the State Attorney’s Office. The letter was attached to the State Attorney’s Office’s response of 31 January 2007 to a letter from the Association for Civil Rights. The attached data sheet did not compare different periods, so the figures do not support the claim of improvement in law enforcement on Hebron settlers.

50

an indictment.99 These cases in which the assailants are not brought to justice reflect another layer of the failure to enforce the law on settlers.

The police’s inability to enforce the law on violent settlers has often led to settlers continuing their rampage against Palestinians living nearby. Presumably, many settlers against whom complaints have been filed, including some who have been indicted, still live in the City Center and regularly commit violent acts against Palestinians.

Ministerial Staff on Law Enforcement in the West Bank As mentioned above, in early 2007, the government established the Ministerial Staff on Law Enforcement in the West Bank.100 The staff was established following the airing of the Tel Rumeida video. At its first meeting, the staff decided to: a. determine the number of police that will be among the forces needed to handle the friction areas; b. make this police force a trained task force that will remain in the assigned area; c. increase the use and handling of restraining orders; d. handle the institutions that are the center of the agitation and are state funded; e. budget personnel for the Civil Administration in light of the new orders.101 These decisions are capable of improving law enforcement on violent settlers.

Still, it seems that they fail to address the foundations of the problem of settler violence in Hebron. The members of the staff ignored the fact that in the area of the settlements in Hebron and elsewhere in the West Bank, many soldiers witness the violence and refrain from exercising their enforcement powers. The members also ignored the large number of investigation files that were closed without an indictment being filed, and the need to determine the reason for this failure. In addition, the decisions did not provide sufficient response to the problem of violence by minors under the age of criminal responsibility.102

99. Yesh Din, A Semblance of Law, 91.

100. Cabinet Decision of 14 January 2007, Section 1046.

101. Notice of the Defense Minister’s media advisor, 30 January 2007.

102. The ministerial staff directed Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh to submit to the government within thirty days recommendations on law enforcement in the Territories. B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights do not know whether Sneh has submitted the recommendations.

51

Chapter Five

Harm to Palestinians by Soldiers and Police Officers “The ease with which you do what you want, without any supervision… What bothered me, I think, and what most frightened me in Hebron was the unregulated and uncontrolled power, and what it led people to do.” (Soldier who served in Hebron, 2004)103 The increased presence of soldiers and police in Hebron, especially in the City Center, brings with it violence and excessive and unjustified use of force and of the powers given them. Violence, house searches, seizure of control of houses, harassment, detainment of passersby, and humiliating treatment have become part of daily reality for Palestinians living in the center of the city and have led many of them to seek housing in safer places.

The system’s handling of violence, abuse, and humiliation by soldiers and police Security forces’ violence against Palestinians is not unusual. Long ago, harassment, humiliation, and “moderate” violence, such as a slap or kick, became commonplace for residents of the Occupied Territories. In Hebron, the police and soldiers have committed even extremely severe violent acts against Palestinians in the city, including bloody beatings and killing. These acts are not part of operational activity; rather, it is abuse that, everyone agrees, serves no military or police need. Compared with other cities in the West Bank, the enlarged presence of military and police forces in Hebron has brought with it more and harsher cases of violence against Palestinian civilians.

On 31 December 2002, four policemen forced ‘Imran Abu Hamdiya, 18, a resident of the city, to get into a jeep the police were driving in H-2. The jeep continued to the industrial area. At some point, the policemen threw Abu Hamdiya out of the jeep while it was traveling at high speed. His head struck the pavement, killing him. B’Tselem and al-Haq investigated and exposed the incident.

103. Breaking the Silence, “Combatants Tell about Hebron,” 5.

53

At first, the police denied any involvement, contending no police jeep was in the area. However, a few months later, the four policemen were arrested and, on 1 May 2003, indicted for the manslaughter of Abu Hamdiya, abuse of three other Palestinians, and obstruction of justice. Other police officers from the same company were arrested on suspicion of committing violent acts against Palestinians in Hebron, and committing robbery while threatening the victims with a knife. A total of eleven indictments were filed in these cases.104 Beating to death by security forces is not common in Hebron. The Abu Hamdiya case is the extreme manifestation of routine violence by police and soldiers in the city. Over the years, human rights organizations have documented numerous cases of violence by Israeli security forces against Palestinian residents of Hebron.

Many of these cases took place near the settlement points, where there is an especially large police presence.105 Investigation of the Abu Hamdiya case and prosecution of some of the suspects are exceptions. As a rule, the authorities do not properly enforce the law on delinquent soldiers and police officers. Presumably, the tragic consequences of this case, together with the extensive media coverage it received, led the authorities to act differently and prosecute security forces who harmed Palestinians.

A soldier who served in Hebron during the second intifada confirmed, in his testimony to Breaking the Silence, that violent acts, abuse, and humiliation by soldiers are common: In every company, there are uncultured persons. They would arrive and not consider anyone or anything. There was a case in which somebody grabbed some unfortunate Arabs by their beards and had his pictures taken with them.

In Hebron. Or there were people who regularly beat Arabs there. They are really a minority of the soldiers in the company. If the company had seventy-eighty combatants, there were about five who were despicable.106

Incidents documented over the years include serious beatings: smashing the victim’s head with a blunt instrument or against the wall, hitting the victims with rifle butts and clubs, kicking them in the head and other parts of the body, flinging persons to the ground, twisting arms and legs with force, and stone throwing, among others. In one case of abuse, soldiers forcibly cut the hair of their victims.

In many cases, the violence was accompanied by damage to Palestinian property, including the shattering of car windows and slashing of tires.

104. Efrat Weiss, “Indictment: Police Beat and Rob Residents in Hebron,” Ynet, 6 July 2003; Baruch Kra, “Serious Charges against Ten More Police Officers from Border Police Company in Hebron,” Ha’aretz, 17 June 2003.

105. See, for example, B’Tselem, Hebron, Area H-2: Settlements Cause Mass Departure of Palestinians (August 2003), 19-25.

106. Breaking the Silence provided the testimony to B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights without mention of the witness’s particulars.

54

Sample cases An army officer who served in Hebron during the second intifada gave her testimony to Breaking the Silence about an incident she witnessed: I see these two pencil pushers… I see a detainee whose hands were cuffed behind his back, his eyes covered. Suddenly, I see one of them go over to him, and without any prior warning, knee him in the head. He simply kneed him in the head.107

In September 2006, Sallem al-Qimri, a contractor, was asked to renovate Border Police offices in Hebron and was given a special permit to enable him to do the work. In his testimony, he related what happened to him at a checkpoint on 6 September 2006: While I was talking to two border policemen, the policeman in a blue uniform [that of the regular police] intervened and told me to give him my identity card.

I gave it to him. I was standing behind a wooden table that was located at the checkpoint. Suddenly, and without knowing why, the border policemen went to the other side of the table, picked it up, and threw it on me. The table struck me under my knees, and my legs started to bleed.108

Samer Idris, a high-school student, told about an incident that occurred on 31 March 2005, south of the Tomb of the Patriarchs, after he walked past a group of soldiers: Five or ten meters after I passed them, I felt a foot being placed between my legs from behind me. I was pushed forward and fell to the ground, on my left side. I saw it was a soldier who did it. I didn’t understand what was happening.

The soldier slammed the left side of my face with his rifle butt, hitting me under the left eye. I felt a sharp pain. I put my hand to where he hit me and turned my head to the right. The soldier hit me again with his rifle butt, this time behind the left ear. That hurt a lot. I felt dizzy and my vision became blurred.

I laid there on the ground for about five minutes. I didn’t know what was happening around me, or why the soldier did that. I heard a jeep move near me, but I didn’t know where it was headed.109

Dr. Taysir Zahadeh, 52, a physician, who lives in Tel Rumeida, described what happened when soldiers invaded his house on 25 August 2006.

The officer came over and ordered me to go inside... I told him that I only wanted to take the sack. He pushed me with his chest toward the entrance of the house.

I put out my hands to move him away from me, and so I wouldn’t fall.

107. Breaking the Silence provided the testimony to B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights without mention of the witness’s particulars.

108. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 15 October 2006.

109. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 31 March 2005.

55

I don’t understand what happened after that. The six soldiers began to kick me and beat me all over my body with their hands and rifles. In the course of the beating, they pushed me toward the door. I tried to ward off the blows as best I could, but they were very aggressive. They hit me dozens of times. I couldn’t believe what was happening to me. I thought they wanted to kill me and “do a job on me” for no reason.

After about five minutes passed, my daughter Sausan, who is fourteen, came down and screamed. She tried to come over and defend me and separate me from the soldiers, but one of the soldiers pushed her hard, and she fell down and lost consciousness. The soldiers paid no attention to that and continued to beat me hysterically. My wife came down and tried to defend me, and the soldiers beat her on the arms with their rifle butts. She still has bruises on her arms.

The soldiers continued to beat me. I saw another of my daughters, Najiya, try to come to me, but one of the soldiers pushed her toward the door. She was hit on the left side of her waist and shouted in pain. The small children stood on the stairs and screamed.

I heard my brother Amjad shout from below and call for help. At that moment, I managed to get out of the grasp of the soldiers, grabbed Sausan, and took her to the clinic on the second floor. I tried to revive her and gave her oxygen. The soldiers chased after me and closed the clinic door behind them. While I was treating Sausan, they hit me in the back and swore at me, “Bastard, ass.” After a while, Sausan regained consciousness.110

‘Abd al-Hafiz al-Hashlamouni, a journalist who lives in Hebron, related an incident that took place on 18 April 2006: I saw six soldiers stop a Palestinian fellow and push him into a fence. His hands were raised. I began to take pictures of the incident and one of the soldiers saw me. The soldiers left the fellow and came over to me. They beat me and took the camera… With another camera I had, I tried to photograph the soldiers and they noticed. A few of them came over to me, pushed me onto a car parked in the square and beat me. They kicked me a few times, punched me, and hit me with their rifle butts. The soldiers also took the second camera out of my hands…

Later, the soldiers left and threw the cameras on the hood of one of the cars.111

On 24 August 2005, police went into the yard of a building in which Bashar alJ’abri lived, in the area of Worshipers’ Way. Al-J’abri described what happened when he encountered them and did not have his identity card on him: He [one of the police officers] said that I had to carry my identity card with me at all times, even when I was sleeping. Another policeman started to hit me, and the first one joined in. They kicked me in the knees and one of them hit me twice with

110. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 28 August 2006.

111. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 20 April 2006.

56

his rifle butt, once in the head and another in the back. I tried to defend myself, and managed a few times to grab the hand of the policeman to get him to stop hitting me, but the other one continued beating me, and I couldn’t resist. This lasted for more than fifteen minutes… Two other police officers stood on the side and did not intervene. A fifth policeman stood guard behind the iron gate.112

Ra’id Fatafteh, an engineer from the town of Tarqumiya, told about an incident on 9 May 2006 at the “’Abbed” checkpoint, near the Tomb of the Patriarchs: One of the police officers told me to stop and asked for my identity card. He ordered me to wait by a low plastic fence, which was about a meter high… After about twenty minutes passed, I went over to the policeman and asked him if he could give me back my identity card. He told me to wait and move back, and then walk right and left. I felt he was trying to humiliate me. Despite this, I did what he said.

Suddenly, he came over to me, grabbed my shirt and dragged me over to the plastic fence. He bent me over it, so that my chest was touching it and my head was facing the ground. I didn’t understand why he was doing that. I stayed calm and did not respond, though I was angry and felt humiliated.

When the policeman left me, I asked him, in Arabic, why he had done that. He began to swear at me, in Hebrew; I didn’t understand what he said. He jumped over the fence, put my hands behind my back, pushed me, and the right side of my head hit the fence, injuring me. That hurt a lot, and I put my hand on my head (to feel it). I saw that I was bleeding badly. The policeman appeared frightened and confused. He brought my identity card and ordered me to go home.113

Handling of offenses committed by soldiers and police officers While justifying many of its violations of human rights of Palestinians in the West Bank on the grounds that the acts are carried out for “security needs” of one kind or another, the authorities generally condemn outright acts of violence, abuse, and humiliation by security forces. However, rejection of the violence is not accompanied by proper enforcement. Many acts of violence and abuse are not investigated, or the investigation does not result in indictments. For example, in the case of the beating of Ra’id Fatafteh, presented above, the Department for the Investigation of Police (DIP), in the Ministry of Justice, closed the file against the assailant police officer on grounds of lack of evidence.114 This even though the incident took place in daylight and was witnessed by many persons.

112. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 30 August 2005.

113. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 10 May 2006.

114. Letter of 7 December 2006 from DIP to Ra’id Fatafteh.

57

Since the beginning of the second intifada, in September 2000, the Military Police Investigations Unit has opened 427 investigations against soldiers suspected of committing violent acts (not including shootings) throughout the entire West Bank. Of these, only thirty-five led to the filing of indictments.115 Given that some of the investigations involved more than one soldier, more than ninetytwo percent of the investigations did not result in the filing of an indictment.116 Many acts of violence and abuse are not investigated, or the investigation does not result in indictments

B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights do not have complete figures on the complaints being handled by DIP, but information on complaints that B’Tselem submitted to DIP indicate a large number of files were closed without the filing of an indictment: eighty-two percent of the cases submitted to DIP during the second intifada that related to police violence against Palestinians were closed with no indictment filed.117 It appears, therefore, that the authorities do not give proper importance to the investigation of violence by security forces against Palestinians and to bringing the delinquent persons to justice. This failure sends a message to soldiers and police officers in the field that acts of violence, abuse, and humiliation are not considered serious. This situation creates a feeling among security forces of impunity for violent conduct against Palestinians in the West Bank, and in Hebron in particular.

In this reality, no wonder severe violence in Hebron, and elsewhere in the West Bank, is deeply entrenched, raising its head time and again with disturbing frequency.118

115. The figures were provided by the judge advocate general to the Knesset’s Constitution, Law and Justice Committee on 14 February 2007. The low number of investigations relating to violent acts in the West Bank can be explained by the small number of complaints, a result of the victims’ lack of confidence in the system, which tends not to take the complaints seriously and not to bring the assailants to justice. Another factor is the concern of victims about the time and energy they would have to expend, and the humiliating treatment they can expect at the police stations and DCOs in the West Bank. B’Tselem, the Association for Civil Rights, and other human rights organizations work diligently to identify cases of violence and abuse and report them to the authorities, but these substantial efforts cannot overcome the systemic failures, which restrain victims from filing complaints.

116. The judge advocate general did not state the number of investigations that had been closed without an indictment being filed. It may be, therefore, that the number of investigations that did not lead to an indictment includes investigations as to which no decision has been made regarding the filing of an indictment. However, the number is likely relatively small because the relevant period is more than six and a half years. If there are unfinished investigations that were opened years ago, this fact, too, would provide further evidence of the failure to bring delinquent soldiers to justice.

117. The figures relate to sixty-eight cases whose investigation was completed, or as to which it was decided at the start not to investigate. Twenty-one other cases submitted by B’Tselem are still being handled or their status is unknown.

118. For further discussion on this point, see B’Tselem, Crossing the Line: Violation of the Rights of Palestinians in Israel without a Permit (March 2007), Chapter Three.

58

Seizure of Palestinian houses At least thirty-five Palestinian residential dwellings and shops in Hebron are currently held by security forces permanently for their continuous or sporadic use: ten of the structures are located in the area of the Avraham Avinu settlement, ten along Worshipers’ Way, four houses in Tel Rumeida, five houses around the Beit Hadassah settlement, three buildings in the area of the Beit Romano settlement, and three buildings in H-1.

Clearly, turning a private dwelling into an army or police outpost severely impairs the living conditions of the occupants. The soldiers invade their private space and restrict the area in which they live. When a family’s roof is taken, they are not allowed to use it, and sometimes they are also not permitted to use the top floor of the building. As a result, large families, which in many cases were already living in overcrowded conditions, have been forced to vacate part of their homes and cramp themselves into an even smaller space.

However, their suffering does not end with the overcrowding. Often, these families are harassed by the invading soldiers. In some instances, the stairs leading to the roof pass through the family’s living quarters, so that the family suffers whenever the soldiers go to or from their post. In other cases, the occupants suffer from frequent routine searches – once or twice a week – and from other actions of the soldiers, such as causing property damage, playing loud music, leaving refuse lying around, and even urinating wherever they want. In some cases, the family suffers these conditions for years.

Sample cases The army has been using the house of Suha Hadad on and off as a lookout. In her testimony, she described the situation: The Israeli army takes control of our house time and again, always late at night, after ten or eleven o’clock. Generally, they arrive on Saturdays and holidays.

They usually come in groups of eight and keep me and the children in the TV room. They enter the bedroom and set up a lookout over the nearby spring, where the settlers swim… At first, the children were frightened and cried, but they got used to it… They [the soldiers] have done this dozens of times.

Last Sukkot [a Jewish holiday], eight soldiers came to our house in the morning.

An officer told me that they would remain for three days. I told him that I wouldn’t let them live in my house. He said that he had an army order… They took control of the interior terrace and the roof. They didn’t let us leave the house while they were there. They used our shower.

Three or four months ago, when I was pregnant, eight soldiers came at night. They put the children and me in one room and used the other rooms. While they were in the house, I took my son to the bathroom and saw them relaxing on the floor…

59

Frankly, we can’t move out because we don’t have enough money to rent… We don’t pay rent where we are living now.119

In 1999, soldiers set up a permanent position on the roof of the house of Bahija Sharabati, the mother of six from Tel Rumeida whose testimony was quoted in part above. Regarding this, she stated: Our yard has become a refuse dump. The soldiers eat and throw the food scraps on the ground around the house. They also urinate on the roof. Three years ago, my little daughter, Abrar, left the house and the urine of one of the soldiers sprayed her on the head. She came into the house and cried. She hasn’t forgotten that incident.

The soldiers shout, jump, run, and sometimes also play. Their shouting and movements disturb us a lot, especially at night. Sometimes, we can’t get to sleep because of the disturbance, and sometimes their noise and the barking of their dogs wake us up. The noise usually starts at 1:00 A.M. and continues until morning…

Some of the soldiers assault us… Last winter, a soldier on the roof broke out in hysterical laughter and threw sand and stones at me while I was standing outside the house. He spoke to me in Hebrew and said things I didn’t understand. My husband understands Hebrew very well, and he said that the soldier swore at me.120

A soldier who served in Hebron during the second intifada told Breaking the Silence: We seized a house. You know the procedure: the family moves down a floor… We installed a pipe for when we peed. This was on the third floor. To pee outside… We installed the pipe in a way that the urine flowed into the yard of a house. There were chicken coops below, and everything landed there. That was the daily joke.

Waiting for the father or one of the children to go to the coops, and everyone standing there and pissing down. Or… one guy loved brushing his teeth… and wait for somebody to appear below, and then spit into the yard… Yes, this was just some of the possibilities you had. Nobody prevented you from doing it. As a rule, the commanders in the field didn’t stop you, unfortunately, because most of them were like the others, and were not exceptions to the rule… There was nobody to try you for what you did.121

119. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 28 January 2007.

120. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 29 December 2006.

121. Breaking the Silence provided the testimony to B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights without mention of the witness’s particulars.

60

Searches, delays, and harassment Searches of houses and shops, detaining of passersby to inspect their identity cards, and various kinds of harassment by soldiers and police are also part of the intolerable routine of Palestinians living under direct military control in the City Center. While in some cases a house search or check of an identity card may be justifiable for security reasons, in other cases the actions are clearly forbidden and unreasonable abuse of civilians.

Searches A house search, even if carried out lawfully and in accord with all the proper rules, severely infringes the privacy and dignity of the occupants. In Hebron, these offensive acts have become routine, especially for Palestinians who live near the Israeli settlements.

While in some cases a house search or check of an identity card may be justifiable for security reasons, in other cases the actions are clearly forbidden and unreasonable abuse of civilians

It appears that in these areas, almost every house has been combed, most more than once. The security forces carry out three kinds of searches in the City Center: pinpoint searches, following a concrete suspicion; extensive searches, for mapping purposes; and routine searches in locations that have been decided arbitrarily, for the purpose of “manifesting a presence� of security forces. The searches are usually conducted by military forces, and sometimes by Border Police officers.

Raja Khatib, from Tel Rumeida, a segment of whose testimony was quoted above, stated: Last year, almost no week passed without them [the soldiers] coming into our house. Each time, they ordered us to leave the rooms. They searched all the rooms and made a mess of everything. This month, they invaded our house twice.

A soldier who served in Hebron during the second intifada stated: One of the functions of the patrol is to manifest a presence, so when the Palestinians wake up in the morning, they hear from the neighbors that we entered this house and that house, and so they get the impression that the army is present everywhere at all times.

You have eight hours to burn, so you make coffee, but that still leaves four hours to burn, so you go into two houses and burn two hours, do a circuit, and burn another two hours. In houses close to the settlements, soldiers make fixed visits.

In houses farther away, soldiers make random checks. The soldiers patrol, they want to rest, so they say, let’s go into that house, do a search, and rest a bit.

61

There are also tasks that we initiate which are random. In those cases, soldiers really turn the house upside down. The company commander opens a map, picks this and that house. He only makes sure the house doesn’t belong to a collaborator or whatever.122

Another soldier who served in Hebron said in his testimony: “Whether night or day, any time I felt like it, we chose a house on the map, based on our geographical location and the situation of the group at the moment. Makes sense to us? Do we want to? Fine, we enter.”123 Another soldier related that, “Daily, a team of six soldiers go along the roofs and enter a house, search the entranceways, the exits, put the whole family into one room…”124 A sergeant who served in the city in 2006-2007 stated in his testimony: The company commander’s believes it’s better to carry out [searches] at night, when the whole family is at home… We went to some house, me and another squad commander, and knocked on the door, waking up the whole house. Now I say to my company commander, “Why at two in the morning?” [He replies:] “Because everyone is there.” Then we call to the whole family, comb some small room, put them all inside, go to the house, and essentially turn the whole house upside down. Then we comb the whole house, you know, you lift up furniture, move things, look inside the vase, and continue in that way… This is the worst thing in the world, having your whole family woken up.125

Search operations aimed at mapping the neighborhoods repeatedly take place in the same areas. The sergeant related to this fact later in his testimony.

I have no idea who thought about these things. Until now, in all the years of Hebron, nobody bothered to preserve the mapping pages. Each time a company arrived, combed a thousand houses, and threw out all [the pages] that were classified material intended to be destroyed.

The frequent invasions into the homes to search them, or on the pretext of a need to search them, severely harm the routine and privacy of Palestinians in the City Center. The soldiers surprise the occupants at various hours, day and night, destroy their daily routine, invade their privacy, and comb their private cabinets and personal belongings. More than once, incidental to a search of an apartment or shop, soldiers have damaged items. In addition, there have been claims of looting of valuable personal property during search operations of this kind.

122. The testimony was given to Ofir Feuerstein on 8 March 2007.

123. Breaking the Silence, Testimonies from Hebron, 18.

124. Breaking the Silence, Testimonies from Hebron, 17.

125. Breaking the Silence provided the testimony to B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights without mention of the witness’s particulars.

62

Hamza al-J’abri, a resident of the Old City, told about a search soldiers conducted in his house on 14 October 2006: We were sitting in the guest room, getting ready to leave the house. Suddenly, a group of eight soldiers came into the house. They forced the whole family – my mother, my father, my sisters, and my brother Osama, 15 – into the guest room.

The soldiers collected the males’ ID cards. Two of the soldiers came into the guest room and started to search, helped by my mother.

One of the soldiers ordered me to leave the room. He asked me how to get to the roof, and I explained that there was no way to the roof from here, only from outside. The soldiers searched computers, disks, and my work equipment… Two soldiers took me into the bedroom and asked me to help them search the room…

I remained with two other soldiers, who asked me if I was a member of Hamas.

When I said I wasn’t, one of them threatened to murder me, cocked his weapon, aimed his rifle at my forehead, and swore at me. Two soldiers who were also there beat me and swore at me.126

Israeli soldiers confirm that acts of humiliation and property damage occur during searches of homes. A soldier who served in Hebron in the second intifada told Breaking the Silence: “The sergeant and some other soldier decided that, before leaving, they would leave behind a memento. They destroyed the video and something else I don’t recall.”127 Another soldier related: We are sitting, resting, in one of the Arab houses. Sitting on the sofa. Sitting opposite us is an old woman, very old, close to eighty or ninety years old… and the two soldiers sitting next to me… were playing some game… I don’t recall, rolling up pieces of paper that were there and throwing them at her… at the old lady.128

Delay and harassment Because the settlement points are located in the heart of the city, dozens of checkpoints and permanent positions have been set up in the City Center. Security forces also conduct frequent patrols in the area. Palestinian residents living there, or Palestinians who need to go there, are forced to pass through checkpoints and by the army’s positions. When they do, they are subject to physical checks and delays “for an identity-card check.” Every Palestinian passerby, at any time of day, is liable to be detained, depending on the whim of the soldiers. The length of the delay varies from five minutes to a couple of hours or more.

126. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 17 October 2006.

127. Breaking the Silence provided the testimony to B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights without mention of the witness’s particulars.

128. Breaking the Silence provided the testimony to B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights without mention of the witness’s particulars.

63

These delays clearly are not justifiable on security grounds nor are they permitted by law. In most cases, the Palestinians detained were not suspected of committing any offense or of constituting a threat to the wellbeing or safety of another person. In some cases, Palestinian passersby were detained as a soldiers’ game for an hour or more in nasty weather.

In other cases, soldiers were ordered to detain Palestinians crossing a certain point, even though it was known that they can get to their destination without being delayed by means of an alternate route.

In most cases, the Palestinians detained are not suspected of committing any offense or of constituting a threat to the wellbeing or safety of another person

A staff sergeant who was stationed in Hebron told Breaking the Silence about one mode of operation adopted by soldiers in Hebron: The officer and soldier get out. The driver stays in the jeep. They randomly collect twenty Palestinian males, stand them in a line in the middle of the street under the sun and do not allow them to move for an hour or so. When I went over to the officer to learn the explanation for this, he responded, “For the fun of it, you know.” When they released them, they gave them a few sharp blows.129

Another soldier, who served in the city during the second intifada, stated: My company commander set a quota of twenty ID cards we had to check while standing guard… At some stage, the company got real excited about this, holding competitions to check as many ID cards as possible…

In one instance, one commander and a solder decided to work at it and grab a lot, to break the quota… They took three guys from the Shalala compound, brought them, put them on the side, and in the meantime checked the details on their cards by two-way radio. Meanwhile, they grabbed three more guys… The number rose to seven, eight, nine persons who were standing there in a one-bytwo-meter space, standing and waiting for their cards to be checked by two-way radio…

From an operations perspective, this was stupid… I realized how inhumane this was. How it was simply evil to do this to people. To take them and stick them next to each other, make them stand there for twenty minutes. And all this for no security reason whatsoever, but because the soldiers got some inertia, and to pass the time while on guard duty.130

Ziad a-Salayme, who is unemployed, lives near the Tomb of the Patriarchs. He stated:

129. Breaking the Silence, Compilation of Testimonies No. 1, 5.

130. Breaking the Silence, Testimonies from Hebron, 10.

64

The suffering starts at the moment I leave the house. The Border Police have a post next to my house… The check can last a few minutes or more than an hour.

They check us even though they see us every day. I think it is an evil device they use against us and is not for security purposes.131

A soldier told about a case in which soldiers encountered a convoy of Palestinian vehicles decorated for a wedding: The minute he [the company commander] sees the wedding convoy… [there is a] kind of a feeling of, “Let’s go, we can strike some blow here”… We stop the car, people get out, Palestinians, dressed in fancy clothes. You see the groom, you see the bride. The father. Their faces as they get out, the dread that the happiest day in their life might be lost… He [the company commander] doesn’t let them continue on. He wants to dismantle everything, so they return home. He takes the keys to the car… Their pleas, the bride’s wailing, the groom’s father, they are all pleading… And on the other side I can see on the face of the company commander, how he looks at them and doesn’t view them as humans. As simple as that… You see them all dressed, the children, everything, a whole family watching this show of an IDF officer taking their car keys and wearing down and canceling the [wedding]. For me it was seeing essentially… how the IDF views the Palestinian population.132

Soldiers conducting a body search of Palestinian pedestrians in the center of Hebron.

Photo: Gil Cohen Magen, Reuters

131. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 31 January 2007.

132. Breaking the Silence, Testimonies from Hebron, 32.

65

Nidal ‘Ashur, a blind resident of Abu Sneineh, related an incident that occurred in November 2006: Border Police officers stopped me at al-Haram [Tomb of the Patriarchs] checkpoint. They know I am blind, I pass there every day. Anyway, one of them told me to give him my identity card and ordered me to stand along the wall.

After a half an hour passed, I asked the policeman for my card. He said I had to wait longer. I waited ten minutes and asked again for my card. Again, he told me to wait. I lit a cigarette and he told me to put it out. My cell phone rang, and he told me not to answer it. An hour and a quarter passed like that. Every time I asked for my card, the soldier told me to wait.133

Victims of this phenomenon are random Palestinians, of all ages, walking along their city streets, on their way to school, to a shop, to visit a relative, to see the doctor, to go home, or for some other reason. At any moment, they might be called by a soldier and detained for as long as the soldier likes, or at best, until the soldier receives the “OK� by two-way radio.

This arbitrariness and the high frequency of detaining and harassing of Palestinians turn this activity into a harmful phenomenon and contribute to Palestinians leaving the City Center.

133. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 11 February 2007.

66

Chapter Six

Israel’s Policy in Hebron from the Legal Perspective Mortal blow at human rights Israel’s policy in the center of Hebron, which is based on the “principle of separation,” has over the years extensively and mortally infringed the human rights of tens of thousands of Palestinians in almost every aspect of their lives.

The obligation to protect these rights is enshrined in international humanitarian law,134 in international human rights law,135 and in Israeli administrative and constitutional law. These three sources of law are binding on Israel as the occupier in the West Bank.136

134. International humanitarian law is comprised of the Regulations Attached to Hague Convention IV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, of 1907, and the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to Civilians in Time of War, of 1949. For a discussion on the applicability of the Hague Regulations, see HCJ 606/78, Ayub v. Minister of Defense, Piskei Din 33 (2) 113. The State of Israel has agreed to comply with the humanitarian sections of the Fourth Geneva Convention in the West Bank. The question of the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention in its entirety has not been decided by the Supreme Court. See HCJ 7957/04, Mara’abe et al. v. Prime Minister of Israel et al. (not yet reported), Judgment, given in 2005, Paragraph 14. On the applicability of these conventions in the Occupied Territories, see the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, in The Hague, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004, 43 ILM 1009 (2004) (hereafter: ICJ Advisory Opinion), Paragraphs 89-101.

135. Three conventions, which deal with protection of human rights, are primarily relevant in the matter under discussion: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of 1966, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, also of 1966, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, of 1989. Israel ratified all three instruments in 1991. The ICJ’s Advisory Opinion states that these instruments are a supplemental legal source governing Israel’s actions in the Occupied Territories. Israel’s High Court of Justice has made a similar determination. See HCJ 769/02, Public Committee against Torture in Israel v. Government of Israel (not yet reported), Judgment, given in 2005, Paragraph 18.

136. The changes that have taken place in the occupied territory since it was first occupied, including the agreements signed by the PLO and Israel, have not altered the status of the areas as occupied territory, or Israel’s status as occupier of these areas. See ICJ Advisory Opinion. This is also the position the High Court has taken in a long list of cases. See, for example, HCJ 7015/02, Ajuri et al. v.

Commander of Military Forces in the West Bank et al., Piskei Din 56 (6) 352; HCJ 2056/04, Beit Sourik Village Council v. Government of Israel et al. (not yet reported); Mara’abe.

67

International humanitarian law, which deals with occupied territory, revolves around two main pivots: one – ensuring the legitimate security interests of the occupying power in the occupied territory and two – ensuring the needs of the civilian population in the occupied territory.137 Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which is a fundamental provision of international humanitarian law, expresses the balance between the two: Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honor, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall at all time be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof….

However, the Parties to the conflict may take such measures of control and security in regard to protected persons as may be necessary as a result of the war.

The obligation to respect and protect the human rights of the population, first and foremost their right to life, liberty, personal safety, and freedom of movement, as well as other rights, are also enshrined in international human rights law, which also applies to Israel’s actions in the Occupied Territories and is binding on Israel.

The obligation to respect and protect the human rights of Palestinians also appears in Israeli administrative and constitutional law.138 This law enshrines, among other obligations, the duty of the governmental body to act only in accordance with lawful authority, the prohibition on infringing rights unless expressly allowed to do so, the duty to provide the right to be heard, the duty to act reasonably, and the principle of proportionality, which specifies that the decision of an administrative body is lawful only if the means used to achieve the objective are proportionate.139

Israel’s policy in the center of Hebron, which is based on the “principle of separation,” has extensively infringed the human rights of tens of thousands of Palestinians

The sweeping restrictions on Palestinian movement in the center of Hebron, the prohibition on opening shops in large sections of this area, the arbitrary searches and seizures of houses there infringe the residents’ freedom of movement,140 the 137. HCJ 393/82, Jam’iyyat Iskan al-Mu’aliman al-Mahddudat al-Mas’uliyyah v. Commander of IDF Forces in Judea and Samaria et al., Piskei Din 37 (4) 785, 793-794.

138. Ibid., 792-793; HCJ 69/81, Abu ‘Ita v. Commander for Judea and Samaria, Piskei Din 37 (2) 197, 231; HCJ 591/88, Taha, a Minor v. Minister of Defense, Piskei Din 45 (2) 45, 52; Ajuri, supra, 382; HCJ 10356/02, Yoav Hass v. Commander of Military Forces in the West Bank, Piskei Din 58 (3) 443; HCJ 7862/04, Abu Daher v. Commander of Military Forces in the West Bank, Piskei Din 59 (5) 368.

139. In Beit Sourik, the High Court specified three sub-tests in determining if an action is proportionate: one, is there a rational connection between the objective and the means; two, is it possible to obtain the objective in a way that causes lesser injury; and three, is the damage caused to the individual by the means used to achieve the authority’s objectives in proper proportion to the gain brought about by that means.

140. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of 1948, Article 13; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 12.

68

right of property,141 the right to gain a living by work they choose,142 the right to an adequate standard of living, including the right to adequate housing,143 the right to the highest attainable standard of health,144 the right to education,145 the right to family life,146 and the right to privacy.147 The ongoing and conscious failure of Israel to enforce the law on the delinquent Israelis, settlers, and security forces, and to protect the Palestinian residents from them, at times amounts to backing the lawbreakers in carrying out their abuse and harassment. This being the case, Israel breaches its fundamental obligation to ensure safety and public order, as well as its duty to protect the rights of the Palestinian residents to bodily integrity and personal safety, which similarly are deeply enshrined in international law and Israeli law.148 The conditions that Israel forces on Palestinians in the City Center cumulatively amount to “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.”149

Prohibition on settlement of occupied territory As shown above, the grave infringements of the human rights of Palestinian residents of the City Center are the result – directly or indirectly – of the settlers’ presence in the city.

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states that, “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population in the territory it occupies.” This provision prohibits not only the deportation or transfer of a population by means of coercion, as occurred during the Second World War, but also the use of any means by the occupying power whose purpose is to organize or encourage the transfer of parts of its population to the occupied territory.150 141. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 17; Hague Regulations, Article 46.

142. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 6.

143. Ibid., Article 11; Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 27.

144. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 12; Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 24.

145. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 13; Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 28; Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 50.

146. Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 27; Hague Regulations, Article 46; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Articles 17 and 23; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 10.

147. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 17; Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 16.

148. Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 27; Hague Regulations, Article 43.

149. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 7. See also common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, and Cyprus v. Turkey (25781/94) [2001] ECHR 327 (10 May 2001).

150. ICJ Advisory Opinion, Paragraph 120. For an extensive legal analysis on the illegality of the settlements in the West Bank, see B’Tselem, Land Grab: Israel’s Settlement Policy in the West Bank (May 2002), Chapter Two.

69

This prohibition applies so long as the territory is under the military occupation of another state. This provision expresses one of the fundamental principles of international law – the denunciation and eradication of colonialism.151 The settlement in Hebron was originally initiated by individuals, and not by the government of Israel. Yet, the development and expansion of it were carried out over the years with the approval, cooperation, support, and even encouragement of the various Israeli governments, and with the approval of other governmental authorities.152 Israel’s actions in settling civilians in the occupied territory breach international humanitarian law, being contrary to the prohibition set forth in the Fourth Geneva Convention.153 Israel’s actions in settling civilians in the occupied territory breaches international humanitarian law

Obligation to ensure the needs and way of life of the local population The military commander has the fundamental obligation to ensure the needs of the civilian population in the occupied territory.154 As we have seen, the fixed pattern of Israel’s activity places the entire burden on continuing the Israeli settlement in the city on the shoulders of the local Palestinian population. This activity breaches Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian law and exceeds the authority given by international humanitarian law to the military commander.

International humanitarian law, as mentioned above, recognizes the legitimate security interests of the occupying power in the occupied territory, and toward this end grants special powers that allow in certain cases even grave harm to the protected persons and infringement of their fundamental rights, provided that the act is required to meet security needs or to serve an imperative military purpose.

However, these special powers do not include protection of the settlements. The absolute prohibition on settlements set forth in international humanitarian law supports this contention. Placing the burden of defending the security of the settlers on the Palestinians therefore breaches the balance between the rights

151. Jean Pictet (ed.), Commentary: Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross, 1958), 283.

152. Petitions filed by Palestinian residents of the city against the expansion of the settlements in the city were denied: a-Natshe (expansion of the Beit Hadassah settlement); HCJ 3352/01, Zakaria al-Bakri v. Civil Administration (unreported) (expansion of the Tel Rumeida settlement); HCJ 6442/01, Zakaria al-Bakri v. Civil Administration for Judea and Samaria (unreported).

153. For an extensive discussion on this point, see B’Tselem, Land Grab.

154. Hague Regulations, Article 43.

70

of the protected residents and the security powers of the military commander as specified in humanitarian law.

The High Court has ruled that Israel may infringe the human rights of protected residents to protect the settlements or to enable various actions of settlers in the occupied territory, and even destroy private Palestinian property.155 However, the High Court’s decisions directly conflict with international humanitarian law, as described above.

Israel has the duty to provide reasonable security to Israelis living in Hebron, while preserving the Palestinian fabric of life

Regardless of the question of the legality of the presence of Israeli settlers in the area, and so long as they remain in his area of responsibility, the military commander must protect their lives and ensure their safety. There is no dispute on this point.

However, this objective and the actions carried out to achieve it cannot lawfully be done in a way that the local population “pays the price” to enable the continuation of the settlement.

Clearly, the actions cannot lawfully include the extreme measures currently taken against Palestinians in the City Center, nor the damage to the Palestinian fabric of life there. Israel has the duty to provide reasonable security to Israelis living in Hebron, while preserving the Palestinian fabric of life.

Guise of security Many of the prohibitions imposed by the security forces on Palestinians in the City Center, and restricting free movement in the area to Israelis, cannot be explained on security grounds. We have seen that the source of some prohibitions on Palestinian movement in the City Center is the army’s surrender to settlers’ demands. By yielding to these demands, the authorities are doing more than protecting the residents of the settlements in the city: they are supporting the aspiration of many settlers “to Judaize” the area and expand the settlement and “Jewish control” in the city, by creating territorial contiguity between the Qiryat Arba settlement and the Tel Rumeida settlement in the heart of the city.

The Israeli authorities have acted unlawfully, therefore, by taking into account extraneous considerations and giving the stamp of legality to breaches of the law.

Furthermore, last year, external Israeli security experts and members of the Israeli Council for Peace and Security proposed alternative ways to protect the settlers in the City Center that would harm the Palestinian residents to a much lesser extent.

Under one of these proposals, which was submitted to the attorney general and the defense minister, the houses in the settlement would be provided with better protective devices, security forces and lookouts would be increased, and the

155. See, for example, the court’s decisions in Hass and Mara’abe.

71

settlers would use vehicles with protective equipment.156 The army rejected the proposal.157 Inasmuch as there are proposals for protecting Hebron’s settlers in a way that causes lesser harm to Palestinians, the sweeping infringement of the human rights of Palestinians is disproportionate and, therefore, illegal.

Obligation to treat persons equally and the prohibition on discrimination Article 1 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, of 1965, which Israel signed in 1966 and ratified in 1979, defines “racial discrimination” as: any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.

All the actions discussed in this report, which gravely infringe fundamental rights, are based on discrimination on a background of ethnic origin. The actions are not carried out by individuals, but are part of the State of Israel’s formal policy of deliberate separation and discrimination. The actions of the military commander in Hebron are directed against every Palestinian citizen, and not only against those who are deemed a threat. The distinction, therefore, is grounded on their nationalethnic origin. A policy based on discrimination of this kind is absolutely forbidden and is denunciated by the world as racist.158

All the actions discussed in this report, which gravely infringe fundamental rights, are based on discrimination on a background of ethnic origin

Israel has argued that restrictions on Palestinian movement in the West Bank are not forbidden discrimination because the prohibition does not apply to the distinction between its citizens and persons who are not its citizens. The UN committee responsible for implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination responded to this argument: The Committee is concerned at the State party’s assertion that it can legitimately distinguish between Israelis and Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories on the basis of citizenship. It reiterates that the Israeli settlements are illegal under international law.

156. The proposal was attached to a letter of 27 August 2006 from the Association for Civil Rights.

157. Letter of 31 January 2007 from Harel Weinberg to Shai Nitzan, supra.

158. See articles 1, 2, 3, and 5 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

72

The Committee recommends that the State party review its approach and interpret its obligations under the Convention in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to its terms in their context, and in the light of its object and purpose. The Committee also recommends that the State party ensures that Palestinians enjoy full rights under the Convention without discrimination based on citizenship and national origin.159

Guests of the settlement in Hebron, some of whom are Jews without Israeli citizenship, are treated like the settlers, clearly indicating that citizenship is not a factor, and that the discrimination is based on national-ethnic origin.

Israel’s actions in Hebron constitute an especially grievous breach of the Convention inasmuch as it has adopted an official practice of separation based on national origin. As the aforesaid UN committee stated: The State party should review these measures to ensure that restrictions on freedom of movement are not systematic but only of temporary and exceptional nature, are not applied in a discriminatory manner, and do not lead to segregation of communities. The State party should ensure that Palestinians enjoy their human rights, in particular their rights to freedom of movement, family life, work, education and health.160

Therefore, Israel’s refusal to cease this practice is liable to result also in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, which particularly condemns racial segregation.

Prohibition on collective punishment “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers; every man shall be put to death for his own sin.”

(Deuteronomy, 24:16) The prohibition on collective punishment is a fundamental principle in Israeli law and in international humanitarian law. Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited…. Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited. 161

The sweeping means taken during the second intifada against all Palestinian residents in the City Center – such as the prolonged curfew, the prohibition on

159. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Concluding Observations, Israel, Consideration of reports submitted by states parties (seventieth session, 2007), CERD/C/ISR/CO/13 (2007), Article 32.

160. Ibid.

161. See also Article 50 of the Hague Regulations.

73

Palestinian movement on the streets, forbidding businesses to open – breach the prohibition on collective punishment.

Israel’s official position is that the means are not collective punishment but are security measures to protect the settlers living in the city. As seen above, the military commander uses the aforesaid means extensively against all Palestinians in the city, for extremely long periods of time, when he has available alternatives that would protect the settlers. Also, it is clear that some of the means used are not necessary for security purposes. Therefore, whether or not the objective is collective punishment and deterrence, the acts constitute collective punishment.162

Prohibition on forced transfer As we have seen, Israel’s declared policy, its actions in separating Israelis and Palestinians in the City Center, and the acts and omissions of its security forces in the city have brought about a “quiet transfer” of thousands of Palestinians from the City Center. The authorities could not have failed to anticipate that this would be the result of their policy in Hebron. In several neighborhoods near the settlement points, the security forces also directly prevent Palestinian families from returning to their homes.

The first paragraph of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportation of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.

Given that this prohibition applies also to transfer within the occupied territory,163 and inasmuch as international law specifies that forced transfer also includes indirect and hidden coercion,164 the provision applies also to driving Palestinians out of the City Center.165 Articles 146-147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention classify the unlawful transfer of a protected person as a grave breach of the convention, a war crime, for which the persons responsible bear personal liability.166

162. In some of the cases, it is clear that collective punishment is the objective of the military action or the prohibition, and not only the result of them (see Chapter Three).

163. See D. Fleck, Handbook of Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflict (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 253.

164. The Prosecutor v. Naletilic & Martinovic, Case No. IT-9834-T (ICTY), 17 October 2003, Sections 125-128.

165. Article 49 specifies a narrow exception that allows evacuation if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. In our case, it is clear that neither of these exceptions apply, nor has Israel ever contended they do.

166. Forced transfer and settling a population of the occupying state in the occupied territory are crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. See the Rome Statute, of 1998, Article 8(2)(b)(viii).

74

Conclusions

The constant and grave harm to Palestinians living in the center of Hebron is one of the most extreme manifestations of human rights violations committed by the State of Israel. Israel’s policy of protecting the Hebron settlement and encouraging it is based on “the principle of separation” and includes physical and legal segregation between Palestinians and Israeli settlers based on nationalethnic criteria.

This policy involves the use of harsh oppressive measures against the Palestinians in the city. Residents of the City Center are subjected to extremely severe restrictions on their movement, whether by car or on foot, to repeated assaults by violent settlers who attack them and their property, and to the arbitrary treatment of soldiers and their commanders during searches of the homes, to delays, and harassment, even to violent acts committed by the security forces. As explained above, these actions violate Israel’s obligations under international human rights law, international humanitarian law, and Israeli administrative and constitutional law.

Using these measures, Israel has brought about over the years the expulsion of thousands of Palestinian residents and merchants from the center of the city.

The measures have sharply embittered the lives of these Palestinians, making it impossible for them to continue to live and work in the area, leaving them no option but to get up and leave. This expulsion is unique in magnitude since the occupation of the West Bank in 1967 began, and is a grave breach of international humanitarian law. The “separation policy” constitutes, therefore, a policy of expulsion of Palestinians. This is the result of that policy, and as we have seen, the authorities had to expect it.

The authorities’ refraining from protecting Palestinians from settler violence also contributes to the harsh results of this policy, and, as the testimonies have shown, is a significant cause, whether deliberate or not, in Palestinians leaving the City Center.

The army acts according to similar principles throughout the West Bank, but in Hebron, the only Palestinian city in the West Bank with an Israeli settlement in the heart of it, this regime of separation-discrimination is implemented in a small area. As a result, the concentration, magnitude, and severity of human rights violations in the city are especially great.

75

It appears that the source of Israeli policy in the center of Hebron is the profound disregard for the rights of the Palestinian residents, the flagrant and discriminating preference for the interests of the settlers, and the fear of confronting the settlers and of enforcing the law on them. Without hesitation, the authorities have made the entire Palestinian population pay the price for protecting the Israeli settlement in the city.

Recommendations The State of Israel must cease infringing the human rights of the Palestinian residents of Hebron and refrain from using the oppressive means they are currently using against them.

The Israeli settlement points in Hebron were established in breach of Israel’s obligations under international law and continue to cause severe breaches of prohibitions specified in international law that are intended to protect the human rights of persons under belligerent occupation.

Israel contends that it is impossible to ensure the safety of the settlers without separating Palestinians and Israelis in the city, and without infringing the basic rights of the Palestinians living there, which has resulted in Palestinians leaving the City Center.

Therefore, and even assuming that the government’s claim that Israeli settlement in the West Bank does not breach its obligations under international law is correct, it was forbidden to enable the settlement in Hebron to continue, given the grave infringement of the human rights of Palestinians living in the city. The State of Israel has the legal and moral obligation to evacuate the Israelis who settled in Hebron, and return them to Israel.

Until the settlers are removed, the Israeli authorities must ensure their safety in a way that enables the Palestinians to live a normal life and guarantees public order, while minimizing the infringement of the human rights of Palestinian residents.

In particular, the government of Israel must urgently take the following measures: •

allow Palestinians to move about in the City Center, in part by removing the physical obstructions separating the City Center from other parts of the city;

•

allow and facilitate the return of Palestinians to their homes;

•

rejuvenate the City Center as a commercial area, in part by enabling Palestinians to open shops and markets there;

76

•

direct the security forces to vigorously enforce law and order on violent settlers, and toward this end, make sure that all soldiers and police officers are instructed of their duty to stop and detain violent settlers committing an offense, ensure that the police properly investigate cases of violence and that the lawbreakers are brought to justice, and that the authorities take the steps necessary to cope with the problem of violence by minors under the age of criminal responsibility;

•

direct the investigative authorities to investigate every case of violation of the law by security forces;

•

direct the army and the police to actively prevent settlers from taking control of additional buildings and areas in the city.

77

Appendix Testimonies of City Center residents Testimony of Na’imah Ahmad167 I live with my husband and five of my children in a rented place on Ras al-Jora, in H-1. We pay rent of 1,300 Jordanian dinars a year. Two of my daughters study at university. My son Firas, 23, studied mechanical engineering and is presently unemployed. Bashar, 26, is a computer engineer. He started work not long ago.

Taysir, 18, is in school. My husband works as a guard in al-Haram al-Ibrahimi [Tomb of the Patriarchs] and earns 900 shekels a month in the framework of the unemployment program. I have a son who is studying and working in the US, and another son, ‘Abd a-Razaq, who is married and lives in his own home.

At the end of May 2006, we moved into our current dwelling. Before that, we had rented a place in the Old City of Hebron, in H-2, where we paid rent of 280 dinars a year. The house was close to the entrance to the Avraham Avinu settlement, opposite the Waqf’s offices. Prior to the intifada, six families lived in the building.

We lived on the fourth floor.

We lived there for twenty-two years. While there, I gave birth to three children, and my other children grew up there. We had problems there because the Israeli army used our roof as a lookout and because of our proximity to the settlers.

Despite that, it was OK. The big children and I knew how to manage. Once, the settlers beat ‘Abd a-Razaq and afterwards he was imprisoned on charges the settlers made up. When Bashar was sixteen, he was arrested for a dispute he had with a soldier.

When the present intifada began, the situation deteriorated. The settlers’ and soldiers’ attacks increased. The army imposed more stringent restrictions on the area. Every day, the settlers threw stones at our windows. They destroyed the electricity meters, threw garbage into the entrance to the building, and beat our sons. More than once, they tried to break into our place and assault us. They

167. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 18 December 2006.

79

assaulted us almost every day. Besides, the army imposed a curfew for many weeks and fired at Palestinian houses arbitrarily. Our water tanks were destroyed as a result.

In the summer of 2001, we had to leave the apartment. We could no longer stand the assaults and the hardship. We rented a place in al-Kawaz at a rent of 1,400 dinars a year. We lived there for eight months. Then we moved back to the apartment in the Old City because my husband stopped working and we had almost no money. We saw that, while we were away, settlers had broken into the apartment, stole things, and destroyed everything that was there. I filed a complaint with the Israeli police. We lived there even though the settlers continued to attack us and despite the curfew. Later, the area was declared a closed military zone. There was a checkpoint at the entrance to the building, and to pass we needed an identity card. After each attack on Israelis, they took out their vengeance on us and imposed a harsh curfew. To continue at school, my sons and daughters had to go and live with their grandfather in H-1.

Three years ago, my daughter Hana’a, who is now twenty-one, was scheduled to take her final exams at high school. The day of her English exam, soldiers blocked the way and said it was forbidden to pass. I argued with the soldiers for more than an hour, and finally managed to convince them to let her leave the building so she could get to school. She arrived at school about an hour after the test had begun.

She failed the exam.

Almost nobody remains in the neighborhood, only two families and us. Most of the neighbors left to go to H-1. We lived in isolation, like in prison. Despite the suffering, our poor financial situation made it impossible for us to move. Later, the settlers took control of the Waqf building [the settlers were subsequently removed, by court order, and the building is now closed]. They torched the places that were vacated in the neighborhood. The situation got worse, and the army increased the restrictions and supervision. I was close to having a mental breakdown. The settlers started to go on the roof of the Waqf building and throw stones at us.

We felt more isolated than ever before. We were frightened and felt we were in a dangerous situation, and that things were getting more and more complicated. It was impossible for us to continue living in the apartment.

In late May 2006, despite the pain in doing so, we decided to move. We rented a place in Ras a-Jura, in H-1. It wasn’t easy to move. We had to carry furniture on our shoulders through the checkpoint and the iron revolving door. They didn’t let anybody help us, and by law, it was forbidden to bring a moving van into the area.

We dragged our things and furniture through the market, a distance of about 300 meters. It took us three days to move everything.

Our life here is much easier. Our fears and worries are gone. I feel that my children are safe. I also feel free. Guests who haven’t visited us in years come by. In the

80

other place, prior coordination was required for visitors to come to our home. Now it is easy for me to do the shopping, without being searched and delayed. The car comes right up to the entrance of the building. Everything is easier.

The aggression of the settlers and the army is past history [for us]. Safety is the most important thing. I feel as if Allah had mercy on me by moving me from that area, although I miss the old house. I lived there half my life. All our memories are from there. Once, I went there with my daughters. They stood facing the building and cried.

I pray that Allah will let us return, but how is that possible if the settlers are still there? It was impossible to live there. Better to live in a tent than in a house surrounded by the army and settlers.

Testimony of Bahija Sharabati168 I live with my husband and our six children in Tel Rumeida. We have a three-room apartment with bathroom and kitchen. The apartment is in a big house, and the apartment of our neighbors, Hani al-’Aza and his wife, is next to ours. We came to live here in 1998, after the elderly owner, Mahmud a-Sahab, left and offered to let us live here for free for two years. Before that, we lived in a small place near the Cordoba School, on a-Shuhada Street. My husband, Wa’il Sharabati, works at the Hasuna gas station in Hebron and earns 1,100 shekels a month.

When we moved into the apartment, the owner and the neighbors told us that, following the massacre in the Tomb of the Patriarchs, soldiers took control of the roof temporarily. In 1999, a settler from Tel Rumeida was stabbed, and the army imposed a curfew. The night of the incident, I heard people on the roof. In the morning, I saw that the army had set up a lookout. The lookout on the roof has remained ever since. They built a room and an iron ladder. Generally, there are two soldiers at the lookout around the clock.

Our life is not easy. Many families were forced to leave this area because of the settler attacks and the army’s actions. We can’t leave the house because we are poor. My husband’s salary is hardly enough to cover our basic needs. Sometimes, the pressure and the tension make me consider leaving, but rent in a safe place in Hebron is at least 1,500 Jordanian dinars a year [about $1,065]. We have no choice; we have to suffer these harsh living conditions.

At the beginning of the intifada, the Israeli army didn’t let us use the front entrance of the house. They also prohibited cars from using the streets in the area. We had to use another entrance and go between trees, house, and fields to get to the

168. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 30 December 2006.

81

paved road. We also had to go by foot along a steep path to the checkpoint at Bab a-Zawiya, a distance of more than 300 meters. Our neighbors – the al-’Aza and Abu Heykal families, among others – also suffered from these access problems.

Because of the army’s lookout, our yard became a refuse dump. The soldiers eat and throw the food scraps on the ground around the house. They also urinate on the roof. Three years ago, my little daughter, Abrar, left the house and the urine of one of the soldiers sprayed her on the head. She hasn’t forgotten that incident.

The soldiers shout, jump, run, and sometimes also play. Their shouting and movements disturb us a lot, especially at night. Sometimes, we can’t get to sleep because of the disturbance, and sometimes their noise and the barking of their dogs wake us up. The noise usually starts at 1:00 A.M. and continues until morning.

One day last summer, around eight at night, we were at home and heard explosions on the roof and around the house, which frightened us and startled the children. We thought it was an army action. We went into one room and were unable to sleep. After midnight, the noise stopped. In the morning, I went into the yard to see what happened, and saw pieces of paper all around and realized that the soldiers had shot off fireworks.

The soldiers let settlers go onto the roof. Children of the settlers throw stones and sand at us from there, and sometimes spit at us. This generally happens on the Sabbath and holidays, so that is the reason why on those days I don’t hang laundry outside the house. There have been a few times that the laundry got dirty from the sand and filth they threw from the roof. Once, when they threw stones and sand at us, I left the house and spoke about this with the soldiers. One of the soldiers said to me, “Children.” My son, Husam, who is twelve, was next to me. I told the soldier, “He, too, is a child, but if he throws stones, you would shoot him.”

The soldier replied, “I don’t do that.”

The soldiers not only let the settler children bother us, they also carry out the settlers’ orders. One day, before the most recent ‘Eid al-Fitr [the holiday at the end of Ramadan], the water in the house stopped running. I think that the settlers damaged the pipe on purpose, but I am not sure. The soldiers did not let the repairmen come and fix the problem for four days. The repairmen came in the morning, and Border Police officers accompanied them.

Husam helped the workers. He gave them tea and cookies and opened the front door for them because the pipe runs through there. The settlers apparently saw him opening the door, which is forbidden, and called the army. Around seven at night, six soldiers came, along with the soldiers on the roof, and asked about Husam. They made him get out of the shower, and he dressed quickly. When they saw he was only a child, they let him be. They took us all outside and conducted a long search, opened a locked room that had items belonging to the owner, and

82

combed through his possessions. When they finished, they took the key for the front door. I called the Israeli police and TIPH [the international observer force in Hebron]. The soldiers returned the key that night.

Three weeks ago, on a Thursday night, there was a power breakdown. The soldiers did not let the workers come and repair the malfunction, and we didn’t have electricity until Sunday afternoon.

On the Saturday that the Jews read the “Chayey Sara” biblical portion [for which the Hebron settlers hold an annual public celebration], the soldiers let the children go to school and told us adults that we could stay closed in the house or leave the house and only come back after eight at night. Last year, on this holiday, the children had to wait at the Bab a-Zawiya checkpoint until eight at night before being allowed to cross and return home.

On one Saturday in 2005, settlers shattered windows in our house. I went into the yard to speak with the soldiers who were on the roof, and one of them laughed.

One of the settler children threw a stone at me, hitting me in the head. After that, ten soldiers arrived. An army doctor examined me, gave me first-aid, and told me to go to the hospital. Police came and asked me to give a statement. I went to the police station and filed a complaint. The soldier who laughed was also there. Later, I went to the hospital where they stitched the wound.

On ‘Eid al-Adha last year, my relatives came to visit. The soldiers let them come in via the front door, which was usually closed. Later, my brothers-in-law came via the other way, and the two soldiers on the roof ordered them to return and enter through the front door. After that, my children realized we could use the front entranceway, so when they came back from the grocery store, they used this entrance. A large group of settlers was waiting for them along the way. The group attacked them and beat my daughter, Islam, who is nine years old. I went to the two soldiers who were on the roof to complain. One of them said that we were forbidden to use the front entrance, and that I have to close the door. I told him that he let us go out that door. He did not reply, but only told me again to close the door.

Some of the soldiers themselves assault us. Last winter, a soldier on the roof broke out in hysterical laughter and threw sand and stones at me while I was standing outside the house. He spoke to me in Hebrew and said things I didn’t understand. My husband understands Hebrew very well, and he said that the soldier swore at me.

Sometimes, there are nice soldiers, who talk to the children, play with them, and give them chocolate and sweets. One day, I told the children not to take chocolate, and that I was afraid of it. The soldier was sad and said that he did that because he missed his children at home. Despite everything, we try to behave nicely toward the soldiers.

83

In May this year, a settler child, who was about nine years old, stood opposite the house. He began to pick loquats from a tree and throw them to the ground. When I saw what he was doing, I asked Husam to pick some fruit, put them in a bag and give it to the child. Husam picked some and gave them to the child. The child took the bag and went away. An hour later, he came back and asked for more, and Husam gave him a bag [of fruit] again. After that, he didn’t return. I saw that he wanted to come over and thank us. He never came back again.

I could write a whole book about settler attacks and the acts committed by soldiers. We have already filed dozens of complaints to the Israeli police, but nothing has changed. I don’t believe in complaints any more. We try to get used to the situation because we have no choice.

Testimony of Taysir Abu ‘Ayesha169 I live with my wife and our seven children. Our eldest daughter, Raja, is seventeen.

We live on the first floor in a house that lies close to the Ramat Yishai settlement in Tel Rumeida. A road separates us from the settlers’ houses. I inherited my apartment. My father lives on the top floor with his wife and children. My father, Raja, and I work in a clothes shop on Bab a-Zawiya Street.

When the settlement in Tel Rumeida began, there were only caravans. Two years ago, they built a building. Since the beginning of the settlement, my family has suffered from settler violence and harassment. At first, my father tried to treat them like neighbors. He went to their homes on the Sabbath for candle lighting and to bring them grapes, but they assaulted and swore at us. They demanded that we leave our house. My two brothers, Samir and Jamil, left the house because of the settlers’ violence. Jamil, 39, left seven years ago. When he left, he had to live in a house that was still under construction. He closed his carpentry shop, which was next to the house, even though he made a good income there, and rented another carpentry shop.

At the beginning of the current intifada, in 2000, the settlers began to attack us more than in the past, and the Israeli army increased the restrictions on movement in the area. One day, the wife of the settler Eitan Fleischman took her car and blocked entry to the street leading to the settlement and our house. She wouldn’t move the car until the army closed the roads to Palestinian traffic. The same day, the army closed the roads leading to Tel Rumeida, and they remain closed. Palestinians are forbidden to travel in this area in their cars. We can only go by car to a place two or three hundred meters from our house. I have to carry gas balloons and food on my shoulder from the Bab a-Zawiya checkpoint on the road that leads up to the house.

169. The testimony was given to Musa Abu Hashhash on 4 January 2007.

84

In 2000, the settler Noam Federman fired shots from an air rifle at our windows.

At first, we thought that it was a regular rifle. When the police came and checked, we learned it was an air gun. The shots pierced holes in the windowpanes. There was a court hearing on the matter, and I was present.

In the first years of the intifada, the army imposed a prolonged curfew on the area, which was interrupted for only short periods. Life for us was almost intolerable.

We had to stay at home all the time. On occasion, I fled with some of my children to be with my two brothers, Samir and Jamil, in H-1. Sometimes, we sent the children to their uncle’s houses, so they could go to school. They came home to us on weekends.

During the curfew, settlers put some white substance in our well. People from the Red Cross told us that they took water samples and checked them. We don’t know the results, but they emptied out the well.

Our family had a factory for melting and casting copper near the entrance to the settlement. About seventeen people worked in the factory. The settlers, among them the wife of Baruch Marzel, filed a complaint with the army, contending that the factory caused smoke pollution and harmed them. In 2002, an order was issued to close the factory. We managed to move a few machines and open a much smaller factory, with three workers, elsewhere.

The most severe attacks took place in the winter of 2002. For example, Shalom Alkoby, Baruch Marzel, and more than ten other settlers broke the side door of the house, entered, beat me and tried to drag me to the road. I grabbed Alkoby by the beard. My father came through the other door with a stick and rescued me. I was hurt in the neck, and the police investigated the matter.

In 2003, my two daughters, Safa and Wafa, got married. We couldn’t have the marriage ceremony in the house because of the curfew, since cars couldn’t get to our house. We decided to have it at Jamil’s and Samir’s houses. The curfew was in force, but I managed to sneak my daughters out the back door using a wooden ladder. My father couldn’t take part in the ceremony. He didn’t want to leave the house unoccupied because he was afraid of what the settlers and army would do.

We had to put up a metal-mesh fence around the house to protect against the attacks. Our house is like a cage. The settlers cut the mesh fence more than once.

We replaced it with tin panels. We did that also because the windows had been shattered by settlers who threw stones and empty bottles.

One day in 2003, I was walking home with my son Sharif, who was five at the time, and my brother Ibrahim, who was four. A young settler threw hot tea at us, hitting me in the face. A few times, settlers attacked my daughter Fada with stones, and beat and swore at her on her way to school. My father was hit twice in the eye by stones thrown by settlers.

85

In 2005, my sister Iman, who was then eight, was struck in the head with a stone.

On 30 November 2006, Shalom Alkoby tried to run over Fada and Iman when they were on their way to school. He tried that more than once, laughing each time. We complained to the police.

The settlers attack us all the time. They swear at us, throw stones, beat us with clubs, and spray water at us. Everybody in my family has been harmed by these attacks.

About a month ago, at two in the morning, my wife, who was pregnant, started to bleed a lot. We had to go by foot to the ‘Aliyah government hospital, about half a kilometer away. We couldn’t summon an ambulance that would come to our house. The doctors at the hospital pronounced the fetus dead. If we want an ambulance, we have to coordinate it hours in advance. In most cases, they don’t let it through.

We do not suffer only from direct assaults. The restrictions on our movement cause us lots of hardship. Since the beginning of the current intifada, the army has forbidden our relatives to come to our home. It is as if we are living in prison.

During the past ‘Eid al-Fitr, they didn’t let any of my wife’s relatives or my father’s wife’s relatives to reach the house.

Just prior to ‘Eid al-Adha this year, because of our experience on the previous holiday, we spoke with people from the Red Cross and they promised that they would arrange with the Israeli army that our relatives could come to us on the holiday. We gave them the names of our relatives and told all of them that they could come. On the morning of the holiday, our relatives arrived at the Tel Rumeida checkpoint and waited. We spoke with the soldiers and told them that things had been arranged so that our relatives could enter. The soldiers spoke by radio with their base, and they said that we should give them the identity card numbers. We realized it would take lots of time, and they all left and didn’t come to our house.

Most soldiers want us to go into the house when there is a confrontation between us and the settlers. Some soldiers identify with us, but they can’t do much. They shout at the children throwing stones. The police hear our complaints. We have already filed more than two hundred complaints with the police. Sometimes, we call the police and they don’t come. The settlers’ attacks go on all the time. The settler children attack us, with the parents encouraging them and standing next to them, because the law doesn’t apply to minors. We try to avoid having contact with them. We try not to cross the road, unless we have no choice. The settlers’ children play in the road, my children and my small brothers play in the yard behind the house. I bought them pigeons and chickens to take care of rather than go into the road and play opposite the house. In any event, the settlers attack us daily.

86

Responses of the Israeli Authorities Response of the IDF

The following is a translation of the Hebrew version, In case of divergence of interpretation, the Hebrew text shall prevail.

Subject: IDF response to B'Tselem Report "Empty Market Square" This B'Tselem report deals with a very important matter, which is dealt with by the army's highest ranking officers, in an ongoing and daily manner. By way of introduction, it is important to note that the interpretation of those who composed the report and their presentation of the current situation in Hebron ignores many key aspects of the reality that prevails in the city. The interpretation of the writers ignores the difficult security situation that prevails in the city and the urban changes that have taken place, which has caused a natural population movement away from the crowded Kasbah to the rest of Hebron.

We would like to refer, in general, to the main arguments described in the report regarding the actions of the IDF authorities by presenting them in a broad context and by taking into account the general picture that is the reality of life in Hebron.

We would like to emphasize that due to the short period of time given to the IDF to comment on the report before its publishing, we did not have enough time to comment on each individual case mentioned in the report. Therefore, we will refer only to the major arguments given against the IDF in the report.

In short, the authors of the report oppose a number of activities that are being carried out by the regional authorities which are, according to their claims, intended to "Judaize" the H-2 area. It is claimed that the security forces use methods such as curfews, closure of shops and traffic disruption on the one hand whilst not enforcing the law on Israelis on the other hand, with the alleged purpose of causing the Palestinian residents of the H-2 area to leave.

Intro: The Security Reality in Hebron For decades the city of Hebron has been a focus of tension and friction between Israelis and Palestinians. This is because it is the only city in the Judea and Samaria regions where Israelis and Palestinians live side by side. It is important to emphasize that the rights of Israeli citizens to live in the city have been authorised by the decisions of the Israeli government.

87

Starting from September 2000, violence erupted in Israel and Judea and Samaria, including terror bombings carried out by Palestinian terrorist organisations against Israeli civilian and military targets. In the framework of this terrorist threat pointed at the State of Israel and the Judea and Samaria regions, the threat against civilians living in the territories has increased, especially in Hebron.

This dangerous security situation is evidenced by a long chain of terrorist attacks which were carried out by Palestinian terrorists (inter alia by operating from within the civilian population and with its assistance) in the H-2 Zone in Hebron. There are numerous examples of these problems such as the terrorist attack on the HaMitpalellim road in Hebron on 15.11.2002, in which Colonel Dror Weinberg was murdered along with eleven other soldiers and members of the Hebron security services and Kiryat Arba; a terrorist shooting attack against IDF soldiers on "160 Curve" in which two soldiers from the Sachlav unit were murdered on December12, 2002; terrorist shooting attack against an IDF soldier in which Tomer Ron was murdered on March 10, 2003; the shooting attack on IDF soldier in which Matan Gidri was murdered on June 8, 2003; a suicide bombing in Gross Square in Hebron in which the married couple Gadi and Dina Levy were murdered on May 17, 2003; the shooting attack in which Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchak Shapira was murdered on September 23, 2002; the shooting attack in which the baby Shalhevet Pass was murdered on March 26, 2001. There have been many other terrorist attacks which took place in the Hebron sector.

The severity of the security situation in Hebron is underlined by the fact that despite the relative quiet in Judea and Samaria in recent months, Hebron has remained a focus of Palestinian terrorist activities. In those months, Palestinian terrorists have carried out numerous attacks in the city including planting explosive charges, stabbing attacks, Molotov bottle attacks and stone throwing, shooting attacks and others.

In 2003, High Court Justice Beinisch ruled on the prevailing situation in Hebron in High Court ruling 7007/03, Qawasmeh v. the IDF Military Commander in Judea and Samaria: "There are prevailing tensions in Hebron between the Arab and Jewish populations in Hebron which are expressed by an ongoing series of bloody flare-ups. The pent-up tension is ongoing and caused the Regional Army Commander over the years to take preventative steps in order to reduce the danger in this volatile area."

It can be said that the Jewish neighbourhood of Hebron has suffered the highest amount of terrorist attacks in proportion to its size throughout all the years of fighting.

Terrorist attacks in Hebron have formed serious threats to Israeli citizens that live in Hebron and on IDF forces and police in the area, which have become a direct target for terrorist factions in the city. In light of these activities, the Military Commander was forced to take steps to thwart Palestinian terror activities and to provide defence for Israelis living in the city.

88

Within the framework of these activities the Commander has undertook and continues to take numerous actions. For example, the Military Commander carries out different intelligence and operative measures, patrolling Hebron and carrying out security activities, restrictions on movement, and construction activities in order to prevent and disrupt terrorist activities. The criticism of the report's authors was focused mainly against these crucial activities, and therefore we will address these activities.

Curfew In the framework of these activities to prevent terror, the military commander of Hebron has been forced to impose a curfew of varying degrees in different areas of the city. This curfew was imposed because of the security needs to make the activities of IDF forces against Palestinian terrorist groups easier and to ensure the safety of the citizens and soldiers in Hebron. (Both Israelis and the Palestinians can get caught up in a battle-zone). This curfew was not a total curfew but rather a partial curfew, which was limited in area and time, and within its framework the possibility was given to the residents of the curfew zone to buy food and medicine, to get access to medical treatment and other services. Similarly, procedures were put in place which allowed the urgent needs of the population to be taken care of during the curfew, such as evacuating people to hospitals, and repairs to the water and electricity infrastructure.

This curfew was imposed sporadically on a number of neighbourhoods in Hebron from 2000 till 2003 according to security needs. The Supreme Court discussed the topic of the curfew in Hebron and determined: "There is no doubt that for the residents of the neighbourhoods of Hebron, upon whom the respondent [Military Commander] was forced in recent months to order, time and again, the imposition of a curfew, suffered a great deal as a result. However, from the details that were mentioned in the statements by the Military Commander in relation to events and circumstances that caused the Military Commander to impose a curfew and his frequent cancellation of curfews he had imposed, limiting the curfews only to the hours of darkness and similarly regarding the issue of fixing breaks in the curfew to allow residents to stock up on food and medicine and to avail themselves of necessary services, in no way supports the claim that the Military Commander used his authority to impose curfews arbitrarily or for long periods of time.

The opposite is true, and by examining the facts, it is easy to be convinced that the Military Commander is well aware that the imposition of a curfew is a drastic measure that is only to be used when circumstances absolutely demand it to defend the lives of civilians and soldiers, for preserving security and to thwart terrorist activities…Unfortunately, due to the continuous and ongoing murderous terrorist attacks, the respondent [IDF] was forced time and again to impose a curfew. In light of this, we have not found any basis to establish that in any cases in the course of the period relevant to the petition, the Military Commander gave the order for the imposition of a curfew in contradiction to the procedures that regulate the use of curfews - his reasons were also explained to the lawyers of the 89

petitioners - or that he decided to impose a curfew when the circumstances of the event allowed for the use of alternative methods which injure the population less. Furthermore, there is no basis to establish that from the previous decisions of the Military Commander, any mistake occurred that was likely to lead to the involvement of the court and there is also no basis for our involvement in the considerations of the Military Commander to establish principles or criteria beyond those established in military procedures and the rules of the Attorney General for the ranks of the military command." (HCJ 854/03, Sultan v. the Military Commander, emphasis added) Nevertheless, despite the importance of this security tool, and its operational necessity, and even though the petition's claim that curfews are an illegal measure was denied, the military commander decided, for the sake of the Palestinian population, not to impose a curfew at this time in Hebron.

As a result of this, as of 2003, curfews were imposed only in unique cases for short periods of time, and since 2006, no curfew has been imposed on the city of Hebron.

Needless to state, that this step had a big impact on improving the fabric of life and trade and industry lives of the Palestinians in the city.

In light of the above, we can conclude that the imposition of a curfew by the military commander is without any shadow of a doubt a measure that makes life difficult for the residents of the city. However, they were necessary, considering the security circumstances in Hebron.

Seizing Positions In the framework of these activities to prevent terrorist activities in the city of Hebron the Military Commander is required to seize property, which often belongs to private owners, in order to establish army positions and stations and for the security of different sectors or zones.

According to the above, the military commander acted to capture strategic positions in territories which overlook and control the city (mainly the hills of Abu Snenah and Kharet A'Shih which are under the security control of the Palestinians, as well as other parts of Hebron). These areas were used for shooting attacks with small-arms from relatively short distances against Israelis in the Hebron area. As a result of these shooting attacks, many civilians and soldiers were injured. These events came to a tragic height when the baby Shalhevet Pass was murdered by a Palestinian terrorist.

The military commander seized these territories through injunction seizure orders in accordance with the recognized and accepted rules of international law, legislated by the regional security. This procedure is routinely brought before the Supreme Court.

(See: HCJ 8286/00 The Association for Civil Rights in Israel v. the Military Commander in Judea and Samaria; HCJ 3435/05 the Muslim Wakf v. the Military Commander; HCJ 10356/02 Hess v. the IDF Military Commander in the West Bank, et.al.)

90

It is noteworthy regarding this issue that despite the stated military need and the strong legal basis under which the military commander operates, there exists an ongoing examination of the hardships and damages caused to the Palestinian population, whilst maintaining a constant effort and intention to ease the suffering that is caused to this population.

For example, regarding a school which had been seized for military purposes (an action approved in a legal process), the Military Commander instructed that the base be relocated in order to return the school to the use of the civilian population. There are other such examples.

Regarding seizing civilian residences, these seizures are done, in general, for short periods of time and for strictly military purposes. These seizures are carried out according to very strict regulations which are given to IDF soldiers, with a meticulous observance of the honour and rights of the residents.

Restrictions on Movement and Commerce in the City of Hebron The authors of the report focused to a large degree on the limitations on movement and trade that were put in place by the IDF in the H-2 zone in Hebron. Within this framework, the authors of the report claim that these restrictions are due to "the submission of the army to the racist demands of the settlers", in their words.

Below, we will clarify the security considerations that necessitated the military commander to take theses limitations, through the presentation of the broader picture with a full perspective and a wide point of view.

The extent of the limitations First an foremost, and before we address the interpretation of the restrictions, it has to be emphasised that these restrictions which are in place in the city of Hebron, are enacted in only a very small area (the area of the Jewish neighbourhood) in the H-2 zone which is a very small part of Hebron. These restrictions which certainly do adversely affect the lives of Palestinians in that area, were only imposed on a very small percentage of the residents of Hebron and actually, most of the residents of Hebron (about 180,000 Palestinian residents) enjoy freedom of movement in the city and light traffic, relatively speaking, compared to the majority of cities and villages in the district.

Furthermore, except for the small Jewish neighbourhood, the movement of Israelis is not permitted in the majority of Hebron (movement in the H-1 zone is completely forbidden to Israelis, excluding special occasions on which they are given special permit from the Military Commander; and movement in the H-2 zone is restricted to Israelis, for security reasons, to only two or three roads.)

91

As was stated, due to the wave of terrorist incidents that washed over Hebron since 2000, the Military Commander was forced to take measures using different methods in order to thwart and prevent the execution of terrorist attacks.

One type of terrorist threat is a "friction attacks", such as suicide attacks and infiltration and shooting attacks; the placing or throwing of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and petrol bombs from short ranges from crowds or from buildings; use of "cold" weapons such as knives for stabbing attacks; and rock throwing from short ranges that could cause injury and even death.

"Friction attacks" occur often when the attacker reaches his destination under the "cloak" of a large gathering of people while cloaking himself as an innocent civilian and makings use of the IDF's difficulty in distinguishing between the terrorist and innocent people to reach his destination. Furthermore, even once IDF forces identify the attacker they still have serious difficulties thwarting the attacker when he is operating amongst a crowd of civilians.

There is no need to state that in Hebron we are not talking about theoretical threats, and as a result of these attacks, tens of Israelis were killed in recent years in Hebron.

In light of the above, the military commander realised that the common military operations available to him were not sufficient to prevent the "friction attacks" in a place as complicated as Hebron where Israelis and Palestinians live side by side.

Therefore, the Military Commander decided that there is no alternative, from an operational perspective, from establishing separation zones in the friction zones so that large gatherings of Palestinians should not be formed in the friction zones, that could assist the approach of an attacker to a military force or to the Jewish neighbourhood, without an IDF force identifying him in advance.

Accordingly, the IDF forces formed a new operational strategy that includes forming of protection zones in proximity to zones of high terrorist activity, including the Jewish neighbourhoods. In these protection zones, the objective is to prevent a large gathering of people, in order to identify the attacker easily when he tries to reach his destination and to prevent the planned attack. Furthermore, this perspective means that due to the sensitivity and high-risk of potential danger that exists in the continuing tensions between the Jews and the Palestinians in the stated zones, it is crucial to try, as far as possible, to minimise the friction.

It is important to point out that this principle is taken in the most part from the idea which was presented in the Shamgar Committee Report, regarding the massacre in the Cave of the Patriarchs in 1994, which dealt with the arrangements for prayers and security in the compound and established that: "‌Firstly, it is recommended to prevent friction between Jews and Muslims‌this matter often causes physical altercations which need to prevented in advance‌on the basis of these assumptions we recommend first and foremost to introduce the order that were supposed to be enforced, to 92

separate completely between the Jewish worshipers and the Muslim worshipers, in order to ensure the safety of all worshipers and to prevent friction, arguments and acts of violence." (Shamgar Committee Report, p.

246) In light of this security perspective, the IDF formed a plan that seeks to regulate the stated protection zones whilst guarding the fabric of Palestinian life in this zone. In the framework of this plan, a small number of areas were closed to Palestinian traffic, a number of roads were closed to vehicles, and trade was forbidden in certain sectors.

It is important to point out that these restrictions were put in place only when there existed alternative roads and in areas where the majority of residents are Israelis.

In the framework of this plan, the military commander invested and continues to invest a large amount of resources, costing millions of NIS, in order to carry out complicated infrastructure operations which allow and will continue to allow the opening of many stores whilst taking a calculated security risk.

Since 2003, the implementation of the stated plan allowed the military commander to open more than 330 stores which had been closed since the year 2000. In addition, 80 additional stores (which are located in proximity to the Jewish neighbourhoods in the H-2 zone) will be opened in the coming months.

However, only about 280 stores will remain closed, according to the Military Commander order.

Furthermore, despite the restrictions on movement mentioned above, the Military Commander allows, with coordination in advance, the movement of Palestinian vehicles that are essential to preserving the fabric of Palestinian life, on the stated roads. Within this framework, the passage of ambulances, garbage vehicles, goods vehicles and others on the defined roads are also coordinated in a routine manner.

We further point out this plan of the Military Commander is pending in the Supreme Court, HCJ 11235/04 The Municipality of Hebron v. the Military Commander. In the state's response to the petition, the Military Commander explained the reasons that led to the imposition of the restrictions in relation to each and every restricted zone in Hebron. In the framework of the petition the petitioners were asked to suggest reasonable alternatives to the plan of the Military Commander which will provide security to the Israelis living in Hebron on the one hand and an improvement in the lives of the Palestinians on the other. To date, an alternative is yet to be presented which provides, in a reasonable and realistic manner, the military requirements mentioned above.

Regarding the section dealing with Shuhada Street that was extensively covered in the report, it is important to emphasize that the street in question is the central road in the Jewish neighbourhood in Hebron that connects all the Jewish areas of the city. This road is the only access road, by foot and by vehicle to "Bet Romano", "Bet Hadassah" and "Tel Romeida" in which there are large number of Israeli residents. Hundreds of Israelis pass through this road everyday. At the Cave of the Patriarchs and on the 93

p g y y Sabbath and Holidays and on the "exceptional days" On the Cave of the Patriarchs, thousands of Israelis use this road.

In the framework of the operational plan, the road was defined by the Military Commander as a road on which Palestinian pedestrian traffic is allowed after a security check. In actuality, until today the road was not opened.

Currently, after evaluating the new situation and the examination of the threat that is visible as a result of the passing of Palestinians in the street, whether to Israelis dwelling on that road or whether to Palestinian pedestrians, and because of the fact that, according to the Military Commander, this street is not critical to the fabric of a normal life of the Palestinian population in the area, the Military Commander requested to re-examine his stated position and to prevent pedestrian traffic on the road (except for families actually living on the road who need to use it everyday), from Gross Square until the Bet Hadassah area. This position of the Military Commander will in the near future be presented for the approval of the Minister of defence and for the examination of the Ministry of Justice.

To summarise, the position of the IDF is that that the restrictions on movement and commerce in the city of Hebron are the "minimum necessary" that are required by the IDF to provide protection to its soldiers and to the Jewish residents of Hebron.

Moreover, in the framework of these restrictions, the military commander decided to take significant calculated risks. Therefore, regarding this situation, we are of the opinion that the claims of the document's authors regarding the external considerations of the military commander are baseless.

Failure to enforce the law on Israelis in Hebron The authors of the report claim that IDF forces do nothing to enforce the law on Israelis in Hebron.

There is no disagreement that regarding respect for the law, the current situation is not the best or optimal. Nevertheless, IDF forces are continually working to improve this situation.

In the last few years, IDF forces carried out many preventative and police actions in order to prevent Israelis breaking the law in their attitudes towards Palestinians and to capture those who are involved in breaking these laws.

Thusly, there was an order given to all soldiers serving in Hebron that whenever a felony is committed against a Palestinian or his or her property, the soldiers have to intervene immediately in order to prevent the crime and to detain the suspects and to transfer them to the Israeli police. Similarly, IDF soldiers are instructed that it is their obligation to report to the Israeli police every criminal incident in the treatment of Palestinians and they are also obligated to assist the Israeli police in every way necessary to implement the law, including giving testimony in court against the suspects. These rules are relayed to IDF soldiers serving in Hebron both in a 94

p y g continuing manner while serving in the city and in the training before they begin their service in this area.

Additionally, the Military Commander allocated Border Police forces to patrol Hebron, whose central purpose is to enforce the law on Israelis. To these forces were recently added two policemen of the Border Police stationed, on a regular basis, to the region of Tel Romeida.

Similarly, the military commander carried out a number of important operations in order to establish a fixed military presence in places where riots are likely to break out.

Furthermore, and in order to deal with minors who break the law in Judea and Samaria, the military commander of the IDF forces in Judea and Samaria passed the law relating to minors that enforces the law on minors on Israelis that reside in Judea and Samaria and provides authority to social-workers to deal with these minors.

It is clear from these actions that the Military Commander is working to reduce the amount of law-breaking in the city of Hebron by Israelis.

Conclusion The reality with which the military commander has to deal with is very sensitive, intricate and complicated, within which many opposing interests of different population groups are intertwined. Unfortunately, the report does not reflect this complex situation.

In the daily reality in Hebron, the Military Commander is obligated to protect the lives and security of the residents in the area under his command, Israelis and Palestinians alike. It is his obligation to defend against terrorist actions, to prevent terrorists achieving their goals and at the same time to ensure the continuance of normal every-day life and the rights of the population not involved in the conflict.

This reality, which rests on the shoulders of the IDF, is an extremely difficult task that requires balance, risk-taking, and coping with a changing and dynamic reality. It is a responsibility that is tested every hour of every day.

In this complex reality, the military commander is required and in fact obligated to act according to the challenges mentioned above and for security reasons alone. The steps taken by the security forces are neither arbitrary nor taken as a matter of choice, but according to the demands of the situation and the specific circumstances. Their one purpose is the defence of human life. Only with this basic understanding is it possible to understand the reality in the city of Hebron.

95

Response of the Israel Police Force*

In follow-up to receipt of the report for our review, the SHAI District’s response to its main points is as follows: A. The State of Israel, through SHAI District, the Hebron sector in this case, is entrusted with enforcing law and order throughout Judea and Samaria, including the area of the Jewish community in Hebron and in the Israeli community situated in this sector.

B. The State of Israel expends great effort to effectively enforce the law and order there. It does this by various means – an intelligence apparatus, detective work, a youth division and other forces operating in the field. In addition, units of teams investigating Israeli public disturbances have the specific responsibility for handling these matters.

C. In the period discussed in the report, there was a clear drop in public disturbances and in the commission of offenses in general. This decline was, in part, a direct result of the Police Department’s firm enforcement of law and order. Periodically, depending on the situation and anticipation of developments, the number of police officers was increased in the Hebron area, and in many cases forces from elsewhere in Israel were dispatched to the Hebron area.

D. Regarding the contents of the letter of Commander Ali Zamir (as his rank was at the time) [see p. 49, the text accompanying footnote 91] there are indeed many problems in opening an investigation when the complainant does not tell his version of the incident, but gives that of third parties. In such a case, it is impossible to verify the complaint by questioning the potential suspect, a line-up – either of persons or photos – cannot be conducted, previous ties between the complainant and the suspect cannot be investigated, and so forth. Therefore, not a few files that lack a complainant or a material lead in the investigation file are closed because the offender is unknown or due to lack of evidence.

We should point out that, in any event, the Police does not have a policy to refrain from opening an investigation if a complaint is not filed.

E. Regarding the claim that there are cases in which police officers are present at incidents and see what occurs yet an investigation is not initiated. We know of no such cases. The policy is to open an investigation in such instances.

F. Regarding the claim that 90 percent of the investigation files were closed in 2006, 344 Israeli disturbance-of-the-peace cases were opened in the Hebron sector. Of these, 67 percent of the files have been resolved. A breakdown of the results of handling of the files is as follows: 63 were closed for lack of evidence, 35 were closed due to lack of public interest (a decision reached together with the Jerusalem District Attorney’s Office), 14 were closed on grounds of lack of guilt, 16 files involved minors who are not subject to criminal punishment, and 95 were closed because of suspect unknown. It should be noted that 81 indictments were filed in court. These figures refute the claim made in the report.

G. As for the claims regarding police violence, abuse, and degrading treatment of the local population, complaints of this kind come within the responsibility of the Department for the Investigation of Police. We know of no such cases that have not been investigated. * Translated by B’Tselem 97

Response of the Ministry of Justice

State of Israel Ministry of Justice The Human Rights and Foreign Relations Department

The following is a translation of the Hebrew version, In case of divergence of interpretation, the Hebrew text shall prevail.

Date: 25 Iyar, 5767 May 13, 2007 Ref: 2766

Mr. Yehezkel Lein Head of Research Department, B'tselem 8 HaTa'asiya St., Jerusalem 91531 Dear Sir,

Re: Reference to "B'tselem" and the "Association for Civil Rights in Israel" Draft Report on Hebron The above-mentioned report deals with many issues relating to various bodies, mostly the security forces. The following is the response of the Ministry of Justice regarding the Department for Investigations of Police Officers -DIPO, that is under its authority.

The Investigations of the Department for Investigations of Police Officers (DIPO) – General Contrary to what is claimed in the report, acts of violence, abuse and humiliation by security forces towards Palestinian residents, are regarded with great severity that is manifested in proper enforcement and punishments, as presented before.

This meticulous and persistent treatment is meant to, among other things, create deterrence among the security forces and raise the bar, to make sure that the Human

99

The Human Rights and Foreign Relations Department

Rights of the local population in the Judea and Samaria areas on the whole, and in Hebron in particular, are maintained.

The complaints raised in the report were raised in "Btselem" previous reports, and the following are our main references.

1.

Complaints received in the DIPO against police officers are inspected by an attorney from the department, whose role is to decide whether to open a criminal investigation in light of the factual basis or to abandon the complaint, based on the grounds set in the law. Following the decision to open criminal investigation, the case is transferred to the relevant investigation team. Subsequent to the gathering of evidence by the Department's investigators, the case is relayed to the consideration of an attorney that recommends to the head of the DIPO whether to close the file or to file criminal/administrative indictment, due to the offences attributed to the police officers. As stated in the report, indeed some of the DIPO cases are closed after the conclusion of an investigation, due to lack of evidence, since insufficient evidence were gathered to prove the acts attributed to the police officers, in the level of certainty required for a criminal trial. Nevertheless, in many cases, where sufficient evidence exists to file a criminal indictment, criminal indictments are filed due to police officers' behavior, among others, in cases concerning police officers' violence towards Palestinian residents. It should be emphasized that DIPO investigators do everything in their power to exhaust the investigation in the case and gather sufficient evidence, to inquire as to the truth.

2.

Contrary to what is claimed in the report, in some cases the investigation resumes despite lack of cooperation on the part of the complainant. This in cases where beyond the complainant version, there are additional evidence supporting its version. Yet in cases where, there are no additional evidence supporting the complainant version, there is no other course of action but to close the case and not to proceed with the investigation. This decision is based on the fact that in cases lacking additional support to the complainant version and the complainant is not interested in cooperating; it will be impossible, even following a strenuous investigation, to file a criminal/disciplinary indictment against the officers involved and prove their guilt in the level of certainty required for a criminal trial.

100

The Human Rights and Foreign Relations Department

3.

The DIPO indicts, even when the complainant's version is in contradiction to the police officer's version, in cases where the complainants' version is supported by additional evidence. Also, indictments are filed in cases lacking evidentiary reinforcement beyond the complainant version, when truth signals can be found in the complainant version attesting to his credibility. It should be noted that in 2006, many criminal/disciplinary indictments were filed against police officers, despite the fact that the police officers denied the allegations attributed to them.

Specific Cases mentioned in the Draft Report In the report, 3 cases of Police violence are mentioned, and the following is the DIPO's stance in their matter: 1. The case dated September 6, 2006 is currently under investigation by the DIPO that has not yet been concluded.

2. A complaint regarding the case dated August 24, 2005 was not located in DIPO, if a complaint will be filed, it will be handled with full gravity.

3. The case dated May 9, 2006 was investigated in DIPO and it was decided to close the case due to lack of sufficient evidence. This decision was appealed and the case is currently in the Appeals Department in the State Attorney's Office, awaiting their decision on the appeal,

Sincerely yours, Boaz Oren, Esq. Department Director

Cc: Mr. Herzel Sheviro – Head of the Department for Investigations of Police Officers Ms. Hila Tene - here

101

Kiryat Arba

102

Bab a-Zawiya

Sh

Abu Sneineh

Muslim Cemetery

Tel Rumeida

a-

al-Shalala Compound

uh

Haret a-Sheikh

Beit Hadassah

Closed shops Travel forbidden Shops closed and travel forbidden Completely closed (pedestrians, cars, shops) Area closed to travel Settlement

Jewish Cemetery

Hebron

ad a St re et

The Casbah

Qeitun

Avraham Avinu

Beit Romano

Haret a-Sharif

a-Sahla

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

Bab al-Khan

Khallet Hadur

Givat Ha'avot

Haret a-Salayme

New Settlement Point

Wadi al-Hussein

Qiryat Arba

Maps

Map of Hebron City Center

103

‫האזור שנסקר‬ ‫התנחלות‬

Jewish Cemetery

Bab a-Zawiya

Abu Sneineh

ee t

Qeitun

Avraham Avinu

The Casbah

Haret a-Sharif

Beit Romano

aSh uh ad a St Muslim Cemetery r

Tel Rumeida

Beit Hadassah

al-Shalala Compound

Haret a-Sheikh

H1

H2

a-Sahla

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

Bab al-Khan

Khallet Hadur

Givat Ha'avot

Haret a-Salayme

New Settlement Point

Wadi al-Hussein

Qiryat Arba

Map of the surveyed area170

170. The surveyed area is enclosed by a yellow line. The survey also included Wadi al-Ghrous and ‘Ein Bani Salim, which lie north of the area on the map, near which the Givat Haharsina settlement was established.

104

Jewish Cemetery

1997

Jewish Cemetery

1994

a-

Sh

a-

Muslim Cemetery

Tel Rumeida

Beit Hadassah

al-Shalala Compound

oh a St re et

a

et

re

St

The Casbah Avraham Avinu

Beit Romano

ad

The Casbah Avraham Avinu

Beit Romano

ad

oh

Sh

Muslim Cemetery

Tel Rumeida

Beit Hadassah

al-Shalala Compound

a-Sahla

Bab al-Khan

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

a-Sahla

Bab al-Khan

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

Haret a-Salayme

Haret a-Salayme

Wadi al-Hussein

Wadi al-Hussein

Restrictions on movement of Palestinians and opening of businesses in the City Center over the years

105

Area closed to travel Settlement

Closed shops Travel forbidden Shops closed and travel forbidden Completely closed (pedestrians, cars, shops)

Jewish Cemetery

2000-1

Jewish Cemetery

1998

a-

Sh

a-

Muslim Cemetery

Tel Rumeida

Beit Hadassah

al-Shalala Compound

oh a St re et

a

St re

et

The Casbah Avraham Avinu

Beit Romano

ad

The Casbah Avraham Avinu

Beit Romano

ad

uh

Sh

Muslim Cemetery

Tel Rumeida

Beit Hadassah

al-Shalala Compound

a-Sahla

Bab al-Khan

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

a-Sahla

Bab al-Khan

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

Haret a-Salayme

Haret a-Salayme

Wadi al-Hussein

Wadi al-Hussein

106

Jewish Cemetery

2003

Jewish Cemetery

2002

a-

Sh

aMuslim Cemetery

Tel Rumeida

Beit Hadassah

al-Shalala Compound

uh a St re et

a

et

re

St

The Casbah Avraham Avinu

Beit Romano

ad

The Casbah Avraham Avinu

Beit Romano

ad

uh

Sh

Muslim Cemetery

Tel Rumeida

Beit Hadassah

al-Shalala Compound

a-Sahla

Bab al-Khan

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

a-Sahla

Bab al-Khan

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

Haret a-Salayme

Haret a-Salayme

Wadi al-Hussein

Wadi al-Hussein

107

Area closed to travel Settlement

Closed shops Travel forbidden Shops closed and travel forbidden Completely closed (pedestrians, cars, shops)

Jewish Cemetery

2007

Jewish Cemetery

2004

a-

aSh

Muslim Cemetery

Tel Rumeida

Beit Hadassah

al-Shalala Compound

a St re et

a St

re

et

The Casbah Avraham Avinu

Beit Romano

ad

The Casbah Avraham Avinu

Beit Romano

ad

uh

uh

Sh

Muslim Cemetery

Tel Rumeida

Beit Hadassah

al-Shalala Compound

a-Sahla

Bab al-Khan

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

a-Sahla

Bab al-Khan

Tomb of the Patriarchs

Haret a-Jaabri

Haret a-Salayme

Haret a-Salayme

Wadi al-Hussein

Wadi al-Hussein

To protect and encourage the Israeli settlement in Hebron, Israel applies a “principle of separation” – the segregation, both physically and by law, of Palestinians and settlers in the city. This discriminatory policy results in protracted and severe harm to Palestinians living and working in the center of the city, and results in some of the gravest human rights violations committed by Israel.

Palestinians in the City Center are subjected to severe restrictions on movement and repeated attacks by settlers. They also suffer arbitrary treatment by commanders and soldiers in house searches, detention and delays, and harassment, as well as violence at the hands of police officers and soldiers.

Over the years, Israel’s policy in Hebron has led to the expulsion of thousands of Palestinian residents and merchants from the City Center, who were left with no option but to get up and leave. This expulsion, the greatest in magnitude since Israel occupied the West Bank in 1967, constitutes a grave breach of international humanitarian law.

GHOST TOWN B’TSELEM - The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories 8 Hata’asiya St., Talpiot P.O. Box 53132 Jerusalem 91531 Tel. (972) 2-6735599 Fax. (972) 2-6749111 www.btselem.org • mail@btselem.org

Israel’s Separation Policy and Forced Eviction of Palestinians from the Center of Hebron Association for Civil Rights in Israel P.O. Box 34510, Jerusalem 91000 Tel. (972) 2-6521218, 1-700-700-960 Fax. (972) 2-6521219 www.acri.org.il • mail@acri.org.il

May 2007

Demilitarization for Deep Decarbonization: Reducing Militarism and Military Expenditures to Invest in the UN Green Climate Fund and to Create Low-Carbon Economies and Resilient Communities Tamara Lorincz DRAFT WORKING PAPER

September 2014

General Inquiries: mailbox@ipb.org

International Peace Bureau 41 rue de Zurich 1201 Geneva Switzerland Tel : +41 22 731 64 29 Disclaimer: This is a draft working paper containing preliminary research, analysis, and recommendations. It is prepared in order to stimulate discussion and critical feedback on the nexus of climate change, militarism and peace. It will be published in a final form in a few weeks, and the content may be revised.

Dedication: To Seymour Melman (December 30, 1917 – December 16, 2004), Professor Emeritus of industrial engineering at Columbia University (NY) who, for fifty years, advocated for disarmament, economic conversion and a peace economy.

Table of Contents List of Figures and Tables................................................................................................................................. 4 List of Acronyms............................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................... 6 1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................................ 9 2.0 Climate Change and the Need for Deep Decarbonization........................................................................ 12 2.1 Latest Assessments on Climate Change

12

2.2 The Carbon Budget 2050: We Cannot Waste it on Military Consumption

15

2.3 Emerging Issues from the United Nations Environment Programme

15

2.4 Upcoming United Nations Climate Summit and Conferences of the Parties 16 2.5 United Nations Decade of Sustainable Energy for All 2014-2024

17

2.6 Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project 17 3.0 Impacts by the Military on the Environment and Climate Change........................................................... 18 3.1 Environmental Impacts of Militarism 3.2 Fossil Fuel Use by the Military

18

20

3.3 Military Exemptions and the Kyoto Protocol

22

3.4 Measuring and Making Sense of Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Military

23

4.0 Financing to Protect the Climate or Prepare for War?............................................................................. 25 4.1 Costs of Climate Mitigation and Adaptation and the Costs of Inaction

26

4.2 Climate Financing27 4.3 The Green Climate Fund 27 4.4 The Problem of Global Military Spending and the Prioritization of Warfighting

28

5.0 Linking Environment, Peace, Militarism and the Climate Crisis............................................................... 33 5.1 Peace, Development and Environmental Protection are Interdependent and Indivisible

33

5.2 The Earth Charter, 2000 34 5.3 People’s Agreement on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, 2010 5.4 Militarism/War: Elephant in the Living Room Resolution, 2010 5.4 Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming Appeal, 2014

35

35

36

6.0 Peace and Disarmament Pathways for Deep Decarbonization.................................................................36 6.1 Disarm and Demilitarize for Climate Justice and Sustainable Development 37 6.2 Reduce and Re-Direct Military Spending to Climate Finance and Research, Development, Demonstration and Deployment (RDD&D) 38 6.3 Mitigate and Adapt, Stop the Industrialization and Militarization of the Arctic

39

6.4 Convert Defence Industries to Civilian and Create Green Jobs in Low-Carbon Economies 6.5 Abolish Nuclear Weapons and Phase Out Nuclear Energy 41 2

40

6.6 Integrate Cooperation, Peacebuilding and Nonviolence for Climate-Resilient Communities 42 7.0 Uniting the Movements to Amplify the Message.....................................................................................44 7.1 Join the Global Day of Action and Campaign on Military Spending 44 7.2 Reject Weapons Manufacturers’ Greenwash and the Military’s Green Warfighting 45 8.0 Recommendations.................................................................................................................................... 46 9.0 Conclusion................................................................................................................................................ 47 Annex 1: IPB’s Letter to the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project, 2014................................................. 49 Annex 2: The Earth Charter, 2000.................................................................................................................. 52 Annex 3: Excerpts of The People’s Agreement on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, 2010...57 Annex 4: Militarism/War: Elephant in the Room Resolution, 2010............................................................... 62 Annex 5: Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming Appeal, 2014.............................................................................64 References...................................................................................................................................................... 67 Relevant IPB Publications

67

Books and Publications

67

Newspaper Articles and News Sites Web Sites

75

77

About the International Peace Bureau........................................................................................................... 79 About the Author........................................................................................................................................... 79

3

List of Figures and Tables Figure 1: IPCC, Global Mean Temperatures from 1850-2012 Figure 2: SIPRI, World military expenditures from 1988-2013 Figure 3: IPCC, Working Group III, Figure 4(1) from Climate Change 2014, Mitigation of Climate Change Figure 4: SIPRI, Share of the world military expenditures of the 15 states with the highest spending, 2013 Figure 5: Public Accounts, National Defence Spending v. Environment Canada from 1997-2013.

Table 1: U.S. Military Oil Consumption and Estimated CO2 emissions, 2012 Table 2: Military Spending by Top 16 Countries, Share of Arms Exports and CO2 per capita, 2013 Table 3: List of Countries Possessing Nuclear Weapons, Number of Weapons & Expenditures, 2010

4

List of Acronyms AR5 CO 2 CO 2-eq COP DELC DDP DDPP DoD ENVSEC GDAMS GCF GEI GEF Gt IDDRI IEA IPCC IPB IPS MDG NAPA NATO OECD ODA RCP SDSN UN UNCLOS UNEP UNESCO UNFCCC UNGA UNODA UNSG R&D RDD&D SE4ALL SIPRI WG1 WG2 WG3 WMO

Fifth Assessment Report Carbon Dioxide Carbon Dioxide equivalent Conference of the Parties UNEP’s Division of Environmental Law & Conventions Deep Decarbonization Pathway Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project U.S. Department of Defense (or DOD) Environment and Security Initiative Global Day of Action on Military Spending Green Climate Fund Green Economy Initiative Global Environment Facility Gigatonne Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations International Energy Agency Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change International Peace Bureau Institute for Policy Studies Millennium Development Goal(s) National Adaptation Programmes of Action North Atlantic Treaty Organization Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Official Development Assistance Representative Concentration Pathways Sustainable Development Solutions Network United Nations United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas United Nations Environment Programme United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change United Nations General Assembly Office for Disarmament Affairs United Nations Secretary General Research and Development Research, Development, Demonstration and Deployment UN Decade of Sustainable Energy for All Stockholm International Peace Research Institute IPCC Working Group I IPCC Working Group II IPCC Working Group III World Meteorological Organization 5

Executive Summary We are on a path toward dangerous climate change without a radical restructuring of our economy and energy systems. That is the stark scenario presented in the latest working group reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Over the past decade, almost ten gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent has been released into the atmosphere. In 2000, anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG) were estimated at 40 GtCO2-eq and by 2010 they rose to 49 GtCO2-eq, which is a 25% increase over the period.1 Carbon dioxide is produced from the burning of fossil fuels for industry, transportation and buildings and is directly linked to the rise in global mean surface temperature. Since the pre-industrial age, the temperature has increased 0.8°C. Last year for the first time, CO 2 was recorded at over 400 parts per million in volume in the atmosphere. In its latest statement on the status of the global climate, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) explained that thirteen of the fourteen warmest years have all occurred in the 21st century since recordkeeping began in 1850. The WMO also observed that natural disasters have increased fivefold since the 1970s, with more frequent and intense heat waves, droughts, hurricanes and flooding. The WMO added, “Each of the past three decades has been warmer than the last, culminating with 2001-2010 as the warmest decade on record.”2 Not only have carbon emissions increased for the past ten years, so too have military expenditures to a record high. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimated that global military spending was $839 billion in 2001 and rose to $1.6 trillion in 2011 – a 92% increase.3 The United States and its allies have spent trillions of dollars financing their deadly and destructive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These wars have had terrible social, economic and environmental costs and have made global warming much worse. Expensive weapons systems such as fighter jets, destroyers, and tanks are extremely energy inefficient and emit highly toxic, carbon-intense emissions. Oil Change International estimated that the U.S. military emitted 100 million metric tonnes of CO2 in fuelling its war in Iraq in five years.4 The U.S. Department of Defense is the largest industrial consumer of fossil fuels in the world.5 It is also the top arms exporter and military spender at $640 billion, which accounts for 37% of the total. Other western countries that are top military spenders like the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada, have high carbon emissions per capita.

Military expenditures are depriving the international community of the funds desperately needed to mitigate and adapt to the climate crisis. Over the past two decades, the developed countries have provided a paltry $12.5 billion for the Global Environmental Facility, one of the first funding mechanisms under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate (UNFCCC). In ten years, the Adaptation Fund has only disbursed $150 million to help developing countries, which are the most vulnerable and least responsible for climate change. In 2009 at the UNFCCC 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) in Copenhagen, developed countries made a commitment to raise $100 billion annually by 2020 for the Green Climate Fund to finance the national adaptation plans for developing countries. This is less than 1% of global annual military expenditures. Yet, wealthy, industrialized countries have failed to make adequate pledges to pay their climate debt.

At COP15, the developed countries also committed to limit the increase of the global mean temperature to less than 2°C to prevent unabated, catastrophic climate change. Despite the Copenhagen accord, 1

IPCC (2013) Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.[Online] Available at: http://www.climate2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf 2 World Meteorological Organization (2014) WMO statement on the status of the global climate in 2013 , [Online] Available at: http://library.wmo.int/opac/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=15957#.VAC9GvRDvuF 3 See the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks from 1994-2013 here: http://www.sipri.org/ 4 Oil Change International (2008) A Climate of War: Behind the Numbers . Advance Edition report, [Online] Available at: http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2008/03/A%20Climate%20of%20War%20FINAL%20(March %2017%202008).pdf 5 Schwartz, M. et al. (2012) Department of Defense Energy Initiatives: Background and Issues for Congress .

Congressional Research Service, [Online] Available at: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42558.pdf

6

greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise. Based on its latest observations and modelling, the IPCC determined that GHG emissions need to decrease to net zero by 2050 and that we must stay within a global carbon budget of approximately 825 GtCO 2, to keep the temperature increase within the 2°C limit. To limit greenhouse gas emissions and stay within a carbon budget, a rapid decarbonization of the energy system is required.

To help countries chart a path to low-carbon energy systems and economies, the UN launched the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project (DDPP). The DDPP recently released its interim report with assessments for fifteen countries accounting for 70% of the GHG emissions.6 The report shows the different pathways that countries can take to reach net zero emissions with a mixed renewable energy system. However, the IPCC and the DDPP failed to include the fuel consumption and carbon emissions for the military in their calculations and analysis. According to the UNFCCC reporting guidelines, most of the military sector’s fuel consumption and emissions are excluded from national greenhouse gas inventories. While the military’s domestic fuel use is reported, international marine and aviation bunker fuels used on naval vessels and fighter aircraft outside national borders are not included in a country’s fuel and GHG total. The exemption of the military sector in calculations and reporting is because of the intense lobbying by the United States during the Kyoto Protocol negotiations in the mid-1990s. Since then, the military’s carbon “bootprint” has been ignored. There is no mention of the military sector’s emissions in the fifth and latest IPCC assessment report. Without complete and transparent information about the emissions and impacts in the military sector, it will not be possible to develop and implement the mitigation and adaptation strategies needed to stabilize the climate. Though, the IPCC and DDPP have argued for decarbonization that supports sustainable development, they overlook one of the most carbon-intensive and environmentally-destructive sectors.

The problem of military expenditures and emissions must be confronted not only by the IPCC and the DDPP, but the entire international community. We need to answer some basic questions: Why is spending for the military prioritized over spending on the climate and the environment? How much of the global carbon budget, if any amount, should be allocated to the military? And should the limited supply of fossil fuels be burned to build new weapons, drop bigger bombs, and fight more wars? In our new report, Demilitarization for Deep Decarbonization, the International Peace Bureau argues that war must stop for global warming to slow down. Military expenditures must be reduced and re-directed for climate finance to create low carbon economies and climate-resilient communities. Disarmament must take place alongside mitigation and adaptation. The military is the problem, not the solution to the climate crisis.

This report provides an environmental perspective to the IPB’s dedicated work on disarmament for development. It also builds on the analysis in our previous publications including Warfare or Welfare?

Disarmament for Development in the 21st Century released in 2005 and Opportunity Costs: Military Spending and the UN’s Development Agenda published in 2012. The IPB argued that military spending should be decreased for human security and meeting the Millennium Development Goals.

In this report, we begin with the latest findings of the IPCC and the emerging environmental issues in the new yearbook of the UN Environment Programme. Part 2 reveals the many ways our fossil-fuel based economy is destabilizing the climate and degrading the natural environment. In Part 3, we examine some of the impacts on the environment and the climate by the military. In Part 4, we compare climate financing and military expenditures. We also look at how exemptions for the military were negotiated at the time of the Kyoto Protocol and how military emissions are measured. Part 5 presents steps taken by civil society to raise awareness about the impacts of the military on the environment and climate and their calls for a reduction of military expenditures including The Earth Charter in 2000, the People’s Agreement on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth in 2010 and the new Peace Appeal: Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming launched this year. In Part 6, we propose six peace and disarmament pathways to decarbonize the planet and achieve sustainable development.

6

Sustainable Development Solutions Network and Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (2014) Pathways to Deep Decarbonization Interim 2014 Report , [Online] Available at: http://unsdsn.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/07/DDPP_interim_2014_report.pdf

7

1. Disarm and demilitarize for climate justice and sustainable development.

In 2004, a UN Group of Governmental Experts released a report, The Relationship between Disarmament and Development in the Current International Context, and advocated for the mainstreaming of the disarmament-development relationship. Thus, an integrated parallel process of disarmament and demilitarization must be pursued alongside climate mitigation and adaptation and the post-2015 development agenda.

2. Reduce and re-direct military spending to climate finance and research, development, demonstration and deployment (RDD&D). The International Energy Agency (IEA) calculated that the total additional investment needs for mitigation for the period 2010-2050 are US $45 trillion. The IEA also estimated that funding for climate RDD&D requires a two to five fold increase to $40-90 billion annually. Combined, this is approximately $1 trillion a year for mitigation and research for the next forty years and roughly equivalent to annual military expenditures.

3. Mitigate and adapt to prevent the drastic impacts of climate change in the Arctic, stop its industrialization and militarization. Countries, such as Russia, the United States, and Canada have plans for increased natural resource development and shipping in the Arctic. These countries are also modernizing their navies for the Arctic environment. Yet to protect this fragile ecosystem and stay within the carbon budget, oil and gas should stay under the ice. The region should be demilitarized, declared a nuclearweapons free zone and a zone of peace.

4. Convert defence industries into civilian, green industries to create a low-carbon economy. The UN Group of Governmental Experts’ 2004 report, recommended that conversion should be encouraged for disarmament and development. To tackle the climate crisis, a conversion plan would help lay the foundation for building a green economy. A University of Massachusetts report found that more jobs could be created with $1 billion in government expenditures in health care, education, and construction than in the military.

5. Abolish nuclear weapons and avoid nuclear energy. Due to the inherent link with nuclear weapons, nuclear power as a pathway to a low-carbon future should be avoided by the DDPP. Nuclear power risks cost-overruns and accidents. In its report, Nuclear Weapons Cost Study, Global Zero estimated that world spending to date on nuclear weapons exceeded one trillion dollars per decade and predicted that another trillion dollars will be spent over the next decade as countries modernize their arsenals.

6. Integrate cooperation, peacebuilding and nonviolence for climate-resilient communities. Cooperation is necessary to stay within the carbon budget in an equitable and just way. The UNFCCC has established the cooperative architecture of diplomacy and the rule of law to peacefully resolve climate conflict. At the local level, peacebuilding and nonviolent conflict resolution help to ensure climate resiliency in communities.

Climate change must not be securitized as a threat multiplier that requires a robust military response.

We conclude our report by urging civil society to join our global day of action and campaign on military spending and to challenge the greenwash by weapons manufacturers and green warfighting by the military.

We also offer several specific steps that UN agencies, international organizations and national governments can take to untangle this Gordian knot of militarism and the climate crisis. This year is the UN Year for Climate Action and the start of the UN Decade of Sustainable Energy for All to 2024. Next year, the 21st COP will be held in Paris, France and it is the crucial meeting to decide a new, legally binding mitigation agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol and to finance the GCF. There must be a groundswell of concerned citizens and international civil society to demand a reduction of militarism and military emissions and expenditures to stabilize the climate and ensure sustainable development. In their article, Paying for the Climate Change Pivot, authors Emily Schwartz Greco and John Feffer wrote, “Unless every nation ramps down military spending, we'll all lose the next big war over the fate of the Earth without even firing a shot.”7 7

Schwartz Greco, E. and Feffer, J. (2014) “Paying for the Climate Pivot,” Truthout, [Online] Available at: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/23322-paying-for-the-climate-change-pivot

8

1.0 Introduction Over the past decade, greenhouse gas emissions have increased to the highest level in human history, so too has military spending. For the first time in human history, carbon dioxide (CO2), the main heat trapping gas, was recorded over 400 parts per million in volume (ppmv) in the atmosphere last year.8 The global mean surface temperature of the earth is now at the highest since recordkeeping began in 1850 as shown in Figure 1.9 Last year, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimated that global military spending is now over $1.7 trillion dollars.10 Figure 2 shows the rise of military spending over the last two decades. The rise of carbon emissions and military expenditures reflects an undeniable connection between war and global warming. Militaries consume a tremendous amount of oil to fuel inefficient, expensive bombers, combat vessels and armoured vehicles for training and warfighting. The United States Department of Defense (DoD) is the largest institutional consumer of petroleum products in the world and just led coalition forces in two of its longest wars in Iraq and Afghanistan this past decade. The carbon emissions from those wars are excluded in national inventory reports required by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. There is no mention of CO2 emissions by the military in the fifth and latest IPCC assessment report. Excessive military expenditures are ignored as a source of funding for climate mitigation and adaption and of capitalization of the United Nations (UN) Green Climate Fund (GCF).

The UN Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project that was established to find ways countries could reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to net zero by 2050 and stay within the 2°C limit did not study the fuel use of the military sector.

In this report, the International Peace Bureau (IPB) argues that without the demilitarization of the economy, deep decarbonization cannot be achieved. Without reducing and redirecting military spending to climate financing, the UN Green Climate Fund will not be adequately capitalized. Without peace and disarmament, sustainable development cannot be realized. Our report begins by presenting some of the most significant findings from the IPCC and the emerging environmental issues from the UN Environment Programme. We discuss the UN Year for Climate Action, the new UN Decade of Sustainable Energy for All to 2024 and the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) under the UN Framework for Convention of Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Paris, France next year. COP21 is the crucial meeting to decide a new mitigation agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol and to raise $100 billion for the GCF. Then, we explore some of the impacts of the military on the climate and the environment. We also describe the problem of military expenditures and the costs of climate action and inaction. Next, we share some significant steps taken by civil society to raise awareness about links between militarism and climate change, such as the People’s Agreement on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth in 2010 and the new Peace Appeal: Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming launched this year. Militarism can be understood as the complex social, cultural and discursive phenomenon responsible for directing people’s and organizations’ responses towards violent pathways, particularly by the military, as explained by Marty Branagan in his new book Global Warming, Militarism and Nonviolence: The Art of Active Resistance.11 We propose six peace and disarmament pathways for deep decarbonisation: from demilitarization to conversion of defence industries, to the abolition of nuclear weapons. Next, we encourage civil society to join our global campaign on military spending and to challenge the greenwash by weapons manufacturers and green warfighting by the military.

We conclude with several specific recommendations to UN agencies, international organizations and national governments to confront these challenges. Demilitarization for Deep Decarbonization provides an environmental perspective to the IPB’s work on Development for Disarmament. This new report also builds on the previous publications of the IPB including Warfare or Welfare? Disarmament for Development in the 21st Century released in 2005 and Opportunity Costs: Military Spending and the UN’s Development Agenda 8

See “Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide” from the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, Earth System Research Laboratory, Global Monitoring Division here: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/weekly.html 9 Ibid.

10 Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2013) SIPRI Yearbook 2013: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security. London: Oxford University Press, 2013.

11 Branagan, M. (2013) Global Warming, Militarism and Nonviolent: The Art of Active Resistance . New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

9

published in 2012.12 In these reports, the IPB argued that military spending should be decreased to achieve human security and meet the Millennium Development Goals. With the urgency and severity of climate change, we appeal to national governments to shift their budgets and priorities from planning warfare to protecting the planet.

Figure 1: IPCC, Global Mean Temperatures from 1850-2012

Source: IPCC (2013) Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.

Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA [Online] Available at: http://www.climate2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf

12

See “Resources� on the International Peace Bureau web site here: www.ipb.org

10

Figure 2: SIPRI, World military expenditures from 1988-2013

Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2013) SIPRI Yearbook 2013: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security. London: Oxford University Press, 2013.

11

2.0 Climate Change and the Need for Deep Decarbonization 2.1 Latest Assessments on Climate Change The most recent observations and findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are bleak. The IPCC was established by the World Meteoroligcal Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in 1988 and is the agency that provides the scientific, technical and socioeconomic research for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The IPCC is finalizing its Fifth Assessment Report (AR5). AR5 is being released in four parts between September 2013 and November 2014. It is the most comprehensive assessment of scientific knowledge on climate change since 2007 when the Fourth Assessment Report was released. The findings of these reports are rated on a confidence scale from very low to very high. Over the past two decades, the research and modelling have improved the confidence rating and the analysis. The latest findings announced from the AR5 are intended to provide the scientific information to policy-makers to take action on the climate crisis.

The first volume of AR5, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, was prepared by almost 900 scientists and experts of Working Group I (WG1) and published last year. Some of the serious observations from this volume are:        

 

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal and human influence on the climate system is clear The atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide have increased to levels unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years Carbon dioxide (CO 2) concentrations have increased by 40% since pre-industrial times, primarily from fossil fuel emissions and secondarily from net land use change emissions CO 2 is the most abundant greenhouse gas and is the product of burning fossil fuels The burning of fossil fuels comes from human activities like energy use, transportation, cement production, waste management, and buildings Ocean warming dominates the increase in energy stored in the climate system, accounting for more than 90% of the energy accumulated between 1971 and 2010 The ocean has absorbed about 30% of the emitted anthropogenic carbon dioxide, causing ocean acidification Over the last two decades, the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have been losing mass, glaciers have continued to shrink almost worldwide, and Arctic sea ice and Northern Hemisphere spring snow cover have continued to decrease, matching the extent of the rise in sea levels, and the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations Over the period 1901 to 2010, global mean sea level rose by 0.19 m Stabilizing the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases at below 450 parts per million (ppm) of carbon-dioxide equivalent (CO 2-eq) is consistent with a near 50% chance of achieving the 2°C target and that this would help avoid the worst impacts of climate change13

With this physical science knowledge, WG1 declared, “Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.”14 Earlier this year, Working Group II (WG2) released its report Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. WG2 explained that as a result of climate change there will be more frequent, deadly and costly natural disasters, such as hurricanes, flooding, and heat waves. Moreover, WG2 warned that the 13

IPCC (2013) Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis . Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, [Online] Available at: http://www.climate2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf 14 Ibid.

12

greater magnitudes of global warming will “increase the likelihood of severe, pervasive, and irreversible impacts.” The following stark findings were made:        

Adaptation and mitigation choices in the near term will affect the risks of climate change throughout the 21st century In many regions, changing precipitation or melting snow and glacier ice are altering hydrological systems, affecting water resources in terms of quantity and quality Based on many studies covering a wide range of regions and crops, negative impacts of climate change on crop yields have been more common than positive impacts Impacts from recent climate-related extremes, such as heat waves, droughts, floods, cyclones, and wildfires, reveal significant vulnerability Climate-related hazards exacerbate other stressors, often with negative outcomes for livelihoods, especially for people living in poverty Violent conflict increases vulnerability to climate change Large-scale violent conflict harms assets that facilitate adaptation, including infrastructure, institutions, natural resources, social capital, and livelihood opportunities Climate change can indirectly increase risks of violent conflicts in the form of civil war and intergroup violence by amplifying well-documented drivers of these conflicts such as poverty and economic shocks15

To reduce vulnerabilities, WG2 recommended climate adaptation pathways for climate-resilient and sustainable development, such as national governments coordinating the development and implementation of adaptation strategies to reduce risk and vulnerabilities across all sectors of the economy.

Working Group III (WG3) has also released its report Climate Change 2014: Mitigation. Mitigation is a human intervention to reduce the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases. 16 WG3 discussed long-term mitigation measures for the sectors of energy supply, energy end use, agriculture, land use, human settlements and infrastructure. WG3 stressed, Without additional efforts to reduce GHG emissions beyond those in place today, emissions growth is expected to persist driven by growth in global population and economic activities.

Baseline scenarios, those without additional mitigation, result in global mean surface temperature increases in 2100 from 3.7o C to 4.8o C compared to pre-industrial levels.17 As stated earlier, the baseline trajectory is also referred to as Business-As-Usual (BAU) and it overshoots the 2oC limit and leads to dangerous climate change. The BAU is the trajectory we are currently on and is reflected in the range between Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) 6.0 and RCP 8.5 (See Figure 3). Figure 3 shows that on the RCP 6.0 and RCP 8.5 pathways there will be a continued increase in annual GHG emissions rising to 720 to 1000 parts per million volume (ppmv) of CO2-eq until 2100. From this increase in GHG emissions, the DDPP explains that the risk of a 4oC increase is potentially catastrophic and threatens all aspects of society and the economy including food production and human health. The safest pathway is RCP 2.6, the bottom line, which shows a deep and immediate reduction of GHG emissions until mid-century. To achieve RCP 2.6 (the most climate safe path) there needs to be an associated upscaling of low-carbon energy shown in the bottom part of Figure 3. WG3 also emphasized that any effective mitigation and adaption programs must be based on the principles of equity, justice and fairness. Let us pause here to ask: Is it equitable, just and fair for the military sector to consume fuel without scrutiny, emit carbon-intensive and highly toxic emissions without limit, divert financial resources needed for communities to cope, and to continue unchecked, taking us on a path toward catastrophic climate change?

15

IPCC (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability .

[Online] Available at: http://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/WG2AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf 16 IPCC (2014) Summary for Policymakers, In: Climate Change 2014, Mitigation of Climate Change . [Online] Available at:http://report.mitigation2014.org/spm/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers_approved.pdf 17 Ibid.

13

Figure 3: IPCC, Working Group III, Figure 4(1) from Climate Change 2014, Mitigation of Climate Change

Source: IPCC (2014) Summary for Policymakers, In: Climate Change 2014, Mitigation of Climate Change.

Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlรถmer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. [Online] Available at: http://report.mitigation2014.org/spm/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-forpolicymakers_approved.pdf

14

2.2 The Carbon Budget 2050: We Cannot Waste it on Military Consumption With the IPCC figures, a carbon budget can be estimated for 2050 that will keep us on a climate safe trajectory until 2100. The budget is based on CO 2, the largest single source of GHG emissions, at 78% of total emissions. The DDPP explains that the carbon budget is determined by the following numbers and parameters: 









 

Since the industrial age, global mean surface temperature has risen 0.8°C (1.4 °F) and the adverse implications of this warming are more serious than expected by the IPCC International consensus is to limit to less than 2°C the increase of global temperature to prevent dangerous, unabated climate change The level of cumulative CO2 emissions for the period of 2011-2100 should be within the range of 630-1180 gigatons of CO 2 (GtCO 2) The bulk of the emission reductions must take place within the next forty years between 2011-2050 because of impacts of accumulation and carbon or radiative forcing Global net emissions of GHG must approach zero by the second half of the century to stay within the 2°C limit The CO 2 budget for the 2011-2050 period is 825 GtCO 2 There is approximately 2,795 GtCO 2 in proven oil and gas reserves , so most of it must be kept in the ground18

In a related study, Busting the Carbon Budget: Low Carbon Economy Index, PricewaterhouseCoopers determined that “the required decarbonisation rate is higher than ever before at 6% per annum between now and 2100. The technological shifts that need to happen have not materialized. The window to act is shorter, and the scale of the challenge is larger… Crucial is the will to act.” 19 We must also decide how that carbon budget will be allocated. The current global population is 7.2 billion and is expected to rise to 9.6 billion by 2050, based on an average fertility rate.20 The international community has made a commitment to energy security for all, so that requires a fair distribution of the fossil fuels humanity can burn in the carbon budget. With the limited fossil fuels that are permitted in the budget, it is irresponsible to use it for the military’s tanks, destroyers and fighter jets and not for transitioning to a low-carbon economy?

2.3 Emerging Issues from the United Nations Environment Programme Along with global warming, there is worsening environmental degradation. For the past ten years, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has released a yearbook of emerging environmental issues. UNEP’s 2014 Year Book examined expanding coastal dead zones due to excess nitrogen in the environment, deteriorating air pollution, increasing plastic debris in the ocean, and rapid changes in the Arctic. 21 There are now 500 known coastal dead zones from severe eutrophication caused by an overload of nitrogen in the marine environment.22 Nitrogen emissions to the atmosphere contribute to climate change.

18

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2014) Global Climate Change: Vital Signs, Key Indicators [Online] Available at: http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators/#co2 and McKibben, B. (2012) “Global Warming’s Terrifying Math,” Rolling Stone Magazine, [Online] Available at: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmingsterrifying-new-math-20120719?page=3 19 PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2013) Busting the carbon budget: Low Carbon Economy Index. Report for PWC, [Online] Available at: http://www.pwc.co.uk/en_UK/uk/assets/pdf/climate-change-in-aerospace-defence.pdf 20 United Nations (2013) World Populations Prospects: The 2012 Revision, Highlights, Volume I Comprehensive Tables, [Online] Available at: http://esa.un.org/wpp/Documentation/pdf/WPP2012_HIGHLIGHTS.pdf 21 See UNEP Year Book 2014 here: http://www.unep.org/yearbook/2014/ 22 Ibid.

15

In 2012, seven million premature deaths were caused by air pollution.23 In urban areas, the widespread combustion of diesel fuel creates dense and deadly smog from fine particulates and contributes to climate change. Plastic, a petroleum product, is damaging critical habitat, like coral reefs, and killing marine life, like turtles, dolphins and whales. UNEP explains, “Our economies are still largely fossil-fuel based, with the environmental, economic and health costs largely hidden.”24 The yearbook is an annual call for international, coordinated action on severe, trans-boundary environmental problems. Though UNEP does not quantify the projected costs of remediation, they are no doubt in the billions of dollars. Cleaning up and protecting the natural environment – our life support system - should be national and international priorities matched by adequate funding, but they are not. Climate change is compounded by intensifying pollution, biodiversity loss and resource scarcity. Political action and funding to date have been inadequate to reverse these negative environmental trends.

2.4 Upcoming United Nations Climate Summit and Conferences of the Parties The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has invited government, business and civil society leaders to a Climate Summit in New York in September. The Summit is not part of formal negotiations of the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change. However, the Secretary General wants to bring leaders together to generate momentum for greater emission reductions and climate financing pledges in advance of the 21st Conference of the Parties meeting in Paris next year. Participation in the Summit is limited to UN members and by invitation to corporate and community leaders. The UN held a worldwide nomination process to find 38 passionate community leaders to participate. From the 500 applications received, the UN selected Kathy Jetnil-Kijiner, a young teacher and spoken word artist from the Marshall Islands to address the opening plenary of the Summit. In a UN press statement, Jetnil-Kijiner said her poetry focuses on “nuclear testing conducted in our islands, militarism, the rising sea level as a result of climate change, forced migration, adaptation and racism in America.”25 Jetnil-Kijiner recognizes the link between climate change and militarism. Earlier this year, the IPB awarded the Sean MacBride Prize to the people and the government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands for taking the nine nuclear weapons-possessing countries to the International Court of Justice to enforce compliance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty and international customary law. The Marshall Islands were used by the U.S. as a nuclear weapons testing ground for 70 nuclear tests from 1946 to 1958 that caused devastating health and environmental impacts from the radiation.26 Along with a tragic, toxic military legacy, the Marshall Islands is a low-lying, developing state that is suffering the effects of climate change from sea level rise.27 The vulnerability of developing countries to climate change is also the vulnerability faced by all global youth whose futures are threatened.

The full IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) will be completed in time for the UNFCCC COP 20 and the 10th Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP 10) in Lima, Peru this November. At this meeting, it is hoped that states will prepare a draft agreement and make commitments for the initial capitalization of the UN Green Climate Fund. The Lima meeting is an important step toward COP 21 and CMP 11 in Paris next year hosted by the French government. It is hoped that a new, universal, legally binding treaty on climate change will be the outcome of the meeting in Paris in 2015.

Parties must agree to mandatory greenhouse gas reductions that will keep the global temperature to below 2°C. Earlier this year, in a joint opinion piece published in the Washington Post and Le Monde, the French President François Holland and U.S. President Barack Obama wrote that they will pursue “an ambitious and inclusive global agreement that reduces greenhouse gas emissions through concrete actions” at the COP 21 23

Ibid.

Ibid.

25 See the UN announcement “Climate Summit to hear from Marshall Islands poet” here: http://www.un.org/climatechange/summit/2014/08/climate-summit-hear-marshall-islands-poet/ 26 See the IPB press release “IPB to award MacBride Peace Prize to the people and government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands for their courageous initiative to rid the world of nuclear arms” here: http://ipb.org/uploads/documents/other_docs/Marshall_Islands.pdf 27 See Press Conference on Impact of Climate Change on Marshall Islands before the UN Security Council on February 13, 2013 here: http://www.un.org/News/briefings/docs/2013/130215_MI.doc.htm 24

16

meeting.28 In their piece, the leaders also recognized that by reducing carbon emissions, new domestic jobs and international clean energy partnerships could be created for low-carbon economic growth. Obama and Hollands’ sincerity is questioned as they both continue to peddle their gas-guzzling fighter jets, the French Rafale combat plane and the American F-35 stealth fighter respectively, to developing countries around the world.29 Last month, it was reported that President Obama would push for a voluntary, not a mandatory agreement at COP21 and that there was no expectation that the U.S. Congress would ever ratify it.30 As well, the COP21 host, France, is the 5th highest military spender at $61 billion, the 5th biggest exporter of arms in the world, and possesses approximately 300 nuclear weapons that are costly to store and maintain.

31 For France to show real climate leadership, it should reduce and re-direct its military spending to green jobs and climate financing and it should stop selling arms to poor countries and instead fund clean energy partnerships.

2.5 United Nations Decade of Sustainable Energy for All 2014-2024 This year the UN launched the Decade of Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL). SE4ALL is a ten-year plan to spur a global energy transformation and to achieve three goals by 2030: universal energy access, renewable energy, and energy efficiency.32 The decade will address energy poverty and climate change and advance energy security and renewable energy. The UN convened its first SE4ALL forum in June and the SecretaryGeneral called on states to make country-level commitments and to invest more in innovative financing.

The UN estimates that it will cost within the range of $500 to $1200 billion of additional capital per year to achieve the SE4ALL commitments.33 Of concern, however, is Bank of America’s involvement in the fundraising of private capital for green bonds for SE4ALL.34 This year, Bank of America settled the largest civil suit in U.S. history for mortgage-related fraud that caused thousands of poor Americans to lose their homes.35 International civil society must remain wary of private investment in SE4ALL and other environmental and climate financing to ensure public transparency and accountability. The IPB recommends that public tax dollars going into military budgets be redirected to achieve the SE4ALL commitments in an accountable and transparent way.

2.6 Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project Under the Cancun Agreement, countries made a commitment to stay within the global temperature limit of 2°C increase by mid-century, yet they have not determined how they will do it. In 2012, the UN established the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) to bring technical and scientific experts together to help find practical solutions to sustainability challenges like climate change. The SDSN partnered with the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI) and launched the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project (DDPP). The project is helping countries find zero CO2 emission pathways 28

Obama, B. and Hollande, F. (2014) "France and the U.S. enjoy a renewed alliance," The Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obama-and-hollande-france-and-the-us-enjoy-a-renewedalliance/2014/02/09/039ffd34-91af-11e3-b46a-5a3d0d2130da_story.html 29 See Bipindra, N.C. (2014) “India Said to Target Signing Rafale Fighter Jet Deal by End 2014,” Bloomberg, [Online] Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-20/india-said-to-target-signing-rafale-fighter-jet-deal-by-end2014.html and See F-35A Conventional Takeoff and Landing Variant on the Lockheed Martin web site here: http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/f35/f-35a-ctol-variant.html 30 Davenport, C. (2014) “Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty,” The New York Times,[Online] Available at:http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/us/politics/obama-pursuing-climate-accord-in-lieu-of-treaty.html?_r=0 31 Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2014) Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2013. SIPRI Fact Sheet, [Online] Available at: http://books.sipri.org/product_info?c_product_id=476 32 See SE4ALLhere: http://www.se4all.org/ 33 See SE4ALLInnovative Finance here http://www.se4all.org/hio/innovative-finance/ 34 See SE4ALL Results And Deliverables: Partners Making Progress 2 here: http://www.se4all.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/04/SE4ALL_Partners_Progress-2.pdf 35 McLaughlin, D. et al. (2014) “BofA to Pay $16.7 Billion to End U.S. Mortgage Probes,” Bloomberg, [Online] Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-21/bofa-agrees-to-pay-16-65-billion-to-end-u-s-mortgage-probes.html

17

by 2050 to get on a safe climate trajectory and to stay within a carbon budget. The DDPP explains that “deep decarbonization” is a profound transformation of energy systems through steep declines in carbon intensity in all sectors of the economy, necessarily required in every country.36 The DDPP is currently comprised of 15 country teams composed of researchers and institutions from countries representing 70% of global GHG emissions and at different stages of development: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, the UK, and the US. Independent of governments, the country research teams have mapped out pathways to decarbonization for these fifteen countries.37 Their interim report was released in July 2014 and the final, full report will be presented to the French government in advance of COP21 in 2015. Unfortunately, the decarbonization pathways developed do not include for GHG emission reductions by the military sector and does not account for the highly militarized nature of the economies of the U.S., Russia, China and the UK. In response to a call for comments on the interim DDPP report, the IPB submitted a letter expressing our concern about the exclusion of military fuel consumption and CO 2 emissions in their analyses (See Annex 1).

We also objected to nuclear energy included in the primary energy mix in some of the country scenarios, such as for France and the United States, because of the concern of nuclear weapons proliferation and waste storage.

The DDPP is one of twelve thematic groups of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN).

The SDSN secretariat is based at Columbia University and is headed by Jeffrey Sachs, Professor of Economics and Director of the Earth Institute. Among the other eleven thematic groups is “Reducing Poverty and Building Peace in Fragile Regions” (Thematic Group 2), the IPB notes that the target of this group is on peacebuilding for poor developing countries and that there are no representatives of peace organizations in the executive membership.38 Peacebuilding is necessary in all countries and the thematic group executive should include a civil society representative with expertise in peace and disarmament.

Practical peacebuilding and disarmament plans should be developed for all countries, especially wealthy developed countries that are the main arms exporters and top military spenders.

3.0 Impacts by the Military on the Environment and Climate Change 3.1 Environmental Impacts of Militarism The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) acknowledges that there has been insufficient oversight and scant research at the international and national level on the military’s impacts on the natural environment and climate change.39 This is confirmed in a 2004 report commissioned by Physicians for Global Survival on the direct and indirect efforts of the military on the natural environment. In The Impact of Military on the Environment, author Abeer Majeed states, “The contribution of military activities to the unprecedented series of environmental crises facing the world today has been largely overlooked and, to an extent, wilfully ignored.”40 The IPB explored some of the impacts of weapons on development in our 2005 publication Warfare or Welfare?

Many studies on the environmental impacts of armed conflict show the terrible ecological effects from wetland degradation, water pollution, deforestation, and weapons, contaminating agricultural land.41 36

Sustainable Development Solutions Network and Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (2014) Pathways to Deep Decarbonization Interim 2014 Report , [Online] Available at: http://unsdsn.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/07/DDPP_interim_2014_report.pdf 37 Ibid.

38 See UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Thematic Group 2, here: http://unsdsn.org/what-wedo/thematic-groups/reducing-poverty-and-building-peace-in-fragile-regions/ 39 See UNEP, Division of Environmental Law and Conventions, Preventing Military Impacts on Environments, here: http://www.unep.org/delc/MilitaryActivities/tabid/78544/Default.aspx 40 Majeed, A. (2004) The Impact of Militarism on the Environment: An Overview of Direct & Indirect Effects . Report for Physicians for Global Survival (Canada). [Online] Available at: http://pgs.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2007/11/militarism_environment_web.pdf

18

In 2009, American professor Barry Sanders published a book, The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism. He studied the environmental impacts of U.S. weapons systems and the extensive environmental damage from U.S. wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan and at domestic and international American military bases. Sanders compiled research on the incidences and impacts of various toxic chemicals and depleted uranium (DU) by the military. The U.S. military has left a trail of environmental destruction from its military bases and operations in Guam and Puerto Rico due to exploded ordinances; in the Marshall Islands from nuclear weapons testing; the Philippines from heavy metals, fuel and asbestos, and lastly, in Iraq and the former Yugoslavia from DU.42 One highly toxic chemical, perchlorate, which is an explosive propellant for rockets and missiles, has caused widespread water and soil contamination in the U.S. 43 Exposure to perchlorate has adverse impacts on the thyroid and respiratory system. Many of the most contaminated sites in the U.S. are military facilities and are listed on the Environmental Protection Agency’s National Priority Super Fund list. 44 Moreover, Sanders explains that the DoD has also secured voluntary status or exemptions to the adherence of national and international environmental norms and laws. Sanders findings are also identified by the Costs of War Project, an excellent resource that tracks the environmental costs of war along with the economic, social, and human costs.45 Though there are many arms control treaties, there are few international norms or laws that enforce compliance and accountability of the military for its damage of the environment. For example, in Agenda 21, Chapter 20, Environmentally Sound Management of Hazardous Wastes, there is a clause that states that governments should ensure that their militaries conform to their national environmental norms in the treatment and disposal of hazardous wastes.46 However, there is no public transparency and third-party verification. To overcome this deficiency, the Division of Environmental Law & Conventions (DELC) in UNEP has made “Military and the Environment” a programme area. DELC is responsible for the development and facilitation of international environmental law, governance and policy. Its current ten-year mandate commenced in 2010 is guided by the 4th Montevideo Programme for the Development and Periodic Review of Environmental Law that was adopted by the UNEP Governing Council in 2009. Under this mandate, one area of focus is “Environment and the Military” and the objective is “to reduce or mitigate the potentially harmful effects of military activities on the environment and to encourage a positive role for the military sector in environmental protection.”47 The accompanying DELC action and strategy do not explicitly mention the climate impacts of the military. UNEP has conducted only two preliminary meetings related to the subject area of military and the environment: in Kenya in 2007 and in Switzerland in 2009. The intended outcomes were to: develop national environmental policies for the military sector; encourage the military sector to assist in the achievement of sustainable development; and assess the damage to the environment caused by military activities and the need for and feasibility of clean up and restoration in such areas where damage has occurred. There are no UNEP outcome documents or reports related to these meetings or to this DELC programme of work available online. Further, there appears to be no progress made since 2009.

DELC should advance its work on the legal aspects of the military and environment and include an analysis of the norms and laws that apply to the military and its impacts on the climate. Though UNEP does do postcrisis environmental assessments and post-conflict environmental recovery reports such as ones for Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, there is limited capacity, remediation and assigning accountability to intervening countries by UNEP.48 The UN must do more to confront and hold accountable states for the adverse impacts of their militaries on the environment and the climate.

41

Conca, K. and Wallace, J. (2013) “Environment and Peacebuilding in war-torn societies: Lessons from the UN Environment Programme’s experience with post-conflict assessment,” in Jensen, D. and Lonergan, S. (eds.) Assessing and Restoring Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding, London: Earthscan, pp. 69 and 70.

42 Sanders, B. (2009) The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism . Oakland: AK Press, Chapter 4.

43 Ibid, pp. 83-106.

44 See the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Superfund List here: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/ 45 See Costs of War Project here: http://costsofwar.org/article/environmental-costs 46 See clause 20 (h) in the United Nations (1992) Agenda 21, [Online] Available at: http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf 47 http://www.unep.org/delc/Portals/119/MontevideoIV.pdf 48 See Country Reports under Post Crisis Environmental Assessments and Post Crisis Environmental Recovery in UNEP Disasters and Conflict here: http://www.unep.org/disastersandconflicts/

19

3.2 Fossil Fuel Use by the Military With his research on military emissions, Barry Sanders, author of The Green Zone stated, “People need to recognize that severe and serious reductions must take place in that one sector – the military – that is responsible for bringing the world to the brink of extinction faster than any other.”49 The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) is the largest consumer of oil in the U.S. and the largest industrial consumer of oil in the world.50 According to a 2012 Congressional report, Department of Defense Energy Initiatives, approximately 75% of DoD’s energy is for operational use that includes training, moving and sustaining military forces and weapon platforms for military operations; 25% is for installations including facilities and non-tactical vehicles.51 The report stated that the DoD consumed approximately 117 million barrels of oil per year at a cost of $17.3 billion. Table 1 presents the breakdown of fuel consumption and cost by the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Army in 2012.

Table 1: U.S. Military Oil Consumption and Estimated CO2 emissions, 2012 Percentage of Number of Number of Fuel Cost U.S. Military total DoD barrels/year gallons/year (in US $) consumption

CO2 or equivalent (metric tonnes)

Air Force

62 million

3 billion

53%

$9 billion

26 million

Navy

33 million

1 billion

28%

$5 billion

14 million

Army

21 million

900 million

19%

$3 billion

9 million

117 million

5 billion

100%

$17 billion

49 million

Source: Schwartz, M. et al. (2012) Department of Defense Energy Initiatives: Background and Issues for Congress. Congressional Research Service, [Online] Available at: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42558.pdf Calculations of CO 2 is from the U.S. Energy Information Administration: http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=10 Based on this level of annual fuel consumption, the DoD emits approximately 49 million metric tonnes of CO 2 into the atmosphere ever year, which is roughly equivalent to annual greenhouse gas emissions from 10 million passenger vehicles or 4 million homes.52 The military’s carbon “bootprint” would be much higher if the petroleum consumption and cement production by its private contractors and on its overseas military bases were included in the calculations.53 Our report Warfare of Welfare? describes some of the environmental and social damage caused to local communities by foreign military bases.54 A retired professor of environmental health from the Boston University School of Public Health looked into greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts of the U.S. military. In her article, The Military Assault on Global Climate, H. Patricia Hynes stated, “Militarism is the most oil-exhaustive activity on the planet, growing more so with faster, bigger, more fuel-guzzling planes, tanks and naval vessels employed in 49

Sanders, B. (2009) The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism . Oakland: AK Press, p. 161.

Schwartz, M. et al. (2012) Department of Defense Energy Initiatives: Background and Issues for Congress .

Congressional Research Service, [Online] Available at: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42558.pdf 51 Ibid.

52 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Greenhouse gas equivalencies calculator, [Online] Available at: http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/calculator.html Note: About 19.64 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) are produced from burning a gallon of gasoline that does not contain ethanol. About 22.38 pounds of CO2 are produced by burning a gallon of diesel fuel.

53 See 3.8 of United States (2014) Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2012 , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Inventory Report, [Online] Available at: https://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/8108.php 54 Archer, C. and Hay-Edie, D. (2005) Warfare or Welfare? Disarmament for Development in the 21st Century. Geneva: International Peace Bureau.

50

20

more intensive air and ground wars.”55 Consider the fuel use by the following weapons systems and vehicles as cited by the Costs of War Project and in the book, The Environmental Costs of Militarism:        

Apache helicopters get .5 miles to the gallon (or it used approximately 300 gallons during eight hours of operation) M1 Abrams tank gets .2 miles to the gallon (compare this with a fuel efficient car like the Toyota Prius that gets 51 mpg) Bradley Fighting Vehicles get 1 mile to the gallon Battleships consume 68 barrels (2856 gallons) per hour Non-nuclear aircraft carriers burn approximately 134 barrels (5628 gallons) per hour Arleigh Burke-class destroyer typically burns 23 barrels (1,000 gallons) of petroleum fuel an hour B-52 long-range bomber burns 80 barrels (3,334 gallons) per hour F-15 fighter jet burns 342 barrels (14,400 gallons) per hour56

Tanks, destroyers and fighters jets are highly energy inefficient, toxic and disproportionately contribute to climate change. In addition, the cumulative, life-cycle emissions and environmental impacts of these weapon systems are not known. Let’s not forget the purpose of these weapons systems; they are designed to injure and kill people and destroy infrastructure.

Recall that the Air Force is the largest consumer of petroleum products in the military. Aircraft fuel is kerosene turbine fuel, also known as JP-8. It is the most carbon intensive and emits the highest CO2 because of its additives and radiative forcing in the atmosphere.57 Fighter jets also cause severe noise pollution from sonic booms and release toxic air pollutants, including cancer-causing benzene and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.58 Having studied the environmental and climate impacts of the military, Sanders concluded that the only way to reduce the greenhouse gases to zero is to end war; the IPB agrees.59 [PROFILE: The most expensive weapons system in history is the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter that is estimated to cost over $1 trillion including the production, operation and maintenance. 60 In a Congressional report this March, the U.S. Government Accountability Office estimates that it will cost approximately $13 billion annually until 2037 for the F-35 program and the latest unit cost is $137 million per plane.61 The GAO expressed concerns about the rising costs and technical problems with the plane. The F-35 is a fifth-generation stealth fighter with a single-seat and a single-engine that has an internal fuel capacity of 18,200 with a combat radius of less than 590 nautical air miles.62 It is highly inefficient at 31 pounds of fuel needed per nautical mile. The jet fuel it burns, JP-8, is carbon-intensive with added nitrous oxide, sulphur dioxide, soot and particles that make it especially harmful to the climate.63 The F-35 is not only destroying the atmosphere, it is designed to drop bombs. Its weapons payload includes cannons, airto-air missiles, and guided bombs.64 The U.S. government has plans to buy 2,457 aircraft. There are twelve other countries also planning to buy the aircraft: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, Israel, Japan, 55

Hynes, P.H. (2011) “The Military Assault on Global Climate,” Truthout, [Online] Available at:http://www.truthout.org/news/item/3181:the-military-assault-on-global-climate 56 Sanders, B. (2009) The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism . Oakland: AK Press, pp. 58-67 and see “Environmental Costs” at the Costs of War: http://costsofwar.org/ 57 Ibid, p. 72.

58 United States Air Force (2011) F-35 Force Development Evaluation and Weapons School Beddown Environmental Impact Statement, Report of the Air Combat Command, [Online] Available at: http://www.nellis.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-080404-038.pdf 59 Sanders, B. (2009), p. 115.

60 United States Government Accountability Office (2014) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Problems Completing Software Testing May Hinder Delivery of Expected Warfighting Capabilities , Report to Congressional Committees, [Online] Available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/661842.pdf 61 Ibid.

62 See F-35A Conventional Takeoff and Landing Variant on the Lockheed Martin web site here: http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/f35/f-35a-ctol-variant.html 63 Sanders, B. (2009) The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism. Oakland: AK Press.

21

Netherlands, Norway, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. Countries hope to use this energy inefficient, carbon-emitting plane over the coming decades. This represents the problem of the “lock-in” effect, whereby highly energy-inefficient products, such as this fighter jet, are used for a long-time and have protracted adverse climate and environmental impacts.]

3.3 Military Exemptions and the Kyoto Protocol In 2009, American journalist Sarah Flounders released a story, “Add Climate Havoc to War Crimes: Pentagon’s Role in Global Catastrophe,” about the DoD’s climate impacts. She questioned the absence of military emissions on the UNFCCC agenda at the COP 15 negotiations in Copenhagen.65 Her story along with many others that year about the military’s impact on the climate were ignored by mainstream media but given the top award by Project Censored in 2010, “US Department of Defense is the Worst Polluter on the Planet.”66 Flounders wrote, “By every measure, the Pentagon is the largest institutional user of petroleum products and energy in general. Yet the Pentagon has a blanket exemption in all international climate agreements.”

In 1997 in Japan, under the UNFCCC, the international community negotiated the Kyoto Protocol, a legally binding treaty with targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions for 38 of the most industrialized countries, which are the countries the most responsible for global warming. The then U.S. Vice-President Al Gore joined the American negotiating team in Kyoto and that year U.S. President Bill Clinton signed the treaty. The protocol requires states to publish reports on the mitigation of emissions from the energy, transport and industry sectors, such as agriculture, forestry and waste management.67 However, the American negotiating team was able to secure exemptions to reduce greenhouse gases for the military sector. This was confirmed by the U.S. Under Secretary for Economic, Business, and Agricultural Affairs, Stuart Eizenstat, who led the American negotiating team in Japan. On February 11, 1998, Eizenstat appeared before the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Foreign Relations in a hearing on Implications of The Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change and discussed the negotiations: We took special pains, working with the Defense Department and with our uniformed military, both before and in Kyoto, to fully protect the unique position of the United States as the world's only super power with global military responsibilities. We achieved everything they outlined as necessary to protect military operations and our national security. At Kyoto, the parties, for example, took a decision to exempt key overseas military activities from any emissions targets, including exemptions for bunker fuels used in international aviation and maritime transport and from emissions resulting from multilateral operations.68 The U.S. Secretary of Defense at the time was Republican William Cohen who was appointed to the post by President Clinton. Cohen warned the White House that “We must not sacrifice our national security… to achieve reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”69 He was supported by an ad hoc group called the Committee to Preserve Security and Sovereignty (COMPASS), which was comprised of former government officials and foreign policy analysts. COMPASS mobilized to ensure that the military was exempted from any 64

See F-35A Conventional Takeoff and Landing Variant on the Lockheed Martin web site here: http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/f35/f-35a-ctol-variant.html 65 United States Air Force (2011).

66 Project Censored (2010) US Department of Defense is the Worst Polluter on the Planet , [Online] Available at: http://www.projectcensored.org/2-us-department-of-defense-is-the-worst-polluter-on-the-planet/ 67 United Nations (1998) Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change , [Online] Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf 68 United States (1998) Implications of The Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change Hearing, Committee On Foreign Relations United States Senate, One Hundred Fifth Congress, Second Session, February 11, 1998, [Online] Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-105shrg46812/pdf/CHRG-105shrg46812.pdf P. 46 69 Greenpeace USA (1998) Why Do Foreign Policy Experts Say Kyoto is Bad for America? Documents related to COMPASS, [Online] Available at: http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=download&d=4196

22

emission targets during the negotiations and lobbied the Senate not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. A COMPASS letter to the White House warning that the Kyoto Protocol threatened to limit American military power was co-signed by Jeane Kirkpatrick, the former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Richard Burt, the former U.S. Chief Arms Control negotiator, and Dick Cheney, the former Secretary of Defense, among others.70 In 1997, by a vote of 95-0, the Senate passed the Byrd-Hagel resolution to prevent the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol.71 It was then Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, now the U.S. Secretary of Defense, who co-led with Democratic Senator Robert Byrd the campaign against the Kyoto Protocol in Congress. The following year, it passed the National Defense Authorization Act that expressly exempted the U.S. military from the climate treaty. Clause 1210 stated, Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no provision of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, or any regulation issued pursuant to such protocol, shall restrict the procurement, training, or operation and maintenance of the United States Armed Forces. 72 Though the U.S. never ratified the Kyoto Protocol, its ability to negotiate military exemptions allowed exemptions to apply to the militaries of all countries. Today, the U.S. Energy Information Administration is explicit about military exemptions. In its latest report, Emissions of Greenhouse Gases, the EIA states: UNFCCC definition of energy consumption excludes international bunker fuels, emissions from international bunker fuels are subtracted from the U.S. total. Similarly, emissions from military bunker fuels are also subtracted from the U.S. total.73 As well, in its latest World Energy Statistics the International Energy Agency confirms that the military is excluded from the fuel accounting in the categories for international marine bunkers and transport for all countries.74 3.4 Measuring and Making Sense of Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Military There is no definitive, comprehensive data on greenhouse gas emissions from the military sector because of exemptions and confidentiality. Nevertheless, under the UNFCCC, Annex 1 countries are required to submit annual greenhouse gas inventories to the Secretariat in Bonn, Germany. Since a 2003 agreement at the 8th Conference of the Parties in New Delhi, India, these submissions have been available on the web and include the following:  

Common reporting format (CRF) – a series of standardized data tables containing mainly numerical information and submitted electronically; and National Inventory Report (NIR) – a comprehensive description of the methodologies used in compiling the inventory, the data sources, the institutional structures and quality assurance and control procedures.75

70

Greenpeace USA (1998) Why Do Foreign Policy Experts Say Kyoto is Bad for America? Documents related to COMPASS, [Online] Available at: http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=download&d=4196 71 See U.S. Senate Resolution 98, 105th Congress, 1st Session, here: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS105sres98ats/pdf/BILLS-105sres98ats.pdf 72 United States (1999) National Defense Authorization Act, that prohibited the US military from being bound by the Kyoto Protocol H.R. 3616, [Online] Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-105hr3616pcs/pdf/BILLS105hr3616pcs.pdf 73 United States (2009) Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2009 , U.S. Energy Information Administration Report, [Online] Available at: http://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/ghg_report/pdf/0573(2009).pdf 74 International Energy Agency (2013) Key World Energy Statistics. [Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/KeyWorld2013.pdf p. 62 and 65 75 National Inventory Submissions: https://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/8108.php

23

According to the UNFCCC Reporting Guidelines on Annual Inventories, reporting should be transparent, consistent, comparable, complete and accurate. However, clause 27 states, “Emissions and removals should be reported at the most disaggregated level of each source/sink category, taking into account that a minimum level of aggregation may be required to protect confidential business and military information (emphasis added).”76 This is the confidentiality clause that the military can use to not report emissions.

For National Inventory Report (NIR) accounting, there is some reporting of military fuel consumption and emissions. This can be found by looking at the NIR submitted by a country, for example Norway. In its NIR, there is a table labelled “Table 1.A, Sectoral Background Data for Energy”, where it lists domestic military fuels in the row labelled “Other” (1.A.5b) and sub-divided into the category “Military-Stationary” (1.A.5a) and “Military-Mobile” (1.A.5b) and these figures are used to determine the Norwegian military’s CO2 emissions.77 However, this amount refers to domestic military transportation in or from the country. It does not include the amount purchased and used overseas. There is a separate row for estimating international bunker fuels, which include the military, but those amounts are not used to calculate a country’s total fuel use or emissions and may not be reported. The U.S. Energy Information confirms that emissions from military bunker oil is excluded from the U.S. NIR total.78 The U.S. government also admits this in its NIR, Uncertainties exist with regard to the total fuel used by military aircraft and ships, and in the activity data on military operations and training that were used to estimate percentages of total fuel use reported as bunker fuel emissions. Total aircraft and ship fuel use estimates were developed from DoD records, which document fuel sold to the Navy and Air Force from the Defense Logistics Agency. These data may slightly over or under estimate actual total fuel use in aircraft and ships because each Service may have procured fuel from, and/or may have sold to, traded with, and/or given fuel to other ships, aircraft, governments, or other entities. 79 The incompleteness and uncertainty of the accuracy of the military fuel consumption reveals the weaknesses of the IPCC reporting guidelines. In addition, the problem with the IPCC reporting is evident by how the U.S. reports its energy consumption by fuel and vehicle type in its latest NIR. In its report, there is a table titled “Table A-90” in which there is a category “Jet Fuel” that is further sub-divided into “Military Aircraft.”80 For military aircraft fuel consumption, the U.S. estimated that 2,167 million gallons of oil were used in 2000. Yet, the amount dropped to 1,860 million gallons at the height of the war in Iraq and declined more to only 1,074 million gallons during the bombing of Libya. It is hard to believe that while fighting two wars and bombing another country simultaneously, that military aircraft fuel consumption over the past decade has gone down as the U.S. claims in its NIR. Worse, the U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that oil consumption for the military will increase from 2011 to 2040 with an annual growth rate of 0.3%.81 How will this impact the carbon budget?

76

United Nations (2006) Updated UNFCCC reporting guidelines on annual inventories following incorporation of the provisions of decision 14/CP.11, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [Online] Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2006/sbsta/eng/09.pdf 77 To see how military fuel use and GHG emissions are presented in a National Inventory Report, please view Norway’s submission, which can be downloaded here: https://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/8108.php and viewed here: http://www.miljodirektoratet.no/Documents/publikasjoner/M138/M138.pdf, look at the U.S. NIR too.

78 United States (2009) Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2009 , U.S. Energy Information Administration Report, [Online] Available at: http://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/ghg_report/pdf/0573(2009).pdf 79 United States (2014) Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2012 , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Inventory Report, [Online] Available at: https://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/8108.php 80 Ibid.

81 United States (2014) Annual Energy Outlook 2014 with Projections to 2040 . U.S. Energy Information Administration, [Online] Available at: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2014).pdf, see Table A7.

24

In addition, Liska and Perrin argue in their article, Securing Foreign Oil, that military activities related to the protection and acquisition of crude oil from abroad be included in carbon emission reporting and climate policy. They explain, “Life cycle GHG emissions calculations associated with U.S. gasoline production and use have included emissions from the extraction and shipping of oil as well as combustion, but related military security emissions have been omitted as direct components of the production life cycle.”82 This shows the problem with IPCC reporting because international bunker fuels are not included in national reporting and the military is given a confidentiality cover. The full carbon and environmental impacts of the military’s operations should be known.

4.0 Financing to Protect the Climate or Prepare for War? The World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme established the IPCC in 1988. At that time, working groups were established to develop the foundation for a treaty on greenhouse gas reductions. The Response Strategies Working Group (Working Group III) was tasked to develop principles, such as “common but differentiated responsibilities,” mitigation strategies, such as emission reduction scenarios, and implementation methods, such as technology transfer, economic measures and financial mechanisms to achieve those reductions.83 In their 1990 report, Climate Change: The IPCC Response Strategies, under Chapter 10 “Financial Mechanisms,” the working group considered various financial mechanisms to pay for mitigation and noted, A number of possible sources for generating financial resources were considered... Creative suggestions include using official resources, which might result from savings on government energy bills and lower levels of military expenditures…84 In 1990, military expenditures were US $1.5 trillion in constant dollars (adjusted for inflation based on 2011 US currency value). The Soviet Union had collapsed and the Cold War had ended, it was hoped that military spending would be reduced and the “peace dividend” would be invested in sustainable development programs. Instead the U.S. led a coalition of countries to start the First Gulf War against Iraq and secure its access to one of the largest reserves of oil in the Middle East. For the past two decades, the international community has struggled to fund mitigation and adaption to the climate crisis, yet it has had no difficulty in paying for war. Since that 1990 IPCC report, there does not appear to be another reference to military spending reductions to pay for climate mitigation and adaption in a formal report by an IPCC working group. However, in 2011, the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, Christiana Figueres, said in a speech to the Congress of Deputies of Spain, Decisions on future defence spending are intricately linked to decisions on immediate climate investment through the different future risk assessments. What will be better? To continue to support a traditional global military budget that has risen 50 percent in real terms from 2000 to 2009 and continues to increase? Or to increase a preventive military budget investing into adaptation and low-carbon growth and avoid climate chaos that would demand a defence response that makes even today’s spending burden look light? Even under current trends, the rate of defence spending growth could account for a major part of the money needed to cut global emissions and to help the vulnerable, often in the most unstable areas of the world, to protect their societies from crumbling under climate pressures.85 82

Liska, A. and Perrin, R. (2010) “Securing Foreign Oil: A Case for Including Military Operations in the Climate Change Impact of Fuels,” Environment, July-August, [Online] Available at: http://www.environmentmagazine.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/July-August%202010/securing-foreign-oil-full.html 83 IPCC (1990) Climate Change: The IPCC Response Strategies. Report prepared for Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change by Working Group III, [Online] Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_first_assessment_1990_wg3.shtml 84 Ibid.

85 Figures, C. (2011) Address by Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to the Congress of Deputies of Spain , [Online] Available at:

25

The UNFCCC’s Executive Secretary words must be remembered and repeated at upcoming COP meetings to remind countries of how the costs of climate mitigation and adaption can be covered.

4.1 Costs of Climate Mitigation and Adaptation and the Costs of Inaction Countries are faced with huge financial costs for climate action or inaction. Though there are different estimates about the financial costs required for mitigating and adapting to climate change over the coming years, they all show massive investments in the billions of dollars. The International Energy Agency (IEA) calculated total additional investment needs for the period 2010-2050 are USD $45 trillion for transforming to a low-carbon energy system.86 This is approximately $1 trillion a year for the next forty years and roughly equivalent to annual military expenditures, in order to halve greenhouse gases and stabilize the climate. In its 2014 IPCC assessment, WG2 highlighted the gap between global adaptation needs and the funding available for meeting those needs, such as infrastructure to prepare for sea-level rise, increase in public transportation, retrofitting and weathering homes and buildings.87 For the upscaling of renewable energy, the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) explained in its recent report, REmap 2030: A Renewable Energy Roadmap, that incremental energy system costs and investments that were needed are at least $398 billion annually to 2030.88 If mitigation and adaption are delayed or avoided, countries face severe adverse impacts on the economy and society, as confirmed by the IPCC, the IEA and the newly released White House report.89 The socioeconomic costs of inaction are revealed by the billions of dollars of property damage and the thousands of people who lost their lives or livelihoods in Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and Super storm Sandy in 2012 in the United States; the heat wave across Europe in 2006; Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines in 2013, and the massive flooding in England and Serbia this year. As well, this June, co-chairman of the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations and former U.S. Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, published an article, How Ignoring Climate Change could sink the U.S. Economy, in the Washington Post. He cited the new web site and report called Risky Business that warns of the economic costs of climate change from increased extreme weather events.90 The costs of inaction are not only economic, but social and environmental as climate change threatens the well-being of communities and the biosphere, the zone of life on earth.

4.2 Climate Financing At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland this January, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said, “To achieve the large-scale transformation necessary to stabilize the climate, countries not only need to send the right policy signals and meet their climate finance commitments but also set much bolder targets. Climate finance is an investment in the future. It must not be taken hostage by short-term budget considerations.”91 Developing countries have called on wealthy nations to commit to 0.5 to 1% their gross domestic products (GDP) to climate finance, a sum that would add up to US $200-400 billion transferred http://unfccc.int/files/press/statements/application/pdf/speech_seguridad_20110215.pdf 86 International Energy Agency (2008) Energy Technology Perspectives 2008, Fact Sheet – The Blue Scenario. [Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/techno/etp/fact_sheet_ETP2008.pdf 87 IPCC (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability .

[Online] Available at: http://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/WG2AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf Ibid, p. 28 88 IRENA (2014) REmap 2030: A Renewable Energy Roadmap, June 2014. IRENA, Abu Dhabi. [Online] Available at: www.irena.org/remap 89 United States (2014) The Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change, Office of the President, , [Online] Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/the_cost_of_delaying_action_to_stem_climate_change.pdf 90 Rubin, R. (2014) “How Ignoring Climate Change could sink the U.S. Economy,” The Washington Post, [Online] Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-rubin-how-ignoring-climate-change-could-sink-the-useconomy/2014/07/24/b7b4c00c-0df6-11e4-8341-b8072b1e7348_story.html? utm_content=buffera0d48&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer 91 See “Big Idea 2014: The Year for Climate Action by Ban Ki-moon” here: http://www.un.org/climatechange/summit/2013/12/big-idea-2014-the-year-for-climate-action-by-ban-ki-moon/

26

every year.92 This is equivalent to 15-25% of global military expenditures. By contrast, the North American Treaty Alliance (NATO) pushes countries to invest 2% of GDP in their military budgets and many countries exceed that target. This year, the U.S. pressed NATO members to increase military spending to respond to the crisis in Ukraine.93 As countries are increasing their military budgets, they are stalling their climate finance commitments. The Institute for Environment and Development determined that from 2002 to 2008, over $18 billion was pledged by developed countries to developing countries for climate change mitigation and adaptation, but only $1 billion was disbursed.94 Climate finance is a matter of justice, as countries that have emitted the most to achieve their state of development owe a debt to pay for the historic damage and to help poor, developing countries that are most at risk to climate change to cope and develop in a lowcarbon way. Due to the inadequate and voluntary nature of climate financing since the Kyoto Protocol came into force, parties negotiated to improve the funding mechanism and established the UN Green Climate Fund.

4.3 The Green Climate Fund In 2010, under the UNFCCC Cancun Agreement, Financial, Technology and Capacity-building support, the developed countries made a commitment to invest $100 billion annually by 2020 for a Green Climate Fund. 95 The fund is a financial mechanism to support mitigation and adaptation programmes and policies in developing countries. They need predictable and stable financial assistance to confront the challenges of climate change for which they are not responsible.96 The GCF is an economic obligation of wealthy, industrialized countries to poor, developing countries to help them move towards low-emission and climate-resilient development pathways. GCF is a climate debt of the developed countries to the developing countries. They have a right to sustainable development that requires both climate financing and a continuation of overseas development assistance (ODA). ODA is still required by developing countries to fund a post-2015 development plan. Many poor countries worry that the GCF will displace ODA and this must not be permitted. In a speech, the UN Secretary-General declared, “The new Green Climate Fund has been built to be a key global channel for funding. It is essential that it is well capitalized.”97 However, developed countries have pledged very little to meet the GCF target. Germany recently announced $1 billion in funding but the European Commission has refused to contribute.98 Yet the amount needed for the GCF is less than 10% of annual military expenditures.

In 2010, the UN Secretary-General appointed an expert group to determine how to raise capital for the climate crisis. The High-Level Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing determined that putting a price on carbon and making direct budget contributions were two key funding sources but also emphasized the role of private investment. Developing countries have criticized any reliance on the private sector to help capitalize the new climate fund. The group did not consider a reduction of military expenditures for climate financing. The co-chair of the High-Level Advisory Group at the time was Jens Stoltenberg, the then Prime Minster of Norway. Two years before his appointment to head the advisory group, Stoltenberg signed a controversial deal to buy the carbon-intensive Lockheed Martin F-35 Stealth Fighters. Norway is spending $10 billion to purchase 52 F-35s by 2027, these are fighter jets that wreck the climate and this is money that 92

International Institute for Environment and Development (2009) Billions at stake in climate finance: four key lessons.

Briefing for the International Institute for Environment and Development, [Online] Available at: http://pubs.iied.org/17075IIED.html 93 MacAskill, E. (2014) “US presses Nato members to increase defence spending,” The Guardian, [Online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/23/us-nato-members-increase-defence-spending 94 International Institute for Environment and Development (2009).

95 See Cancun Agreements for Financial, Technology and Capacity-building support here: http://cancun.unfccc.int/financial-technology-and-capacity-building-support/new-long-term-funding-arrangements/ 96 International Institute for Environment and Development (2009).

97 Ki-Moon, B. (2014) Speech of the Secretary-General, Addressing the European Forum, SG/SM/15748 [Online] Available at: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/sgsm15748.doc.htm 98 Morales, A. and Parkin (2014) “Germany Pledges $1 Billion to UN Green Climate Fund,” Bloomberg, [Online] Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-16/germany-pledges-1-billion-to-un-green-climate-fund.html

27

could be spent on sustainable development for poor countries.99 Not surprisingly, earlier this year, Stoltenberg was appointed NATO’s new Secretary-General.100 According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Norway’s military expenditure is the highest in Europe steadily rising to a high of $US7 billion and according to the OECD, Norway has one of the highest carbon emissions per capita in Europe.101 Strangely, Stoltenberg was also selected by the UN Secretary-General to be new UN Special Envoy for Climate Change.102 4.4 The Problem of Global Military Spending and the Prioritization of Warfighting Last year, countries spent a combined $1.7 trillion on military expenditures as calculated and defined by SIPRI. 103 Table 2 shows the top 16 countries that spent the most on their militaries, the percentage of GDP, their share of the arms trade, and their per capita carbon dioxide. By contrast, for the same year, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimated that donor countries gave $126 billion for ODA, which is less than 10% of the global military budget.104 This contrast represents the problem of military spending: prioritizing warfighting and not human welfare. At the IPB seminar for the Global Day of Action on Military Spending at the United Nations in Geneva this year, the UN UnderSecretary-General Michael Møller said in his speech, Excessive military spending has vast hidden human costs. It saps away the resources required to better address global challenges such as climate change, food security, and global epidemics.

It obstructs resources to flow towards eradicating poverty, providing basic health care, sanitation, education and infrastructure.105 The problem of military spending has been raised with many different UN agencies: the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, the United Nations Human Rights Council, the UNFCCC, the IPCC, and UNEP, but the reductions that are needed for climate change and sustainable development have not materialized.

According to SIPRI, the U.S. spends the most on its military at $640 billion, which accounts for 37% of the global total (Figure 4). China is second at approximately $188 billion and accounts for 11% of global military spending. The U.S. spends more on its military than almost all other countries combined. As well, the U.S. spends more on the military then almost all other discretionary spending combined, including domestic food, housing, education, and transportation programs.106 More troubling is the fact that the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has not been able to audit the DoD since 1995 and has deemed 99

Agence France-Presse (2012) “Norway orders first two F-35 fighters as part of $10bn deal,” [Online] Available at: http://www.defencetalk.com/norway-orders-first-two-f-35-fighters-as-part-of-10bn-deal-43225/ 100 See NATO press release here: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_108390.htm and UN announcement here: http://www.un.org/climatechange/blog/2013/12/secretary-general-appoints-special-envoys-on-climate-change-toengage-global-leaders-ahead-of-2014-climate-summit/ 101 See the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute’s Military Expenditure database here: http://www.sipri.org/research/armaments/milex and see OECD Statistics for Greenhouse Gas Emissions here: http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=AIR_GHG 102 See announcement by Norwegian government here “Jens Stoltenberg becomes UN special envoy on Climate Change” here: http://www.norway-un.org/News/News-2013/Jens-Stoltenberg-becomes-UN-special-envoy-onClimate-Change/#.VBTSLfRDvuE 103 Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2014) Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2013. SIPRI Fact Sheet, [Online] Available at: http://books.sipri.org/product_info?c_product_id=476 104 See Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Statistics, under heading “Development Aid” here: http://www.oecd.org/statistics/ 105 Møller, M. (2014) “Military Expenditure and its Relationship to the Purposes of the United Nations,” Speech by Michael Møller, United Nations Under-Secretary-General and Acting Director-General, United Nations Office at Geneva, [Online] Available at: http://www.unog.ch/unog/website/dg.nsf/ (httpSpeechesByYear_en)/CAFAC1EEC1BD96FDC1257CBC0025FAF9?OpenDocument 106 See “Discretionary Spending” at the National Priorities Project here: https://www.nationalpriorities.org/

28

the department to be of high risk for waste, fraud and abuse.107 In its latest biennial report, the GAO, stated: DOD is one of the few federal entities that cannot accurately account for its spending or assets and is one of three major impediments that prevent GAO from rendering an opinion on the annual consolidated financial statements of the federal government. Without accurate, timely, and useful financial information, DOD is severely hampered in making sound decisions affecting its operations.108 Despite the GAO’s inability to audit the books of the DoD, the U.S. Congress continues to increase the funding to the department and approve new defence procurement. As the DoD cannot properly prepare its financial books, it is hard to trust the department’s climate and environmental reporting. Moreover, the U.S. military, like all militaries, is engaged in classified operations and the budget associated with covert actions or secret weapons programs are not publicly reported. The secretive nature of military operations and budgets make them undemocratic and problematic. Military spending’s lack of transparency and undermining of democracy were raised in a recent report by Alfred de Zayas, the independent expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order delivered to the United Nations Human Rights Council this month. 109 Zayas recommended that citizens should have more input in national prioritysetting and budget-making and that military budgets be reduced to meet the most pressing societal and environmental needs.

From the latest assessment reports of the IPCC we know how grave climate change is, and yet countries are decreasing their environmental budgets and increasing their military budgets. This is revealed by comparing and contrasting how much countries give to their Ministries of Environment versus their Departments of Defence: 





In 2013, the United States spent $640 billion on the Pentagon but only $8.3 billion on the Environmental Protection Agency and $27 billion on the Department of Energy that is responsible for renewable energy programs. Many parts of the U.S. are in severe, protracted drought, which have adversely affected water and agriculture.110 Last year, the UK allocated £37 billion on the Ministry of Defence but only £1.2 for the Ministry of Energy & Climate Change and £1.9 for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). The British Parliament web site states, “Defra is one of the smallest of Government Departments but it has faced among the most substantial budget cuts, which are set to continue up to 2016.”111 The UK was hit with one of its worst flash floods this year.

In its latest audited accounts, the Canadian government gave CAD $23 billion to National Defence but only CAD $1.5 billion to Environment Canada, the lead agency on climate change.112 Over the past fifteen years, the government has increased the budget for National Defence but has stalled the budget for Environment Canada (Figure 5: ) In the latest departmental reports on plans and priorities, they show that the federal government is going to cut Environment Canada’s budget by more than half within the next two years as it has been cutting environmental regulations to

107

United States (2013) High-Risk Series: An Update, Report to Congressional Committees, Government Accountability Office (GAO) [Online] Available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/652133.pdf p. 134 108 Ibid.

109 Zayas, A. (2014) Third Report to Human Rights Council, A/HRC/27/51, [Online] Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/IntOrder/Pages/IEInternationalorderIndex.aspx#sthash.p3TTfdWq.dpuf 110 See SIPRI data for military spending in Table 2 and U.S. Office of Management and Budget here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/factsheet_department_epa 111 See SIPRI data for military spending in Table 2 and the UK DEFRA Annual Report here: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/environment-food-and-ruralaffairs-committee/news/publication-of-dar-report/ 112 See SIPRI data for military spending in Table 2 and Environment Canada’s budget and planned cuts in its Plans & Priorities here: https://www.ec.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=024B8406-1&offset=3&toc=show

29



maintain the massive tar sands project in Alberta. Canada also abrogated from the Kyoto Protocol in 2011.

Australia spent USD $24 billion on its Department of Defence but only USD $2.3 billion (=AUD $2.6 billion) on its Sustainability, Environment, and Water Portfolio across many departments and agencies and recently repealed the carbon tax even though the country has experienced severe water shortages.113

This examination of military spending and national budgets reveals the fundamental problem: countries are prioritizing warfighting instead of protecting the climate.

Figure 5: Public Accounts, National Defence Spending v. Environment Canada from 1997-2013.

113

See SIPRI data for military spending in Table 2 and Australia Budget Statements For Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population And Communities Portfolio http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/79729f3ef830-4c8f-9e03-a712e276dd06/files/pbs-portfolio-budget-statements-2013-14.pdf

30

Table 2: Military Spending by Top 16 Countries, Share of Arms Exports and CO 2 per capita

1 2 3 4

Military Spendin g Ranking 2012 1 2 3 7

5 6 7 8 9

4 6 9 5 8

France United Kingdom Germany Japan India

61.2 57.9 48.8 48.6 47.4

2.2 2.3 1.4 1.0 2.5

10

12

South Korea

33.9

2.8

11 12 13

11 10 13

Italy Brazil Australia

32.7 31.5 24.0

1.6 1.4 1.6

14

16

Turkey

19.1

2.3

15

15

United Arab Emirates (UAE)

[19.0]

4.7

16

14

Canada

18.4

1.0

Total top 16

1 426

Total top 16

World Total Military Spending

1 747

Military Spending Ranking 2013

Country United States China Russia Saudi Arabia

Military Spendin g 2013 (US$ billion) 640 [188] [87.8] 67

Military Spending as a share of GDP (%)

Share of international arms exports (%) 2009-13

Carbon Dioxide per person (Metric tons) 2012

3.8 [2.0] [4.1] 9.3

29 6 27 Note: 1 st main client importer of UK weapons (42%) 5 4 7 <1 Note: 1st main client importer of weapons from Italy (10%) Note: 2 nd main client importer of U.S. weapons (10%) 3 <1 Note: 1 st main client importer of the US (10%) Note: 2 nd main client importer of weapons from Israel (10%) Note: 2 nd main client importer of weapons from Italy (9%) <1

16.4 7.1 12.4 16.2

5.8 7.7 9.7 10.4 1.6

13.0

6.3 2.3 18.8 3

19.9

16.0

82

Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2014) Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2013. SIPRI Fact Sheet, [Online] Available at: http://books.sipri.org/product_info?c_product_id=476 Source: World Bank Carbon Emissions per capita 2010: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC/countries

31

Figure 4: SIPRI, Share of the world military expenditures of the 15 states with the highest spending, 2013

Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2013) SIPRI Yearbook 2013: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security. London: Oxford University Press, 2013.

5.0 Linking Environment, Peace, Militarism and the Climate Crisis Over the past four decades, there have been many UN and civil society initiatives that have challenged military spending and militarism from an environmental perspective. These initiatives have promoted the connections between the environment and peace in the context of sustainable development. Over the past five years, there have been significant steps taken by civil society and activists to expose the self-reinforcing relationship between militarism and the climate crisis.

32

5.1 Peace, Development and Environmental Protection are Interdependent and Indivisible Peace is integral to sustainable development. In 1983, the UN established the World Commission on Environment and Development. Four years later, the Commission released a ground-breaking report, Our Common Future, which defined sustainable development, identified international challenges, and provided cooperative solutions. In the report, the Commission recognized the need to shift military expenditures to meeting environmental and human needs. In Chapter 11 entitled “Peace, Security, Development and The Environment,” the Commission wrote: The absence of war is not peace; nor does it necessarily provide the conditions for sustainable development. Competitive arms races breed insecurity among nations through spirals of reciprocal fears. Nations need to muster resources to combat environmental degradation and mass poverty. By misdirecting scarce resources, arms races contribute further to insecurity.114 Our Common Future influenced the concluding declaration of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil five years later. The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development is a list of principles for sustainable development that were agreed to by all the parties at the summit. The declaration states that war is inherently destructive of sustainable development (Principle 24) and calls on states to resolve all their environmental disputes peacefully (Principle 26). Principle 25 declares that “Peace, development and environmental protection are interdependent and indivisible.”115 The Rio Declaration accompanies Agenda 21, the comprehensive action plan created at the Earth Summit.

Agenda 21 is a voluntary, non-binding program for states to implement to help achieve sustainable development. In Chapter 33 under “Innovative Financing,” clause 16 notes, “New ways of generating new public and private financial resources should be explored, in particular: (e) The reallocation of resources at present committed to military purposes.”116 In 2000, the UNGA adopted the Millennium Declaration, which re-affirmed Agenda 21 and established the basis for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). In our publication, Opportunity Costs: Military Spending and the UN’s Development Agenda, the IPB discussed the Millennium Declaration and argued that military spending should be reduced and re-directed to fund the MDGs. Our Common Future, the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21 create an historical and environmental foundation upon which to challenge militarism and military spending. It is important to revisit these developments because the current discourse and research on sustainable development, such as by the IPCC and the DDPP, often overlook peace and disarmament.

5.2 The Earth Charter, 2000 After the Earth Summit, civil society organizations engaged in a six-year global dialogue and consultation to develop the shared values and vision for sustainable development. The drafting of The Earth Charter is considered the most comprehensive, inclusive and participatory process ever associated with the creation of an international declaration. The Earth Charter was finalized and presented at the Peace Palace in The Hague in the Netherlands in 2000 (Annex 2). It is the ethical framework for sustainable development and the foundation for “building a just, sustainable, and peaceful global society in the 21st century.”117 The Charter comprises 16 principles grouped into the following four categories: I. Respect and Care for the Community of Life 114

United Nations (1987) “Chapter 11: Peace, Security, Development, and the Environment,” In: Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, [Online] Available at: http://www.undocuments.net/ocf-11.htm 115 See the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development here: http://www.unep.org/Documents.multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=78&ArticleID=1163 116 United Nations (1992) Agenda 21, [Online] Available at: http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf 117 See The Earth Charter here: http://www.earthcharterinaction.org

33

II. Ecological Integrity III. Social and Economic justice IV. Democracy, Nonviolence and Peace118 Under IV, it states that to promote a culture of tolerance, nonviolence, and peace, national security systems must be “demilitarize[d] to the level of a non-provocative defense posture, and convert military resources to peaceful purposes, including ecological restoration.”119 The Earth Charter has been adopted by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the World Conservation Union (IUCN), but it has not yet been adopted by the UN General Assembly. It was also highlighted by the UN High-Level Panel on Global Sustainability in its 2012 report, Resilient Planet, Resilient People: A Future Worth Choosing, though it did not make any recommendations on peace and disarmament.120 The demilitarization clause of the Earth Charter reflects the will of civil society and should be remembered. The Secretariat in Costa Rica encourages individuals and institutions to endorse and promote The Earth Charter.

5.3 People’s Agreement on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, 2010 In April 2010, Bolivia held the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth in the city of Cochabamba. The event was held in response to the failure of the COP15 negotiations in Copenhagen in 2009 to negotiate a new framework for greenhouse gas mitigation to replace the Kyoto Protocol. Frustrated with the formal UNFCCC process, 30,000 civil society representatives and government officials from 100 countries attended the World People’s Conference. The meeting concluded with a People’s Agreement on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth. Excerpts of the Agreement are found in Annex 3. It is a comprehensive set of demands to tackle climate change, environmental degradation, inequality and poverty. The Agreement is based on the principles of human rights, harmony, collective well-being, and peace. A significant point in the preamble states: Capitalism requires a powerful military industry for its processes of accumulation and imposition of control over territories and natural resources, suppressing the resistance of the peoples. It is an imperialist system of colonization of the planet.121 In relation to climate financing and military spending, the Agreement states: Current funding directed toward developing countries for climate change and the proposal of the Copenhagen Accord is insignificant. In addition to Official Development Assistance and public sources, developed countries must commit to a new annual funding of at least 6% of GDP to tackle climate change in developing countries. This is viable considering that a similar amount is spent on national defense.122 The People’s Agreement received international media attention and broad civil society support. It is an aspirational and important reference document for global civil society to use to mobilize for COP21.

5.4 Militarism/War: Elephant in the Living Room Resolution, 2010

118

Ibid.

Ibid, 16(c) 120 United Nations (2012) Resilient Planet, Resilient People: A Future Worth Choosing , Secretary-General's High-level Panel on Global Sustainability, [Online] Available at: http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php? page=view&nr=374&type=400&menu=35 121 See The People’s Agreement on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth here: http://globalclimateconvergence.org/2014/08/peoples-agreement-cochabamba-world-peoples-conference-climatechange/ 122 Ibid.

119

34

At the COP16 meeting in Cancun, Mexico in November 2010, an American and Canadian environmental non-governmental organization, Climate SOS, promoted a resolution entitled War/Militarism: Elephant in the Living Room. The resolution arose from the Climate Justice Now Network and the United National Peace Conference in which almost a thousand peace activists attended in Albany, New York in July 2010.

The resolution highlighted the fact that the U.S. military is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases. It also called for the “redirection of the vast majority of military funding to fund human services, ensure decent quality of life, payment of ecological and climate debt, and compensation to countries and peoples damaged by U.S. militarism” (See Annex 4).

At the Cancun meeting, the resolution was circulated to delegates, given to government officials, copied to the White House, and released to the media. Maggie Zhou, a biologist with Climate SOS and a delegate at the official meeting had her accreditation revoked for her promotion of the resolution. In an interview, Zhou said, “We must shine a spotlight on this issue of military spending.”123 On the last day of COP16, International Human Rights Day, seventy environmental, peace and social justice organizations denounced Zhou’s accreditation revocation and called upon state parties to contend with the problem of militarism and greenhouse gas emissions, which they referred to as the “elephant in the living room,” or they warned that human rights and climate initiatives will fail.124 This resolution reflects the attempts made by civil society, without success, to try to bring the concerns about military emissions and expenditures onto the agenda of the UNFCCC. 5.4 Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming Appeal, 2014 In July of this year, peace and justice groups in the United States released the Peace Appeal: Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming in advance of the People’s Climate March and UN Climate Summit in New York. The Appeal highlights the dangerous feedback loop of the U.S. military’s exorbitant use of oil for warfighting and its wars for oil and resources that release greenhouse gases and cause global warming. The Appeal declares, “We can’t effectively address climate change without ending war and militarism” (See Annex 5).

American supporters are calling on the U.S. government to reduce military spending and shift it to financing a low-carbon economy, “The vast expenditures now consumed by military machines are the very resources needed for a crash program to rapidly create a renewable energy infrastructure and put millions of people to work in green jobs.” The Peace Appeal warns that to avoid worst-case climate disaster U.S. foreign policy must be demilitarized and calls for international cooperation to be strengthened. It has been widely circulated and has local, national and international support including from the IPB. This Appeal also serves an attempt to bring together more closely the peace and environmental movements. Many faith and labour organizations also support the Peace Appeal.

6.0 Peace and Disarmament Pathways for Deep Decarbonization Pathways to deep decarbonization must incorporate peace and disarmament. The IPB offers six peace and disarmament pathways that will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, generate financing for climate change mitigation and adaptation, create a green economy, and support climate-resilient communities. We emphasize that these pathways are premised on gender equality, racial and social justice, and respect for the rights of indigenous peoples. The IPB recognizes the powerful voice and position that women have on peace and security issues. The UN Security Council “Women, Peace and Security” suite of resolutions require that women have equal and full participation in the prevention and resolution of conflicts. This must apply to the challenge of climate change as women are disproportionately affected. In her article, War, Climate Change and Women, Maryam Roberts wrote: 123

See interview with Dr. Maggie Zhou here on Climate Change TV on Youtube: http://climatechangetv.rtcc.org/2010/12/10/maggie-zhou-december-2010/ 124 See War/Militarism: Elephant in the Living Room here: http://www.climatesos.org/wpcontent/uploads/2010/12/Military_Climate_resolution_Dec10_2010_delivery.pdf

35

Every time war and climate change erode the lives and rights of women, they further damage the fabric of our families, our culture and our societies.125 The IPB has outlined the importance of gender perspectives and human security in its 2005 publication, Warfare or Welfare? Disarmament for Development in the 21st Century. We also respect the leadership of indigenous people on environmental campaigns, such as the Rights of Nature and Rights of Mother Earth movements. We acknowledge that people in poor communities and developing countries have been subjected to environmental racism and harm and justice is central to solving the climate crisis.126 The IPB’s pathways of peace and disarmament uphold gender equality, social and racial justice, and the dignity of indigenous peoples.

6.1 Disarm and Demilitarize for Climate Justice and Sustainable Development Disarmament and demilitarization are vital drivers to climate justice and sustainable development. A climate-focused roadmap for disarmament and demilitarization could be developed by a UN appointed Group of Governmental Experts. In 2002, the General Assembly passed a resolution requesting the UN Secretary General appoint a Group of Governmental Experts to report on the state of the relationship between disarmament and development. The group was mandated to explore progress on the implementation of the action plan developed at the 1987 International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development. The group was also tasked with considering disarmament in the context of the new security environment and the new development agenda, the Millennium Development Goals. Two years later in 2004, the group submitted its report, The Relationship between Disarmament and Development in the Current International Context, to the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA). In the report, the group explained that disarmament and development are “two distinct, yet mutually reinforcing, processes that are linked by security in all its aspects.”127 The experts also affirmed that “disarmament and development are two of the international community’s most important tools for building a world free from want and fear.”128 They made several key recommendations:      

Mainstreaming the disarmament-development relationship Raising awareness of this relationship in the international community Reducing military expenditures Engaging in a wide range of conflict-prevention measures Promoting security through greater openness, transparency and confidence Strengthening the role of the United Nations and other international institutions, including the donor community, towards the aforementioned ends129

However, the report gives sparse acknowledgement of the environmental impacts of weapons and war and does not mention climate change. Ten years have passed since the report with climate change accelerating and environmental degradation worsening. An updated disarmament and development report is needed that integrates the climate change and environmental security. A new report would also address the changing international security context with an increasing population and social inequality, widespread use 125

Roberts, M. (2009) “War, Climate Change, and Women,” Race, Poverty & the Environment, Fall, [Online] Available at: http://www.movementgeneration.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/Roberts.Climate.16-2-10.pdf 126 Cameron, E., Shine, T. and Bevins, W. (2013) Climate Justice: Equity and Justice Informing a New Climate Agreement. Working Paper. World Resources Institute and Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice, [Online] Available at: http://www.mrfcj.org/media/pdf/climate_justice_equity_and_justice_informing_a_new_climate_agreement.pdf 127 United Nations (2004) The relationship between disarmament and development in the current international context .

Report of the Secretary-General, Department for Disarmament Affairs, [Online] Available at: http://www.un.org/disarmament/HomePage/ODAPublications/DisarmamentStudySeries/PDF/DSS_31.pdf 128 Ibid.

129 Ibid.

36

of unmanned aerial vehicles, the opening of the Arctic, and new civil conflicts and uprisings. It may also reinvigorate the UNODA Conference on Disarmament’s programme of work. There should be a formal link between the UNODA and UNEP that can move forward a climate and peace agenda.

Most importantly, the militarization of the climate crisis must be challenged. The risks of natural disasters and mass displacement cannot be used as justifications for the maintenance and expansion of the military.

The military’s purpose is warfighting, not humanitarian aid and disaster relief, which will be what is needed to cope with climate change. Our Common Future clearly stated, “There are, of course, no military solutions to ‘environmental insecurity’.130 As well, the climate must not be another casualty of the U.S. military. The latest U.S. DoD Quadrennial Defense Review claims that the impacts of climate change will increase the frequency, intensity and complexity of its future missions, which the DoD prioritizes as warfighting and projecting power.131 In Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for the 21st Century Defense, President Obama and the DoD assured that funding to the military will be maintained so that it is “the best-equipped fighting force in history.”132 Fighting is not the answer to the climate crisis. As Emily Gilbert in her article, The Militarization of Climate Change, explained: As the militarization of climate change unfolds, it is this interpretation that needs to be disrupted, both with respect to martial approaches to the environment, and with respect to the troubling attempts to use the mobilization of climate change to re-moralize war and the military.133 6.2 Reduce and Re-Direct Military Spending to Climate Finance and Research, Development, Demonstration and Deployment (RDD&D) Kumi Naidoo, the Executive Director of Greenpeace International, denounced the billions of dollars spent for the military. In a 2012 opinion piece titled, Two Bullets per Person: The Trillion Dollar Military Spending Club, Naidoo wrote, “A lot of money is being spent on preparing for war, how much is being spent on preventing it? How much is being spent on mitigating the risks of climate change? Very little by comparison and nowhere near enough.” 134 He recognized that less than 10% of military budgets is what is needed to invest in the UN Green Climate Fund. With Greenpeace International, the IPB calls for a reduction and redirection of military spending to finance urgent action for the climate.

Public funding needs to shift from military R&D to green research, development, demonstration and deployment (RDD&D). RDD&D is needed to advance the technological solutions for climate mitigation and adaption. The Director of the SDSN, Jeffrey Sachs, emphasized in a recent interview, “We are profoundly under investing in research and development of low carbon technology.” That’s confirmed in the report, Military vs Climate Security: The 2011 Budgets Compared, by the Institute for Policy Studies. The report found that the U.S. government spent $77 billion on military R&D but only $8 billion on climate R&D.135 The IEA estimates that funding for climate RDD&D requires a two to five fold increase.136 There needs to be more research into innovative renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency. However, there needs 130

United Nations (1987) “Chapter 11: Peace, Security, Development, and the Environment,” In: Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development , [Online] Available at: http://www.undocuments.net/ocf-11.htm 131 United States (2014) Quadrennial Defense Review. Department of Defense [Online] Available at: http://www.defense.gov/pubs/2014_Quadrennial_Defense_Review.pdf 132 United States (2012) Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for the 21st Century Defense , Department of Defense report, [Online] Available at: http://www.defense.gov/news/defense_strategic_guidance.pdf 133 Gilbert, E. (2012) “The Militarization of Climate Change,” ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, [Online] Available at: http://www.acme-journal.org/vol11/Gilbert2012.pdf 134 Naido, K. (2012) “Two Bullets per Person: The Trillion Dollar Military Spending Club,” The Huffington Post, [Online] Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kumi-naidoo/two-bullets-per-person-th_b_1431642.html 135 Pemberton, M. (2011) Military vs Climate Security: The 2011 Budgets Compared . Foreign Policy in Focus of the Institute for Policy Studies, [Online] Available at: http://fpif.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/mil-v-climate-2010.pdf

37

to be more research into the military’s carbon emissions and environmental impacts. In scanning the academic literature and the IPCC publications for this report, there is an obvious research gap in assessing the climate and environmental impacts of the military sector. Independent, publicly available scientific and technical research is needed on the fuel consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts of the military in every country. This information is vital for decision-making about deep decarbonization and sustainable pathways for the future.

6.3 Mitigate and Adapt, Stop the Industrialization and Militarization of the Arctic The Arctic is a fragile ecosystem that is experiencing dramatic warming from melting glaciers and loss of sea ice. The opening of the Arctic Ocean is leading countries to pursue more industrialization and militarization in this highly sensitive area. A 2009 U.S. Geological Survey estimated that the Arctic holds 30% of the world’s recoverable gas and over 10% of the world’s remaining oil deposits.137 However, natural resource development in this remote region is risky, because it is difficult to monitor and remediate. For instance, there still remains contamination from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska.138 Greenpeace’s concern led its Arctic 30 activists to try to stop further offshore development by protesting Russia’s Gazprom oil rig.139 Shell is exploring for oil and has plans for development. To stay within our carbon budget, Arctic oil should be left under the ice to prevent dangerous climate change. Yet, Russia, Canada, Norway and China are pursuing greater development and shipping that will further threaten the region. Last October, the first Norwegian marine bulk carrier picked up a load of coal from Canada’s pacific coast, sailed across the Northwest Passage and made a delivery in Finland.

Countries are also militarizing the Arctic, modernizing their navies and steering toward conflict. Warships and naval activity pose a serious environmental risk to the Arctic. Naval sonar adversely affects marine life and the ocean floor is littered with exploded and unexploded ordinances. Walruses, seals, narwhals, whales and polar bears are some of the endangered species that will be more threatened by the industrialization and militarization of the Arctic. In his column, Disarming Arctic Security, Ernie Regehr reports that Russia is also modernizing its navy with new attack, intercontinental ballistic missile submarines.140 The Canadian government is spending $25 billion to build a new fleet of armed combat vessels. Last November, the U.S. christened the first of a new class of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, the $7 billion USS Zumwalt. The Royal Navy just unveiled the largest British warship in its history, the 65,000-tonne HMS Queen Elizabeth that cost £6.2 billion (along with its support ship). The amount spent for warships is more than these countries have spent to mitigate climate change and prevent its adverse effects in the Arctic. Sheila WattCloutier, a Canadian Inuit activist who was co-nominated with Al Gore for the Nobel Peace Prize, has denounced the militarization of the Arctic.141 Instead of competition over resources and militarized conflict, maritime disputes can be settled more responsibly through international law, such as UN Convention on the Law of the Seas and diplomacy, such as the Arctic Council. Russia, China, Canada, the UK and 163 other countries have acceded or ratified the 136

International Energy Agency (2010) Energy Technology Perspectives: Scenarios & Strategies to 2050 . [Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/techno/etp/etp10/English.pdf, p.7.

137 United States (2009) Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal: Estimates of Undiscovered Oil and Gas North of the Arctic Circle, United States Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey, [Online] Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3049/fs2008-3049.pdf 138 United States (2009) Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal: Estimates of Undiscovered Oil and Gas North of the Arctic Circle, United States Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey, [Online] Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3049/fs2008-3049.pdf 139 See Greenpeace International’s #SavetheArctic program here: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/arctic-impacts/ 140 Regehr, E. (2013) Disarming Arctic Security, Occasional briefing paper, [Online] Available at: http://www.thesimonsfoundation.ca/projects/disarming-arctic-security 141 Speech at the 2030 North Conference in Ottawa, Canada in 2009: http://arctic.blogs.panda.org/default/climatechange-is-changing-who-we-are/

38

Convention on the Law of the Seas, which is a comprehensive legal framework with a binding dispute settlement system to ensure “the peaceful uses of the seas and oceans” (the U.S. has not ratified the treaty).142 IPB supports Greenpeace’s campaign to Save the Arctic and prevent offshore oil development.

The IPB further calls for a global campaign to demand that the Arctic be demilitarized, declared a nuclear weapons-free zone and zone of peace.

6.4 Convert Defence Industries to Civilian and Create Green Jobs in Low-Carbon Economies To achieve deep decarbonization, the carbon-intense, militarized economies of most Western countries can no longer be maintained. Countries must pursue conversion from defence industries to civilian industries to climate-proof the economy. Conversion of defence industries, also known as economic conversion, refers to the process of re-orienting a military or defence company, laboratory or base to a civilian purpose.143 For five decades, American industrial engineering professor, Seymour Melman, extensively studied and advocated for conversion of the U.S. war economy but was ignored by the federal government. He and other academics and activists detailed comprehensive conversion plans of American defence industries as part of an integrated disarmament plan that were unfortunately shelved. In his 1988 book, The Demilitarized Society: Disarmament & Conversion, Melman wrote, “There is little chance for either life or social justice in a warfare state.” 144 Similarly, there is no chance to stabilize the climate and achieve sustainable development with continued militarism. The UN expert group, in its 2004 UN report, The Relationship between Disarmament and Development in the Current International Context, recommended that “conversion should be encouraged as a long-term strategy that contributes to both disarmament and development.” To tackle the climate crisis, a conversion-disarmament plan would help lay the foundation for building the green economy.

A green economy is defined as low-carbon, resource efficient and socially inclusive, according to UNEP’s Green Economy Initiative (GEI). In Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication, UNEP presents examples of green jobs around the world in several sectors: renewable energy, manufacturing, waste management, buildings, transportation, tourism and cities. It also provides feasible strategies for transition from high-carbon to low-carbon industries. However, the report fails to consider conversion of defence industries and the demilitarization of economies.145 In 2012, the UN held the Rio +20 Earth Summit in Brazil with the theme of the green economy. It was the largest UN gathering in history. At the Summit, the IPB and several partners unveiled a bread tank sculpture to symbolize the neglect of the peace and disarmament agenda. Inside the tank was a vegetable garden to represent the possibility of cutting military expenditures to feed people, eliminate poverty and green the economy.146 In his 2007 book, The Green Collar Economy: How One Solution Can Fix Our Two Biggest Problems, Van Jones explicitly made the links between inflated military spending, climate change and poverty. Jones, an American environmental advocate and attorney, argued that a green economy could overcome these challenges and showed how it was possible through Green For All. His organization is training and employing people to weatherize homes and buildings, install renewable energy technologies and implement sustainability projects to make climate-resilient communities, particularly in poor neighbourhoods, across the U.S.147 Green For All also has special programs for veterans to give them training in construction to help build a green economy. In 2011, the Political Economic Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts published a study, U.S. Employment Effects on Military and Domestic 142

See the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas here: http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm 143 Melman, S. (1988) The Demilitarized Society: Disarmament and Conversion . Nottingham, UK: Spokesman, p.21.

144 Melman, S. (1988) The Demilitarized Society: Disarmament and Conversion . Nottingham, UK: Spokesman.

145 United Nations (2011) Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication , [Online] Available at: http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/ger_final_dec_2011/Green %20EconomyReport_Final_Dec2011.pdf 146 See the Rio +20 Disarmament for Sustainable Development web site: http://www.worldwithoutwars.org/news/rio20-disarmament-sustainable-development 147 See the Green for All web site here: http://greenforall.org/

39

Spending Priorities, that found that more jobs could be created with $1 billion in government expenditures in health care, education, and construction than in the military.148 With the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan largely over, the DoD’s Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA) is providing grants for defense transition to communities, as explained by Miriam Pemberton in her article, Demilitarizing the Economy: A Movement is Underway.149 Last year, Connecticut passed a bill to establish a Commission to explore how defense industries could be transitioned into civilian ones in the state. It gathered input through public consultations and its report is due at the end of this year.150 This month UNEP released its Green Economy Toolkit for Policymakers to assist governments in devising and implementing national green economy policies.151 It also recommended that 2% of GDP be invested annually by the public and private sector until 2050 to finance the green economy. About this report, the British Special Representative for Climate Change, Sir David King confirmed, “A transition to a green economy is needed to tackle the enormous environmental challenges we face.” The IPB asserts that this green economy transition can be financed by reducing military spending and that more people could be employed in a green, demilitarized economy that would push us faster and further into the deep decarbonization pathway.

6.5 Abolish Nuclear Weapons and Phase Out Nuclear Energy Due to the inherent link with nuclear weapons, the IPB is opposed to nuclear power as a pathway to a lowcarbon future as proposed by the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project (DDPP). Nuclear power risks high costs and accidents, such as the terrible explosion in Chernobyl in 1986 and the melt down in Fukushima in 2011. There is also no safe storage for nuclear wastes. Mining for uranium leads to environmental contamination and the transportation, enrichment, and conversion of uranium is carbon-intensive.152 The DDPP is considering advanced or fourth-generation nuclear energy for low-carbon electricity for countries with nuclear power programs or access to uranium. In its country-level reports for India, China, France, the United Kingdom, Russia and the United States, a nuclear energy strategy was proposed. These five countries also possess nuclear weapons and spend billions of dollars maintaining their arsenals (Table 3).

India is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which entered into force in 1970. The UK ratified and China and France acceded to the NPT in 1992. Though Russia and the United States have ratified the treaty, they possess the majority of nuclear weapons and spend the most amount of money to maintain them.

Table 3: List of Countries Possessing Nuclear Weapons, Number of Weapons & Costs, 2010 2010 Number of Nuclear Nuclear Weapons Nuclear Weapons Country Weapons Core Cost Full Cost (2014) ($US billions) ($US billions) United States 7,315 30.9 55.6 Russia 8,000 6.8 9.7 China 250 5.7 6.8 France 300 4.6 5.9 148

Pollin, R. and Garrett-Peltier , H. (2011) The U.S. Employment Effects Of Military And Domestic Spending Priorities.

Report for the Political Economy Research Institute, University Of Massachusetts, Amherst.

149 Pemberton, M. (2013) “Demilitarizing the Economy: A Movement is Underway,” Common Dreams, [Online] Available at: http://www.commondreams.org/views/2013/12/20/demilitarizing-economy-movement-underway 150 See Commission on Connecticut’s Future here: http://www.ct.gov/ecd/cwp/view.asp?a=1097&q=532620 151 United Nations Environment Programme (2014) Green Economy Toolkit for Policymakers. A Guidance Manual for Green Economy Policy Assessment. [Online] Available at: http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/GEI%20Highlights/UNEP%20Assessment%20GE %20Policymaking_for%20web.pdf 152 An example is Elliot Lake, Ontario, Canada called the “Uranium Capital,” learn more about its toxic environmental legacy here: http://www.uranium-network.org/images/Canada/Yellowcake%20Series%20WS%2020092010.pdf

40

United Kingdom India Israel Pakistan North Korea

225 3.5 4.5 90-110 3.4 4.1 80 1.5 1.9 100-120 .8 1.8 <10 .5 .7 Total 16,400 $57.7 $91.0 Sources: Kristensen, H. and Norris, R. (2014) “Worldwide deployments of nuclear weapons, 2014,” Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, [Online] Available at: http://bos.sagepub.com/cgi/collection/nuclearnotebook and Blair, B. and Brown, M. (2011) Nuclear Weapons Cost Study, Global Zero Technical Report, [Online] Available at: http://www.globalzero.org/files/gz_nuclear_weapons_cost_study.pdf. Note: Core costs refer to researching, developing, procuring, testing, operating and maintaining the nuclear arsenal. Full costs add unpaid/deferred environmental and health costs, missile defences, nuclear threat reduction and incident management.

Global Zero, an international movement to abolish nuclear weapons launched in 2008, commissioned a study to determine the core and full costs of nuclear weapons. Its report, Nuclear Weapons Cost Study, the authors estimated that world spending on nuclear weapons exceeds one trillion dollars per decade and predicted that another trillion dollars will be spent over the next decade as countries modernize their arsenals (Table 3).

The IPB submitted a letter to the DDPP expressing our opposition to nuclear energy as a pathway for deep decarbonization (See Annex 1). The IPB advocates for the abolition of nuclear weapons and the decommissioning of nuclear power plants. The IPB also calls for the re-direction of nuclear weapons spending to environmental remediation and renewable energy. A nuclear-free and carbon-free energy strategy is possible. In 2010, the Nuclear Policy Research Institute and the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research released a report that described how the U.S. could develop an energy roadmap that was carbon-free and nuclear-free.153 6.6 Integrate Cooperation, Peacebuilding and Nonviolence for Climate-Resilient Communities Climate change has been characterized as a “threat multiplier” exacerbating environmental and social pressures that will likely lead to violent competition, armed conflict, state destabilization and displacement that requires military intervention.154 Climate change and environmental degradation will lead to conflict but it does not have to be competitive and violent. So, how can communities prepare for and cope in resource and climate constrained conditions? How can communities confront climate and environmental challenges peacefully? Cooperation, peacebuilding and nonviolence are the essential pillars for building climate-resilient communities that can withstand the impacts of climate change.

Cooperation is the foundation upon which the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has been build. The IPCC Working Group 3 affirmed in its latest report, “International cooperation is therefore required to effectively mitigate GHG emissions and address other climate issues.”155 Cooperation involves respect for the rule of law, diplomacy and consensus to deal with the climate crisis. There is no need for the military and its use of force, coercion or violence. The UN, academic researchers and development specialists have studied and affirmed that cooperation is possible in challenging environmental and natural resource conflict.156 153

2010 report, Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy , by Dr. Arjun Makhijani that is available online at: http://ieer.org/resource/reports/carbon-free-and-nuclear-free/ 154 CNA Military Advisory Board (2014) National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change . Report for CNA Corporation, [Online] Available at: http://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/MAB_2014.pdf 155 IPCC (2014) Summary for Policymakers, In: Climate Change 2014, Mitigation of Climate Change . [Online] Available at: http://report.mitigation2014.org/spm/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers_approved.pdf 156 Dinar, S. ed. (2011) Beyond Resource Wars. Cambridge: The MIT Press and Tanzler, D. et al. (2013) Adaptation to climate change for peace and stability, Adelphi report, [Online] Available at:

41

In 2005, the UN established a Peacebuilding Commission, an Expert Advisory Group on Conflict and Peacebuilding, and a Peacebuilding Fund to support countries emerging from conflict and later released a policy entitled From Conflict to Peacebuilding: The Role of Natural Resources and the Environment.

Peacebuilding is defined as societies equipping themselves to manage conflicts without resorting to violence.157 For natural resources, it is an inclusive, participatory programme involving democratic governance, education and training for nonviolent conflict resolution and mediation, the rule of law, and wealth sharing.158 Environmental peacebuilding is a new and growing programme that is being jointly developed by the UN and academic partners for post-conflict environmental and natural resource management.159 Yet, it should be expanded to deal with the climate crisis. That same year, the UN also launched the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 to build capacity and resilience in nations and communities to handle natural disasters from climate change and later formed the Partnership for Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction (PEDRR).160 Through the Hyogo Framework for Action and the PEDRR, resilience is achieved through the prevention, preparedness and mitigation of natural disaster. Yet, the Hyogo Framework does not deal with peacebuilding. There needs to be a strong connection between peacebuilding and capacity-building for disasters and risks to cooperatively confront the climate crisis.

Building resiliency is also essential for climate mitigation and adaptation. In its latest report, the IPCC Working Group II explained that many climate change risks are concentrated in urban areas and urged states to take steps to build resilience.161 Resilience is defined as “the capacity of social, economic, and environmental systems to cope with a hazardous event or trend or disturbance, responding or reorganizing in ways that maintain their essential function, identity, and structure, while also maintaining the capacity for adaptation, learning, and transformation.” 162 The concept of resiliency in respect to climate change is most fully articulated by the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on Global Sustainability. In 2012 in advance of the Rio +20 Summit on Sustainable Development, the panel prepared and released its 100-page report, Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A Future Worth Choosing.163 It is explained that social protection and safety nets are essential for climate resiliency. It made 56 recommendations to make greater progress on sustainable development. However, the report does not mention peace and disarmament.

Later that same year, 2012, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) adopted its updated Framework for Action for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence. UNESCO defines this culture as, “values, attitudes and behaviours that reflect and inspire social interaction and sharing based on the principles of freedom, justice and democracy, all human rights, tolerance and solidarity, that reject violence and endeavour to prevent conflicts by tackling their root causes to solve problems through dialogue and negotiation and that guarantee the full exercise of all rights and the means to participate fully in the development process of their society.”164 This definition relates well to environmental peacebuilding http://www.adelphi.de/files/uploads/andere/pdf/application/pdf/adaptation_for_peace_and_stability_studycomplete.pdf 157 Smith, D. and Vivekananda, J.(2007) A Climate of Conflict: The Links between Climate Change, Peace and War, International Alert report, [Online] Available at: http://www.internationalalert.org/sites/default/files/ClimateChange_ClimateOfConflict_EN_2007_0.pdf 158 Conca, K. and Wallace, J. (2013) “Environment and Peacebuilding in war-torn societies: Lessons from the UN Environment Programme’s experience with post-conflict assessment,” in Jensen, D. and Lonergan, S. (eds.) Assessing and Restoring Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding, London: Earthscan, pp. 63-84.

159 Visit Environmental Peacebuilding here: http://environmentalpeacebuilding.org 160 United Nations (2005) Hyogo Framework for Action, Extract from the final report of the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (A/CONF.206/6), [Online] Available at: http://www.unisdr.org/files/1037_hyogoframeworkforactionenglish.pdf 161 IPCC (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability .

[Online] Available at: http://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/WG2AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf 162 Ibid.

163 United Nations (2012) Resilient Planet, Resilient People: A Future Worth Choosing , Secretary-General's High-level Panel on Global Sustainability, [Online] Available at: http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php? page=view&nr=374&type=400&menu=35

42

and climate resiliency. Yet, climate change is not mentioned in the framework. There must be integration between the UN work on resiliency and a culture of peace and nonviolence for sustainable development.

For these UN initiatives to support climate-resilient communities there needs to be systematic integration and coherence among peacebuilding, a culture of peace and nonviolence, disaster risk reduction, development, mitigation and adaptation. There needs to be better collaboration among the UNFCCC, UNEP, UNODA and UNESCO. The UN and the international community must have a holistic approach to sustainable development that does not neglect the peace and disarmament agenda and the culture of peace and nonviolence while confronting the climate crisis. The IPB contends that peace should be mainstreamed in IPCC negotiations, climate financing, mitigation and adaptation for climate-resilient communities.

7.0 Uniting the Movements to Amplify the Message The IPB hopes that this report contributes to uniting the peace, environment, development, labour, and faith communities for demilitarization for deep decarbonization. Together, we must confront the problems of militarism and military spending to overcome the climate crisis. The problems will only be overcome with a united and international movement for transformation. As a step toward this transformation, the IPB invites participation in our Global Day of Action on Military Spending. We also urge resistance to the greenwash by weapons manufacturers and the plan for green warfighting by defence departments. Energy efficient weapons and warfare cannot be accepted for sustainable development. Weapons and war are carbon-intensive and keep us in the destructive direction to dangerous climate change. To stabilize the climate, to protect the environment and to develop sustainably, war must be abolished. A united global civil society movement can make this happen.

7.1 Join the Global Day of Action and Campaign on Military Spending In 2011, the IPB in collaboration with the Institute for Policy Studies launched the first annual Global Day of Action on Military Spending (GDAMS). The day is held every April and coincides with the release of the SIPRI Yearbook on Military Expenditures and Tax Day in the United States. For the past four years, IPB members and supporters have held events around the world to raise awareness about the problem with military spending. This year there were 158 actions in 34 countries and an international social media campaign “If I had $1.75 trillion US.” The IPB encourages civil society organizations and individuals to join GDAMS. Our web site provides organizers with materials, fact sheets, and reports to get started.165 In 2015, the IPB plans to organize a special campaign linking GDAMS with Earth Day, which is celebrated on April 22, as another way to expose the link between militarism and the climate and environmental crises. We hope to raise awareness about how military spending deprives countries from having the financial resources to protect the environment and stabilize the climate, and that a reduction of military expenditures could be re-directed to climate financing like the UN GCF. 166 The IPB plans to expand GDAMS into an ongoing, international campaign to reduce military spending to meet urgent social and environmental needs.

7.2 Reject Weapons Manufacturers’ Greenwash and the Military’s Green Warfighting The IPB rejects efforts to make warfighting more energy efficient and calls on states to demilitarize. The IPB also considers plans by arms manufacturers to make “environmentally-friendly” weapons systems to be “greenwash,” deceptive and discreditable environmental marketing. For example, the “climate champion” branding of Lockheed Martin, the world’s top weapons manufacturer with net sales of $45 billion and net 164

UNESCO (2012) UNESCO’s Programme of Action for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence: A vision in action, [Online] Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002177/217786e.pdf 165 See the Global Day of Action on Military Spending here: http://demilitarize.org/ 166 See more information about Earth Day here: http://www.earthday.org/

43

profits of $3 billion. It is one of the main manufacturers of nuclear weapons, hellfire missiles, naval weapons systems, drones, fighter jets and bombers – products that emit greenhouse gases and pollute the natural environment. In 2008, Lockheed Martin launched a Go Green initiative and spent a paltry $40 million over six years on an environmental strategy.167 Lockheed Martin bills itself as a renewable energy expert and is trying to secure contracts with cities on green urban projects. However, in 2011, the people in Burlington, Vermont mobilized to prevent Lockheed Martin from partnering with the state capital on a renewable energy plan, because they did not want the weapons manufacturer to taint the capital’s hard earned reputation as a green city.168 Nevertheless, Lockheed Martin along with Raytheon, another top weapons manufacturer, won “Climate Leader” awards from the Environmental Protection Agency in 2013.169 As journalist Jeremy Schulman explained in his article, “Defense Contractor: Climate Change Could Create "Business Opportunities,” the weapons companies are hoping climate-related security risks will increase demand for their products and that their “green” reputations will award them more government contracts, though most of these companies have been cited on the federal contractor misconduct list by the Project on Government Oversight.170 The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) contains the largest database in the world of companies’ environmental reporting that includes their data on climate change, water and forest-risk.171 Eight of the ten top arms-producing companies submit reports to the CDP with a paucity and opaqueness of information. Still the CDP gives these companies A ratings for their reporting. For example in Lockheed Martin’s climate report there is no mention of its jet-fuel guzzling F-35 stealth fighter program.

The IPB denounces the “greenwash” of the defence contractors and challenges the scoring company reports in the CDP. We also deplore the selection of Lockheed Martin as the premium, platinum sponsor of the NYC 2014 Climate Week events.172 As a top sponsor, Lockheed Martin is given high visibility and recognition at the events, which give the false public impression that it is a corporation caring about the climate.

The IPB also rejects the pursuit of “greening” warfighting by departments of defence around the world, including the UK and the U.S.173 The U.S. DoD’s National Defense Center for Energy and Environment has a mandate to support environmental sustainability, military readiness, and warfighting. The Pentagon centre is planning technology transitions for less toxic, environmentally-friendly and fuel-efficient military bases, weapons systems and warfighting.174 “More fight, less fuel” is what is planned by the DoD in a 2011 report, Energy for the Warfighter: Operational Energy Strategy.175 The IPB maintains that there should be no fight and no fossil fuels for deep decarbonization and sustainable development to be achieved. Further, as argued above, with peacebuilding for climate mitigation and adaptation, cooperation and not armed conflict is possible in constrained natural resource environments. Every state should be preparing for peace and adapting to climate change, our greatest human security threat, not planning for war.

167

See Lockheed Martin’s program “Go Green” here: http://www.lockheedmartin.co.uk/us/tallevast/programs/school/go-green.html 168 Goodnough, A. (2011) "In a Green Town, Activists See Red Over Lockheed Martin," The New York Times, [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/12/us/12burlington.html?_r=0 169 See the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2013 Climate Leader Awards here: http://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/awards/2013winners.html 170 Schulman, J. (2013) “Defense Contractor: Climate Change Could Create "Business Opportunities,” Mother Jones Magazine, [Online] Available at: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/08/raytheon-climate-changesecurity and See the Federal Contractor Misconduct Database here: http://www.contractormisconduct.org/ 171 See the Carbon Disclosure Project here: https://www.cdp.net/en-US/Results/Pages/responses.aspx 172 See NYC Climate Week 2014 Partners & Sponsors here: http://www.climateweeknyc.org/partners-sponsors/ 173 See the UK Ministry of Defence’s climate change and sustainable development plans here: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-defence/about/our-energy-use and Brzoska, M. (2012) “Climate change and the military in China, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 68 (2), pp. 48-54.

174 See more information about the U.S. Department of Defense’s National Defense Center for Energy and Environment here: http://www.ndcee.ctc.com/index.php/about-ndcee/technology-transition-approach 175 United States (2011) Energy for the Warfighter: Operational Energy Strategy. Department of Defense Report, [Online] Available at: http://energy.defense.gov/Portals/25/Documents/Reports/20110614_Operational_Energy_Strategy.pdf

44

8.0 Recommendations The IPB recommendations offered here are directed to the SDSN and IDDRI that administer the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project, UNFCCC, UNEP, other UN agencies and national governments. Most of these recommendations were elaborated upon throughout the report. They also include a special appeal to the scientific, engineering and R&D communities to study the military’s environmental and carbon “bootprint” and to examine the possibilities of demilitarization for decarbonization. As well, the UN and the academic community should acknowledge the omission of military emissions in their research and work for completeness.            



 



  

For deep decarbonization, the SDSN and IDDRI should include a decarbonization pathway for the military sector in every state in the final report If the military sector is not a pathway explored, the exclusion of military emissions should by acknowledged in the Deep Decarbonization final report.

The UNFCCC should put on the agenda and re-negotiate military exemptions in the next climate agreement The UNFCCC should end all military exemptions to greenhouse gas reporting in future climate change agreements The UNFCCC and the IPCC should establish a working group to investigate the greenhouse gas emissions of the military sector and release a report The UNFCCC roster of experts should include specialists with an expertise in defence materiel and fuel use The UNFCCC expert review teams should do a desk study and in-country visit for the military sector For National Communications, the IPCC should create mandatory reporting guidelines to disaggregate data for the military and make the military a separate sector For National Adaptation Programmes of Action, they should include peacebuilding initiatives to ensure climate-resiliency in communities and states UNEP should convene a special meeting and report related to its mandate Preventing Military Impacts on Environments with focus on greenhouse gas emissions UNEP should include greenhouse gas emission estimates in post-conflict environmental assessment reports UNEP to conduct post-conflict environmental assessment reports that include greenhouse gas emission calculations and environmental impacts of weapons use for recent wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Gaza and Syria UN to create a formal link and liaison between the UN Office on Disarmament and the UN Green Economy Initiative for better collaboration and coherence among environment, development, peace and climate Across the UN and its agencies, peace and peacebuilding should be mainstreamed and expressly linked to climate change programmes and disaster risk reduction planning UN General Assembly should introduce and pass a resolution on the creation of a special commission to examine demilitarization and economic conversion from militarized industries to civilian industries in order to green the economy The UN General Assembly should put forward a Uniting for Peace Resolution (377) that gives the body the right to directly deal with issues not effectively addressed in the UN Security Council, such as demilitarization for deep decarbonization. Any member of the GA can introduce a Uniting for Peace Resolution The UN appoint a new Group of Governmental Experts to update the 2004 disarmamentdevelopment report from a climate perspective The UN Special Rapporteur for Climate, Mary Robinson, should convene a meeting and report on the climate impacts of the military and a decarbonization plan for the military The OECD should compile data on state budgets that compare public spending on environment and climate. The OECD is already collecting environmental statistics and should add countries’ expenditures for the public financing of environment and climate change 45

  

   

States must reduce military spending and redirect it to meeting the UN Green Climate Fund for climate mitigation and adaptation and to environmental remediation States must reduce military spending and redirect it to meet the UN Decade of Sustainable Energy for All for global energy security and the Global Environmental Facility for trans-boundary problems States must report the life-cycle fuel use, greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts of their domestic and international military operations, procurement and facilities and make those reports publicly available for peer review and verification States must cease R&D into new weapons and invest in RDD&D into renewable energy technologies, energy efficiency and conversion from the war economy to the green economy States must abolish nuclear weapons, decommission nuclear power plants and re-direct nuclear spending and R&D for renewable energy and investment in climate financing The scientific and R&D communities should acknowledge the limitations of their analysis if they do not include military emissions in their research and reporting The scientific and R&D communities should undertake more research into conversion and demilitarization as a pathway to deep decarbonization and the conversion of defence industries

The consideration and fulfilment of these recommendations will require pressure and advocacy from global civil society.

9.0 Conclusion Climate change is becoming more serious with each passing decade as more greenhouse gas emissions are released and extreme weather events take place. The scientific evidence is clear and unequivocal, yet we are not taking adequate action and not investing enough to slow down global warming. Instead, our governments are spending more on military expenditures to buy and build new warships, fighter jets, and missile systems rather than spending on urgent environmental and social programs. In this report, Demilitarization for Deep Decarbonization, the International Peace Bureau has argued that militarism and military expenditures must be reduced and re-directed toward climate finance to create low carbon economies and climate-resilient communities. Betsy Hartmann, a professor of development studies and director of the Population and Development Program at Hampshire College, affirmed, “Militarism stands in the way of achieving progress on climate change.”176 Demilitarization and disarmament must take place alongside climate mitigation and adaptation strategies to achieve the deep decarbonization required to stabilize the climate by 2050. The military, which accounts for a disproportionate amount of carbon emissions and toxic pollution, must not longer be exempted from reporting and must not be given any amount of the carbon budget. The military is an extremely destructive sector to the planet and to people; it is the problem, not the solution to the climate crisis. We concluded our report with six peace and disarmament pathways to decarbonization and sustainable development. We also offered several specific recommendations to UN agencies, international organizations and national governments to confront the troubling nexus between militarism and climate change. It will require a unified, global movement of civil society organizations and concerned citizens to push for the realization of these pathways and the implementation of these recommendations. For the IPB, ultimately, war must stop for global warming to slow down. With the urgency and severity of climate change, we demand that national governments shift their budgets and priorities from planning for warfare to protecting the planet before it is too late.

176

Mychalejko, C. (2013) “Turtles and Tomahawk Missiles, Together at Last? War is Not the Answer to Climate Change,” Truthout, [Online] Available at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/13917-turtles-and-tomahawk-missilestogether-at-last-war-is-not-the-answer-to-climate-change

46

Annex 1: IPB’s Letter to the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project, 2014

To:

Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) and the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI)

Date:

August 15, 2014

Re:

Comment on the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project (DDPP)

The International Peace Bureau (IPB) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments to the Pathways to Deep Decarbonization Interim 2014 Report. We applaud the important work done by the SDSN, the IDDRI and the country research teams to determine how states can reduce greenhouse gas emissions to stabilize the climate. We would like to raise several concerns and questions about the report and the pathways project in the hopes that they will be addressed by the coordinating organizations.

First, we would like to share with you information about our organization. The IPB was founded in 1891 and is the world’s oldest international peace network with a membership of 300 affiliates. Our vision is of a world without war and one of our main program areas is Disarmament for Development. In 2005, we published a report entitled Warfare or Welfare? Disarmament for Development in the 21st Century and in 2012 we released a publication entitled Opportunity Costs: Military Spending and the UN’s Development Agenda. These reports can be found on our web site at http://www.ipb.org. The IPB is concerned that global, annual military spending of $1.7 trillion deprives states of the funding needed to invest in urgent social and environmental needs like climate change. We are also concerned about the climate impacts from states’ militaries, such as the greenhouse gas emissions from tanks, warships, and aircraft and from military operations such as the recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the NATO bombings in Libya in 2011 and the ongoing civil war in Syria, among other conflicts.

Second, along with the SDSN and the IDDRI, the IPB shares a firm commitment to sustainable development. The Pathways to Deep Decarbonization report states that “avoiding dangerous climate change and achieving sustainable development are inextricably linked.” We agree and recall the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, which articulates the principles of sustainable development and states in Principle 25 that “peace, development and environmental protection are interdependent and indivisible.” However, in the Pathways to Deep Decarbonization report, peace is not mentioned and the military is not examined as a sector. There are only two minor references to the military in the report: 47

1.

On page 185, “Transportation’s one-third share of emissions rises to 60% of total final emissions by 2050 (excluding electrified transport), as the remaining fossil fuels in the economy are applied to largely to long-distance transport end-uses (including aviation and military use) that are difficult to electrify or convert to pipeline gas.”

2.

On page 187, “Residual petroleum use is in the transportation sector, where it continues to be used in some light duty and transit vehicles, civilian aviation, and military vehicles and aircraft.”

From these two references, it seems to us that greenhouse gas emissions from the military are accepted as a Business-As-Usual scenario for the future. Can the SDSN and the IDDRI clarify if the pathways identified in the country reports contribute to deep reductions for states’ militaries? If not, can the five key questions devised by SDSN and the IDDRI be applied to the military sector and answered in next year’s final report? Can key metrics related to greenhouse gas emissions for the military be developed, so that states and the general public have the necessary data to support decision making for deep decarbonization across the economy and for sustainable development?

Third, why have the country research teams not considered the military as a separate sector?

According to the International Energy Agency, the US Department of Defense is the largest institutional consumer of fossil fuels in the world, spending $15 billion annually. The country reports are limited to the sectors of transport, buildings and industry. Yet, consider the following information for the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada, for which DDPP reports have been done, from their respective national accounts and defence procurements:  In 2013, the United States government spent $607 billion on the military but only $38 billion on environment and natural resources. The US is a highly militarized economy and a chief arms exporter with 7 of the 10 top weapons manufacturers in the world according the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. This year, the US christened its largest and costliest warship, the $7 billion USS Zumwalt, and is procuring the most expensive weapons system in its history, the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter fleet. The new warship and fighter jets use a tremendously carbon intensive JP-5 military-grade jet fuel. If the Pathways to Deep Decarbonization neglect the fundamental character of the U.S. economy it will not achieve the greenhouse gas reduction targets needed in the country. We draw your attention to the report written by the senior economist at the Institute for Policy Studies Dr. Miriam Pemberton, Military vs. Climate Security: The 2011 Budgets Compared, which is available online here: http://fpif.org/military_vs_climate_security_the_2011_budgets_compared/  In 2013, the United Kingdom spent £37 billion on the Ministry of Defence versus £7 billion combined on the Department of Environment, Food & Rural Affairs and the Department of Energy and Climate Change. This year, the Royal Navy unveiled the largest warship in its history, the 65,000tonne HMS Queen Elizabeth that cost £6.2 billion (along with its support ship), and the British government announced plans to purchase a fleet of new F-35s for £2.5 billion.  In 2013, Australia spent $24 billion but only $3 billion for environmental protection. This year, the Australian government has terminated its carbon tax. Over the next three years, the federal government plans to reduce environmental spending by 50% but has increased the defence budget by 6%. The Australian air force will also buy new fighter jets for $12 billion.  In 2011, the Canadian government abrogated from the Kyoto Protocol. In 2013, the federal government spent $23 billion on the Department of Defence versus $1.5 billion on Environment Canada, the lead agency for climate change. Over the next three years, the federal government plans to reduce environmental spending by over 50% but maintain military spending and buy new fighter jets for $45 billion and build new warships for $25 billion.

48

The impacts on climate change and the environmental costs of states’ militaries cannot be overlooked.

We are challenging the SDSN and the IDDRI to scrutinize the current, energy pathway for the military in each country.

Fourth, we would also like to raise our opposition to advanced nuclear energy for deep reductions. We recall the terrible nuclear accidents in Chernobyl in 1986 and in Fukushima in 2011, the costly construction and tax payer subsidization of nuclear power plants around the world, and the fact that nuclear waste cannot be safely stored. We are concerned about the inherent link between nuclear power and nuclear weapons. We believe a sustainable energy pathway is a nuclear-free pathway. We bring to the attention of SDSN and the IDDRI the 2010 report, Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy, by Dr. Arjun Makhijani that is available online at: http://ieer.org/resource/reports/carbon-free-and-nuclear-free/ Fifth, the IPB notes that the results from the public consultations on the draft SDSN report An Action Agenda for Sustainable Development in 2013 revealed that many participants highlighted peace and security as priorities. However, peace is not mentioned in the interim report and the second thematic group, Reducing Poverty and Building Peace in Fragile Regions, only deals with peace-building for developing, fragile states. Yet peace and peace-building are essential for all states, including for developed countries with the most advanced militaries, such as the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Russia, Australia, and Canada.

Finally, the IPB supports the recommendation made by the SDSN and the IDDRI in the Pathways to Deep Decarbonization interim report that “financial flows are re-directed from high-carbon to lowcarbon portfolios and projects” (p. 25). We believe that states must re-direct military spending to renewable energy technologies and green jobs. We also agree with Director of SDSN Jeffrey Sachs and United Nations’ Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon that “ambitious national action is critical to averting dangerous climate change” and that the task of “transformation is enormous.” However, we believe that a transformation to a low-carbon economy will not possible with continued, excessive military expenditures and carbon-intensive defence procurement. We hope that the final report submitted by the SDSN and the IDDRI to the United Nations in 2015 includes a deep decarbonization pathway for the military sector, and that the second thematic group considers disarmament and peacebuilding for every country, so that we can create a roadmap that will truly lead all of humanity toward sustainable development.

Sincerely,

Colin Archer Secretary-General

Tamara Lorincz Researcher

49

Annex 2: The Earth Charter, 2000 THE EARTH CHARTER http://www.earthcharterinaction.org Preamble We stand at a critical moment in Earth's history, a time when humanity must choose its future. As the world becomes increasingly interdependent and fragile, the future at once holds great peril and great promise. To move forward we must recognize that in the midst of a magnificent diversity of cultures and life forms we are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny. We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace. Towards this end, it is imperative that we, the peoples of Earth, declare our responsibility to one another, to the greater community of life, and to future generations.

Earth, Our Home Humanity is part of a vast evolving universe. Earth, our home, is alive with a unique community of life. The forces of nature make existence a demanding and uncertain adventure, but Earth has provided the conditions essential to life's evolution. The resilience of the community of life and the well-being of humanity depend upon preserving a healthy biosphere with all its ecological systems, a rich variety of plants and animals, fertile soils, pure waters, and clean air. The global environment with its finite resources is a common concern of all peoples. The protection of Earth's vitality, diversity, and beauty is a sacred trust.

The Global Situation The dominant patterns of production and consumption are causing environmental devastation, the depletion of resources, and a massive extinction of species. Communities are being undermined. The benefits of development are not shared equitably and the gap between rich and poor is widening. Injustice, poverty, ignorance, and violent conflict are widespread and the cause of great suffering. An unprecedented rise in human population has overburdened ecological and social systems. The foundations of global security are threatened. These trends are perilousâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;but not inevitable.

The Challenges Ahead The choice is ours: form a global partnership to care for Earth and one another or risk the destruction of ourselves and the diversity of life. Fundamental changes are needed in our values, institutions, and ways of living. We must realize that when basic needs have been met, human development is primarily about being more, not having more. We have the knowledge and technology to provide for all and to reduce our impacts on the environment. The emergence of a global civil society is creating new opportunities to build a democratic and humane world. Our environmental, economic, political, social, and spiritual challenges are interconnected, and together we can forge inclusive solutions.

Universal Responsibility To realize these aspirations, we must decide to live with a sense of universal responsibility, identifying ourselves with the whole Earth community as well as our local communities. We are at once citizens of different nations and of one world in which the local and global are linked. Everyone shares responsibility for the present and future well-being of the human family and the larger living world. The spirit of human 50

solidarity and kinship with all life is strengthened when we live with reverence for the mystery of being, gratitude for the gift of life, and humility regarding the human place in nature.

We urgently need a shared vision of basic values to provide an ethical foundation for the emerging world community. Therefore, together in hope we affirm the following interdependent principles for a sustainable way of life as a common standard by which the conduct of all individuals, organizations, businesses, governments, and transnational institutions is to be guided and assessed.

Principles I. RESPECT AND CARE FOR THE COMMUNITY OF LIFE 1. Respect Earth and life in all its diversity. a. Recognize that all beings are interdependent and every form of life has value regardless of its worth to human beings. b. Affirm faith in the inherent dignity of all human beings and in the intellectual, artistic, ethical, and spiritual potential of humanity.

2. Care for the community of life with understanding, compassion, and love. a. Accept that with the right to own, manage, and use natural resources comes the duty to prevent environmental harm and to protect the rights of people. b. Affirm that with increased freedom, knowledge, and power comes increased responsibility to promote the common good.

3. Build democratic societies that are just, participatory, sustainable, and peaceful. a. Ensure that communities at all levels guarantee human rights and fundamental freedoms and provide everyone an opportunity to realize his or her full potential. b. Promote social and economic justice, enabling all to achieve a secure and meaningful livelihood that is ecologically responsible.

4. Secure Earth's bounty and beauty for present and future generations. a. Recognize that the freedom of action of each generation is qualified by the needs of future generations. b. Transmit to future generations values, traditions, and institutions that support the long-term flourishing of Earth's human and ecological communities.

In order to fulfill these four broad commitments, it is necessary to: II. ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY 5. Protect and restore the integrity of Earth's ecological systems, with special concern for biological diversity and the natural processes that sustain life. a. Adopt at all levels sustainable development plans and regulations that make environmental conservation and rehabilitation integral to all development initiatives. b. Establish and safeguard viable nature and biosphere reserves, including wild lands and marine areas, to protect Earth's life support systems, maintain biodiversity, and preserve our natural heritage. c. Promote the recovery of endangered species and ecosystems. d. Control and eradicate non-native or genetically modified organisms harmful to native species and the environment, and prevent introduction of such harmful organisms. e. Manage the use of renewable resources such as water, soil, forest products, and marine life in ways that do not exceed rates of regeneration and that protect the health of ecosystems.

51

f. Manage the extraction and use of non-renewable resources such as minerals and fossil fuels in ways that minimize depletion and cause no serious environmental damage.

6. Prevent harm as the best method of environmental protection and, when knowledge is limited, apply a precautionary approach. a. Take action to avoid the possibility of serious or irreversible environmental harm even when scientific knowledge is incomplete or inconclusive. b. Place the burden of proof on those who argue that a proposed activity will not cause significant harm, and make the responsible parties liable for environmental harm. c. Ensure that decision making addresses the cumulative, long-term, indirect, long distance, and global consequences of human activities. d. Prevent pollution of any part of the environment and allow no build-up of radioactive, toxic, or other hazardous substances. e. Avoid military activities damaging to the environment.

7. Adopt patterns of production, consumption, and reproduction that safeguard Earth's regenerative capacities, human rights, and community well-being. a. Reduce, reuse, and recycle the materials used in production and consumption systems, and ensure that residual waste can be assimilated by ecological systems. b. Act with restraint and efficiency when using energy, and rely increasingly on renewable energy sources such as solar and wind. c. Promote the development, adoption, and equitable transfer of environmentally sound technologies. d. Internalize the full environmental and social costs of goods and services in the selling price, and enable consumers to identify products that meet the highest social and environmental standards. e. Ensure universal access to health care that fosters reproductive health and responsible reproduction. f. Adopt lifestyles that emphasize the quality of life and material sufficiency in a finite world.

8. Advance the study of ecological sustainability and promote the open exchange and wide application of the knowledge acquired. a. Support international scientific and technical cooperation on sustainability, with special attention to the needs of developing nations. b. Recognize and preserve the traditional knowledge and spiritual wisdom in all cultures that contribute to environmental protection and human well-being. c. Ensure that information of vital importance to human health and environmental protection, including genetic information, remains available in the public domain.

III. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE 9. Eradicate poverty as an ethical, social, and environmental imperative. a. Guarantee the right to potable water, clean air, food security, uncontaminated soil, shelter, and safe sanitation, allocating the national and international resources required. b. Empower every human being with the education and resources to secure a sustainable livelihood, and provide social security and safety nets for those who are unable to support themselves. c. Recognize the ignored, protect the vulnerable, serve those who suffer, and enable them to develop their capacities and to pursue their aspirations.

10. Ensure that economic activities and institutions at all levels promote human development in an equitable and sustainable manner.

52

a. Promote the equitable distribution of wealth within nations and among nations. b. Enhance the intellectual, financial, technical, and social resources of developing nations, and relieve them of onerous international debt. c. Ensure that all trade supports sustainable resource use, environmental protection, and progressive labor standards. d. Require multinational corporations and international financial organizations to act transparently in the public good, and hold them accountable for the consequences of their activities.

11. Affirm gender equality and equity as prerequisites to sustainable development and ensure universal access to education, health care, and economic opportunity. a. Secure the human rights of women and girls and end all violence against them. b. Promote the active participation of women in all aspects of economic, political, civil, social, and cultural life as full and equal partners, decision makers, leaders, and beneficiaries. c. Strengthen families and ensure the safety and loving nurture of all family members.

12. Uphold the right of all, without discrimination, to a natural and social environment supportive of human dignity, bodily health, and spiritual well-being, with special attention to the rights of indigenous peoples and minorities. a. Eliminate discrimination in all its forms, such as that based on race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion, language, and national, ethnic or social origin. b. Affirm the right of indigenous peoples to their spirituality, knowledge, lands and resources and to their related practice of sustainable livelihoods. c. Honor and support the young people of our communities, enabling them to fulfill their essential role in creating sustainable societies. d. Protect and restore outstanding places of cultural and spiritual significance.

IV. DEMOCRACY, NONVIOLENCE, AND PEACE 13. Strengthen democratic institutions at all levels, and provide transparency and accountability in governance, inclusive participation in decision making, and access to justice. a. Uphold the right of everyone to receive clear and timely information on environmental matters and all development plans and activities which are likely to affect them or in which they have an interest. b. Support local, regional and global civil society, and promote the meaningful participation of all interested individuals and organizations in decision making. c. Protect the rights to freedom of opinion, expression, peaceful assembly, association, and dissent. d. Institute effective and efficient access to administrative and independent judicial procedures, including remedies and redress for environmental harm and the threat of such harm. e. Eliminate corruption in all public and private institutions. f. Strengthen local communities, enabling them to care for their environments, and assign environmental responsibilities to the levels of government where they can be carried out most effectively.

14. Integrate into formal education and life-long learning the knowledge, values, and skills needed for a sustainable way of life. a. Provide all, especially children and youth, with educational opportunities that empower them to contribute actively to sustainable development. b. Promote the contribution of the arts and humanities as well as the sciences in sustainability education. c. Enhance the role of the mass media in raising awareness of ecological and social challenges. d. Recognize the importance of moral and spiritual education for sustainable living.

53

15. Treat all living beings with respect and consideration. a. Prevent cruelty to animals kept in human societies and protect them from suffering. b. Protect wild animals from methods of hunting, trapping, and fishing that cause extreme, prolonged, or avoidable suffering. c. Avoid or eliminate to the full extent possible the taking or destruction of non-targeted species.

16. Promote a culture of tolerance, nonviolence, and peace. a. Encourage and support mutual understanding, solidarity, and cooperation among all peoples and within and among nations. b. Implement comprehensive strategies to prevent violent conflict and use collaborative problem solving to manage and resolve environmental conflicts and other disputes. c. Demilitarize national security systems to the level of a non-provocative defense posture, and convert military resources to peaceful purposes, including ecological restoration. d. Eliminate nuclear, biological, and toxic weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. e. Ensure that the use of orbital and outer space supports environmental protection and peace. f. Recognize that peace is the wholeness created by right relationships with oneself, other persons, other cultures, other life, Earth, and the larger whole of which all are a part.

The Way Forward As never before in history, common destiny beckons us to seek a new beginning. Such renewal is the promise of these Earth Charter principles. To fulfill this promise, we must commit ourselves to adopt and promote the values and objectives of the Charter. This requires a change of mind and heart. It requires a new sense of global interdependence and universal responsibility. We must imaginatively develop and apply the vision of a sustainable way of life locally, nationally, regionally, and globally. Our cultural diversity is a precious heritage and different cultures will find their own distinctive ways to realize the vision. We must deepen and expand the global dialogue that generated the Earth Charter, for we have much to learn from the ongoing collaborative search for truth and wisdom.

Life often involves tensions between important values. This can mean difficult choices. However, we must find ways to harmonize diversity with unity, the exercise of freedom with the common good, short-term objectives with long-term goals. Every individual, family, organization, and community has a vital role to play. The arts, sciences, religions, educational institutions, media, businesses, nongovernmental organizations, and governments are all called to offer creative leadership. The partnership of government, civil society, and business is essential for effective governance.

In order to build a sustainable global community, the nations of the world must renew their commitment to the United Nations, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of Earth Charter principles with an international legally binding instrument on environment and development.

Let ours be a time remembered for the awakening of a new reverence for life, the firm resolve to achieve sustainability, the quickening of the struggle for justice and peace, and the joyful celebration of life.

54

Annex 3: Excerpts of The People’s Agreement on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, 2010 World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth April 22nd, 2010 Cochabamba, Bolivia http://globalclimateconvergence.org/2014/08/peoples-agreement-cochabamba-world-peoples-conferenceclimate-change/ Today, our Mother Earth is wounded and the future of humanity is in danger.

If global warming increases by more than 2 degrees Celsius, a situation that the “Copenhagen Accord” could lead to, there is a 50% probability that the damages caused to our Mother Earth will be completely irreversible. Between 20% and 30% of species would be in danger of disappearing. Large extensions of forest would be affected, droughts and floods would affect different regions of the planet, deserts would expand, and the melting of the polar ice caps and the glaciers in the Andes and Himalayas would worsen.

Many island states would disappear, and Africa would suffer an increase in temperature of more than 3 degrees Celsius. Likewise, the production of food would diminish in the world, causing catastrophic impact on the survival of inhabitants from vast regions in the planet, and the number of people in the world suffering from hunger would increase dramatically, a figure that already exceeds 1.02 billion people. The corporations and governments of the so-called “developed” countries, in complicity with a segment of the scientific community, have led us to discuss climate change as a problem limited to the rise in temperature without questioning the cause, which is the capitalist system.

We confront the terminal crisis of a civilizing model that is patriarchal and based on the submission and destruction of human beings and nature that accelerated since the industrial revolution.

The capitalist system has imposed on us a logic of competition, progress and limitless growth. This regime of production and consumption seeks profit without limits, separating human beings from nature and imposing a logic of domination upon nature, transforming everything into commodities: water, earth, the human genome, ancestral cultures, biodiversity, justice, ethics, the rights of peoples, and life itself.

Under capitalism, Mother Earth is converted into a source of raw materials, and human beings into consumers and a means of production, into people that are seen as valuable only for what they own, and not for what they are.

Capitalism requires a powerful military industry for its processes of accumulation and imposition of control over territories and natural resources, suppressing the resistance of the peoples. It is an imperialist system of colonization of the planet.

Humanity confronts a great dilemma: to continue on the path of capitalism, depredation, and death, or to choose the path of harmony with nature and respect for life.

It is imperative that we forge a new system that restores harmony with nature and among human beings.

And in order for there to be balance with nature, there must first be equity among human beings. We 55

propose to the peoples of the world the recovery, revalorization, and strengthening of the knowledge, wisdom, and ancestral practices of Indigenous Peoples, which are affirmed in the thought and practices of “Living Well,” recognizing Mother Earth as a living being with which we have an indivisible, interdependent, complementary and spiritual relationship. To face climate change, we must recognize Mother Earth as the source of life and forge a new system based on the principles of:       

harmony and balance among all and with all things; complementarity, solidarity, and equality; collective well-being and the satisfaction of the basic necessities of all; people in harmony with nature; recognition of human beings for what they are, not what they own; elimination of all forms of colonialism, imperialism and interventionism; peace among the peoples and with Mother Earth;

The model we support is not a model of limitless and destructive development…. To guarantee human rights and to restore harmony with nature, it is necessary to effectively recognize and apply the rights of Mother Earth. … Developed countries, as the main cause of climate change, in assuming their historical responsibility, must recognize and honor their climate debt in all of its dimensions as the basis for a just, effective, and scientific solution to climate change. In this context, we demand that developed countries: • Restore to developing countries the atmospheric space that is occupied by their greenhouse gas emissions. This implies the decolonization of the atmosphere through the reduction and absorption of their emissions; • Assume the costs and technology transfer needs of developing countries arising from the loss of development opportunities due to living in a restricted atmospheric space; • Assume responsibility for the hundreds of millions of people that will be forced to migrate due to the climate change caused by these countries, and eliminate their restrictive immigration policies, offering migrants a decent life with full human rights guarantees in their countries; • Assume adaptation debt related to the impacts of climate change on developing countries by providing the means to prevent, minimize, and deal with damages arising from their excessive emissions; • Honor these debts as part of a broader debt to Mother Earth by adopting and implementing the United Nations Universal Declaration on the Rights of Mother Earth.

The focus must not be only on financial compensation, but also on restorative justice, understood as the restitution of integrity to our Mother Earth and all its beings.

We deplore attempts by countries to annul the Kyoto Protocol, which is the sole legally binding instrument specific to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by developed countries.

We inform the world that, despite their obligation to reduce emissions, developed countries have increased their emissions by 11.2% in the period from 1990 to 2007.

During that same period, due to unbridled consumption, the United States of America has increased its greenhouse gas emissions by 16.8%, reaching an average of 20 to 23 tons of CO2 per-person. This 56

represents 9 times more than that of the average inhabitant of the “Third World,” and 20 times more than that of the average inhabitant of Sub-Saharan Africa.

We categorically reject the illegitimate “Copenhagen Accord” that allows developed countries to offer insufficient reductions in greenhouse gases based in voluntary and individual commitments, violating the environmental integrity of Mother Earth and leading us toward an increase in global temperatures of around 4°C. …

It is necessary to construct an Adaptation Fund exclusively for addressing climate change as part of a financial mechanism that is managed in a sovereign, transparent, and equitable manner for all States. This Fund should assess the impacts and costs of climate change in developing countries and needs deriving from these impacts, and monitor support on the part of developed countries. It should also include a mechanism for compensation for current and future damages, loss of opportunities due to extreme and gradual climactic events, and additional costs that could present themselves if our planet surpasses ecological thresholds, such as those impacts that present obstacles to “Living Well.” …

The immense challenge humanity faces of stopping global warming and cooling the planet can only be achieved through a profound shift in agricultural practices toward the sustainable model of production used by indigenous and rural farming peoples, as well as other ancestral models and practices that contribute to solving the problem of agriculture and food sovereignty. This is understood as the right of peoples to control their own seeds, lands, water, and food production, thereby guaranteeing, through forms of production that are in harmony with Mother Earth and appropriate to local cultural contexts, access to sufficient, varied and nutritious foods in complementarity with Mother Earth and deepening the autonomous (participatory, communal and shared) production of every nation and people.

Climate change is now producing profound impacts on agriculture and the ways of life of indigenous peoples and farmers throughout the world, and these impacts will worsen in the future. …

We similarly denounce the way in which the capitalist model imposes mega-infrastructure projects and invades territories with extractive projects, water privatization, and militarized territories, expelling indigenous peoples from their lands, inhibiting food sovereignty and deepening socio-environmental crisis. …

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples must be fully recognized, implemented and integrated in climate change negotiations. The best strategy and action to avoid deforestation and degradation and protect native forests and jungles is to recognize and guarantee collective rights to lands and territories, especially considering that most of the forests are located within the territories of indigenous peoples and nations and other traditional communities. …

We demand the full and effective implementation of the right to consultation, participation and prior, free and informed consent of indigenous peoples in all negotiation processes, and in the design and implementation of measures related to climate change. …

Developed countries should assume responsibility for climate migrants, welcoming them into their territories and recognizing their fundamental rights through the signing of international conventions that provide for the definition of climate migrant and require all States to abide by abide by determinations.

57

Establish an International Tribunal of Conscience to denounce, make visible, document, judge and punish violations of the rights of migrants, refugees and displaced persons within countries of origin, transit and destination, clearly identifying the responsibilities of States, companies and other agents.

Current funding directed toward developing countries for climate change and the proposal of the Copenhagen Accord is insignificant. In addition to Official Development Assistance and public sources, developed countries must commit to a new annual funding of at least 6% of GDP to tackle climate change in developing countries. This is viable considering that a similar amount is spent on national defense, and that 5 times more have been put forth to rescue failing banks and speculators, which raises serious questions about global priorities and political will. This funding should be direct and free of conditions, and should not interfere with the national sovereignty or self-determination of the most affected communities and groups. …

It has been stated that developed countries significantly increased their emissions in the period from 1990 to 2007, despite having stated that the reduction would be substantially supported by market mechanisms.

The carbon market has become a lucrative business, commodifying our Mother Earth. It is therefore not an alternative for tackle climate change, as it loots and ravages the land, water, and even life itself.

The recent financial crisis has demonstrated that the market is incapable of regulating the financial system, which is fragile and uncertain due to speculation and the emergence of intermediary brokers. Therefore, it would be totally irresponsible to leave in their hands the care and protection of human existence and of our Mother Earth. …

The world must recover and re-learn ancestral principles and approaches from native peoples to stop the destruction of the planet, as well as promote ancestral practices, knowledge and spirituality to recuperate the capacity for “living well” in harmony with Mother Earth.

Considering the lack of political will on the part of developed countries to effectively comply with commitments and obligations assumed under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol, and given the lack of a legal international organism to guard against and sanction climate and environmental crimes that violate the Rights of Mother Earth and humanity, we demand the creation of an International Climate and Environmental Justice Tribunal that has the legal capacity to prevent, judge and penalize States, industries and people that by commission or omission contaminate and provoke climate change. …

We urge peoples to propose and promote deep reform within the United Nations, so that all member States comply with the decisions of the International Climate and Environmental Justice Tribunal.

The future of humanity is in danger, and we cannot allow a group of leaders from developed countries to decide for all countries as they tried unsuccessfully to do at the Conference of the Parties in Copenhagen.

This decision concerns us all. Thus, it is essential to carry out a global referendum or popular consultation on climate change in which all are consulted regarding the following issues; the level of emission reductions on the part of developed countries and transnational corporations, financing to be offered by developed countries, the creation of an International Climate Justice Tribunal, the need for a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth, and the need to change the current capitalist system. The process of a global 58

referendum or popular consultation will depend on process of preparation that ensures the successful development of the same.

In order to coordinate our international action and implement the results of this â&#x20AC;&#x153;Accord of the Peoples,â&#x20AC;? we call for the building of a Global Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Movement for Mother Earth, which should be based on the principles of complementarity and respect for the diversity of origin and visions among its members, constituting a broad and democratic space for coordination and joint worldwide actions.

59

Annex 4: Militarism/War: Elephant in the Room Resolution, 2010 Non-Governmental Organizations’ Resolution Presented at the Conference of the Parties (COP) 16 in Cancun, Mexico in 2010 War = Climate Change = War = Climate Change... Time to Break the Cycle!

Militarism/War: Elephant in the Living Room http://www.climatesos.org/wpcontent/uploads/2010/12/Military_Climate_resolution_Dec10_2010_delivery.pdf • The US Military and their allies, through their imperial wars and military actions (overt and covert) around the world, have inflicted massive suffering and civilian casualties.

• The US Military is the largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions on the planet, yet these emissions are exempted from reporting requirements.

• Access to more oil, the burning of which is fundamental cause of climate change – is the primary underlying motive for current wars.

• Both warfare and climate change are rendering large areas uninhabitable – displacing millions of people as refugees, and yet the rights of immigrants are increasingly limited, threatened and abused.

• Climate change is likely to result in far more wars, being a “threat multiplier” and now recognized as the greatest looming threat to "security". Access to resources – including land, food, water – is already becoming increasingly challenging, and scarcities will likely trigger conflict and further displacement in the future.

• The US Military is also the largest source of toxic chemical and radioactive poisoning of peoples and environment around the globe, and plays a major role in promoting false solutions that only worsen the problems (biofuels, nuclear technologies, climate geoengineering etc) • The US and global economy is in shambles, funding for a "fair and just transition" – to ensure that people are not negatively impacted by the necessary transitions, is not forthcoming, “green” jobs remain scarce, millions lack access to basic healthcare.

• The US has lead the efforts by developed countries in stymieing progress among nations, consistently refusing to pay their “ecological debt”, owed to non-industrialized countries and their peoples… All while spending trillions on furthering wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and elsewhere.

• Our global commons (air, water, forests) is being bought and sold in carbon markets under the guise that this is the ONLY feasible means of generating funds to take necessary actions to prevent and adapt to impacts of climate change. The result is further concentration of wealth and power, at the expense of the planet.

We will not accept the death spiral of militarism, war and climate change. It is time to break the cycle! In Cancun and beyond, we demand:

60

1. An end to oil and resource wars, and reinstatement of diplomacy and respect over use of force in all foreign relations 2. Troops brought home, military bases abroad closed down and cleaned up, those on U.S. soil dramatically reduced and cleaned up.

3. Redirection of the vast majority of military funding to fund human services, ensure decent quality of life, payment of ecological and climate debt, and compensation to countries and peoples damaged by U.S. militarism.

4. Dismantling of the military-industrial complex. Corporations stripped of personhood. Clean elections mandated.

5. IPCC to create an urgent special report on military emissions, both direct and indirect (e.g., ecosystem damage and desertification due to military activities). No reporting exemptions by powerful countries.

6. Urgent implementation of "real” as opposed to “false” solutions, to end the use of fossil fuels, and restore and protect public and environmental health.

Supported by Biofuel Watch, Climate SOS (USA/Canada), CODE PINK (USA), Farmers' Voice (Bangladesh), Global Compliance Research Project, Grassroots Global Justice Alliance, Grassroots International, International Action Center, International Tribal Association, JUBILEE SOUTH, Organic Consumers Association (USA), Peoples Movement on Climate Change, Sociologists without Borders, Teachers and Scientists against Maldevelopment (India), United for Peace and Justice (USA), United National Antiwar Committee (USA), Unity of Women for Freedom (Philippines), World Rainforest Movement…& more.

61

Annex 5: Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming Appeal, 2014 Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming!* Appeal to the Peace and Climate Movements 2014 http://peoplesclimate.org/peace/appeal/ We are at a crossroads, faced with a climate crisis that threatens to end our world as we know it. The signs of climate change are all around us. They includeâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;increasingly severe weather everywhere (floods, heat waves, droughts, cyclones and wildfires), as well as melting polar ice and glaciers, rising acidic oceans, and thawing of the Siberian permafrost, which threatens release of huge, devastating, methane gas emissions.

If we pursue business as usual we face a world of food shortages caused by drought, increasing disease and deaths, and displacement from vast areas of flooded and uninhabitable terrain. We must do all in our power to stop greenhouse gas emissions, counteract the effects, and prevent the increase of global warming.

But the developing climate emergency does not exist in isolation. And we must understand and confront the social and economic context that produced and accompanies it: war and unlimited military expenditures, corporate globalization, vast social inequality and racism.

The US military is the single greatest institutional producer of greenhouse gases in the world.

Wars by their very nature destroy the environment and burn and release massive amounts of greenhouse gases. Recent military mobilizations are pouring huge amounts of new carbon emissions into the atmosphere.

The vast expenditures now consumed by military machines are the very resources needed for a crash program to rapidly create a renewable energy infrastructure and put millions of people to work in green jobs.

Wars and military buildup are in large part dedicated to controlling the fossil fuel energy resources on which our present model of global economic development and endless growth depend. Resorting to armed conflict is increasing as fossil fuels become more expensive and difficult to extract, transport and produce.

Nuclear weapons, like climate change, threaten to destroy the world. There are nine nuclear armed nations and estimated 16,400 nuclear weapons in the world. With ten wars and 34 limited conflicts now occurring, the chance of any one of them escalating to nuclear war and its unthinkable human and environmental impact is an ever-present specter. Nuclear power is not a green alternative energy. It produces large amounts of radioactive nuclear waste, poses the risk of catastrophic accidents, and contributes to the global proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Corporate dominance and extreme social inequality are intrinsic to our expansionist global economic model.

62

The UN Millennium Development Goals in conjunction with other forces have begun to lift the poorest billion of humanity out of extreme poverty. The damage now coming as a result of climate change threatens to erase and even reverse whatever progress has been made.

The people most affected by climate change are those with the fewest resources to deal with it. With increasing environmental destruction, droughts, floods, and famine, there will be massive displacement of impoverished and desperate people leading to forced migration and regional hostilities. Within the U.S., the people most affected include the poor, those in prison or nursing homes, the disabled and others who don’t have the freedom or ability to leave when disaster threatens or strikes.

Two examples of long-term-drought-induced Climate Wars are the tragedies in Somalia and Syria. In the latter case, a five-year drought was one of the contributors to an ongoing civil war. Somalia has been at war for twenty years, and that conflict has also embroiled neighboring Kenya and Ethiopia.

Rather than taking emergency measures to address climate change and the needs of those impacted now, our military is preparing to control these displacements to protect “US interests”.

We who have opposed the toxic, polluting, life- and earth-destroying wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the existential threat of nuclear weapons are in total support of the People’s Climate March and its vision of a world without fossil fuels and the fires of war. We will march, we will demand divestment and fight denial, we will battle the pollution of Big Money, and we will join in demanding that the Obama administration step forward to achieve a 2015 global treaty to phase out greenhouse gas emissions.

We call on all who want to preserve our planet to join the People’s Climate March in New York City on September 21st and to form a Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming Contingent. We are organizing under the following principles:     



We can’t effectively address climate change without ending war and militarism; We can’t end war without ending the fossil fuel energy system; We can’t address social injustice unless we stop using war to safeguard an economic infrastructure (based on fossil fuels) that produces and requires vast social inequality.

We can’t end war unless we address the systemic inequality and corporate domination that requires and produces it.

We must insist that the transition to a sustainable economy and green jobs not be accomplished at the expense of those now employed in the fossil fuel and military sectors and the communities in which they work and live.

Energy and armament corporations should bear the lion’s share of the social cost to make that transition a just one.

We call on our government to:   

Undertake an emergency program to make all our cities energy efficient and to create a new energy grid based on renewable energy sources.

End federal subsidies for the fossil fuel industries—coal, gas, oil and industrial biomass End the 2005 “Cheney exemption” to the Clean Water Act for gas hydraulic fracking, which threatens clean water supplies to people in some 23 states. Strictly enforce the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts of 1970 in all energy production.

63

 

   





Stop building new fossil fuel infrastructure, including the Keystone pipeline project, and rapidly end fracking projects and the awarding of any new offshore drilling contracts.

Build a carbon-free, nuclear-free energy future and end subsidies for nuclear power. Implement a financial transaction tax to fund the new solar, wind, hydro, and efficiency programs we need globally and to help clean up the toxic mess of fossil and nuclear destruction.

Join with all nuclear powers to abide by their treaty commitments and to move quickly toward mutual abolition of all nuclear weapons as required by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Re-direct military spending to the creation of millions of green jobs and to research and develop a rapid but just transition from fossil fuels to non-polluting energy sources.

Stop the military protection of fossil fuel interests in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world.

Bring our all troops home now from Afghanistan and Iraq, reject military attacks in Iraq, Syria and Iran, and use the billions saved to invest in energy efficient mass transit and other public infrastructure, schools, affordable housing and sustainable union-standard jobs.

Redefine the mission of U.S. military forces as defense of the United States instead of achieving “Full Spectrum Dominance” in the service of global corporations, the fossil fuel industry, and the military industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned against, thereby also allowing closure of most of our 1,000 or more foreign military bases.

Stop blocking the proposals for effective international action on climate change put forward by the Group of 77 and other developing countries, starting at the UN on September 23, 2014. All countries must do something, but the countries which are most responsible for carbon emissions have the larger responsibility to commit resources to achieve an 85% cut in greenhouse gases by 2050. The wealthier developed countries should provide $100 billion to an international fund for green industrial development in less developed countries.

We can’t afford the greenhouse gas emissions arising from the way we live and from war and preparation for war. And we can’t afford the climate of mistrust and non-cooperation that military threats and intervention foster.

To successfully avert worst-case climate disaster we will need international agreements and cooperation on a scale not seen in the past; we need new approaches in order to demilitarize US foreign policy and humanize domestic policy.

We believe that most Americans will welcome these positive changes. Working together, peace, climate and social justice activists can help make this happen. * Signed by many local, national and international organizations including the Peace and Justice Hub of the People’s Climate March, the International Peace Bureau, United for Peace and Justice, U.S. Labor Against the War, U.S. Peace Council, Veterans for Peace, Alliance for Global Justice, Campaign for Peace and Democracy, Franciscans for Justice, Nonviolence International, Pax Christi USA, Peace Action, WarIsACrime.org, Brooklyn For Peace, Climate Action NOW! (Western Massachusetts), Coalition for Peace Action, (Pennsylvania and New Jersey), Massachusetts Peace Action, Occupy Bergen County (New Jersey), Pax Christi Metro New York, The Peace Farm (Texas), Physicians for Social Responsibility – Kansas City, Physicians for Social Responsibility – New York City and more.

64

References Relevant IPB Publications Archer, C. and Hay-Edie, D. (2005) Warfare or Welfare? Disarmament for Development in the 21st Century.

Geneva: International Peace Bureau.

Archer, C. (2007) Whose Priorities? A guide for campaigners on military and social spending. Geneva: International Peace Bureau, [Online] Available at: http://www.ipb.org/uploads/tbl_contingut_web/207/documents/Whose%20Priorities.pdf Archer, C. and Willi, A. (2012) Opportunity Costs: Military Spending and the UN’s Development Agenda.

[Online] Available at: http://www.ipb.org/uploads/tbl_contingut_web/227/documents/Opportunity %20Costs%20web.

Buckland, B. (2007) A Climate of War? Stopping the Securitisation of Global Climate Change. Report for the International Peace Bureau, [Online] Available at: http://www.ipb.org/uploads/tbl_contingut_web/176/documents/paper.pdf Books and Publications Akbar, S. et al. (2014) Climate-Smart Development: Adding Up the Benefits of Actions that Help Build Prosperity, End Poverty and Combat Climate Change. World Bank Working Paper, [Online] Available at: http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2014/06/20/000456286_20140620100 846/Rendered/PDF/889080WP0v10RE0Smart0Development0Ma.pdf Blair, B. and Brown, M. (2011) Nuclear Weapons Cost Study, Global Zero Technical Report, [Online] Available at: http://www.globalzero.org/files/gz_nuclear_weapons_cost_study.pdf Branagan, M. (2013) Global Warming, Militarism and Nonviolent: The Art of Active Resistance. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Brock, H. (2012) Climate Change: Drivers of Insecurity and the Global South. Oxford Research Group, [Online] Available at: http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/sites/default/files/Climate%20Change %20and%20Insecurity%20in%20the%20Global%20South.pdf Brzoska, M. (2012) “Climate change and the military in China, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 68 (2), pp. 48-54.

Buchner, B. et al. (2012) The Landscape of Climate Finance 2012. Climate Policy Initiative, [Online] Available at: http://climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/The-Landscape-of-ClimateFinance-2012.pdf Cameron, E., Shine, T. and Bevins, W. (2013) Climate Justice: Equity and Justice Informing a New Climate Agreement. Working Paper. World Resources Institute and Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice, [Online] Available at: 65

http://www.mrfcj.org/media/pdf/climate_justice_equity_and_justice_informing_a_new_climate_agreemen t.pdf Capalino, R. and Fulton, M. (2014) Investing in the Clean Trillion: Closing the Clean Energy Investment Gap. A Ceres Report, [Online] Available at: http://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/investing-in-the-cleantrillion-closing-the-clean-energy-investment-gap/view Climate Group (2014) IPCC Summary and Graphics: Final Report Makes Clear Need for Urgent Clean Revolution, On-line Summary, [Online] Available at: http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/newsand-blogs/ipcc-summary-and-graphics-final-report-makes-clear-need-for-urgent-clean-revolution/ Conca, K. and Wallace, J. (2013) “Environment and Peacebuilding in war-torn societies: Lessons from the UN Environment Programme’s experience with post-conflict assessment,” in Jensen, D. and Lonergan, S. (eds.) Assessing and Restoring Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding, London: Earthscan, pp. 6384.

CNA Military Advisory Board (2009) Powering America’s Defense: Energy and Risks to National Security.

Report for CNA Corporation, [Online] Available at: http://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/Powering%20Americas%20Defense.pdf CNA Military Advisory Board (2014) National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change. Report for CNA Corporation, [Online] Available at: http://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/MAB_2014.pdf Dabelko, D. et al. (eds.)(2013) Backdraft: The Conflict Potential of Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation. 14(2), [Online] Available at: http://wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/ECSP_REPORT_14_2_BACKDRAFT.pdf Dinar, S. ed. (2011) Beyond Resource Wars. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Greenpeace USA (1998) Why Do Foreign Policy Experts Say Kyoto is Bad for America? Documents related to COMPASS, [Online] Available at: http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=download&d=4196 Environmental Working Group (2008) “EPA Ignores Toxic Rocket Fuel Chemical In Drinking Water,” Press Release, [Online] Available at: http://www.ewg.org/news/news-releases/2008/10/03/epa-rocket-fuelcontaminant-safe-nation%E2%80%99s-drinking-water European Commission (2011) Scaling up international climate finance after 2012, Commission Staff Working Document, [Online] Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/articles/financial_operations/pdf/sec_2011_487_final_en.pdf Figures, C. (2011) Address by Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to the Congress of Deputies of Spain, [Online] Available at: http://unfccc.int/files/press/statements/application/pdf/speech_seguridad_20110215.pdf Gilbert, E. (2012) “The Militarization of Climate Change,” ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, [Online] Available at: http://www.acme-journal.org/vol11/Gilbert2012.pdf Green Climate Fund (2013) Report of the Green Climate Fund to the Conference of the Parties and Guidance to the Green Climate Fund. GCF/B.01-13/Inf.03, [Online] Available at: http://www.gcfund.net/fileadmin/00_customer/documents/pdf/B-01-13_Inf.03_COP_Guidance-final.pdf

66

Goodwin, J. et al. (2006) “Chapter 2: Approaches to Data Collection,” In: 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, [Online] Available at: http://www.ipccnggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/1_Volume1/V1_2_Ch2_DataCollection.pdf Gurría, A. (2013) The climate challenge: Achieving zero emissions, Lecture by the OECD Secretary-General, [Online] Available at: http://www.oecd.org/about/secretary-general/The-climate-challenge-achieving-zeroemissions.htm Huebert, R. et al. (2012) Climate Change & International Security: The Arctic as a Bellwether. Report for the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, [Online] Available at: http://www.c2es.org/docUploads/arcticsecurity-report.pdf Institute for Economics and Peace (2011) Economic Consequences of War on the U.S. Economy, Report [Online] Available at: http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/The-EconomicConsequences-of-War-on-US-Economy.pdf International Energy Agency (2008) Energy Technology Perspectives 2008, Fact Sheet – The Blue Scenario.

[Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/techno/etp/fact_sheet_ETP2008.pdf International Energy Agency (2010) Energy Technology Perspectives: Scenarios & Strategies to 2050.

[Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/techno/etp/etp10/English.pdf International Energy Agency (2013) Key World Energy Statistics. [Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/KeyWorld2013.pdf International Energy Agency (2013) Redrawing the Energy-Climate Map. World Energy Outlook Special Report. [Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/WEO_Special_Report_2013_Redrawing_the _Energy_Climate_Map.pdf International Institute for Environment and Development (2009) Billions at stake in climate finance: four key lessons. Briefing for the International Institute for Environment and Development, [Online] Available at: http://pubs.iied.org/17075IIED.html IPCC (1990) Climate Change: The IPCC Response Strategies. Report prepared for Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change by Working Group III, [Online] Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_first_assessment_1990_wg3.shtml IPCC (2013) Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA [Online] Available at: http://www.climate2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf IPCC (2014) Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability.

Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1-32. USA [Online] Available at: http://ipccwg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/WG2AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf 67

IPCC (2014) Summary for Policymakers, In: Climate Change 2014, Mitigation of Climate Change.

Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. [Online] Available at: http://report.mitigation2014.org/spm/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-forpolicymakers_approved.pdf IRENA (2014) REmap 2030: A Renewable Energy Roadmap, June 2014. IRENA, Abu Dhabi. [Online] Available at: www.irena.org/remap Ki-Moon, B. (2014) Speech of the Secretary-General, Addressing the European Forum, SG/SM/15748 [Online] Available at: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/sgsm15748.doc.htm Kristensen, H. and Norris, R. (2014) “Worldwide deployments of nuclear weapons, 2014,” Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, [Online] Available at: http://bos.sagepub.com/cgi/collection/nuclearnotebook Liska, A. and Perrin, R. (2010) “Securing Foreign Oil: A Case for Including Military Operations in the Climate Change Impact of Fuels,” Environment, July-August, [Online] Available at: http://www.environmentmagazine.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/July-August%202010/securing-foreign-oilfull.html Lovins, A. (2001) “Battling Fuel Waste in the Military,” Article for RMI Solutions. [Online] Available at: http://www.rmi.org/Knowledge-Center/Library/S01-12_BattlingMilitaryFuelWaste Majeed, A. (2004) The Impact of Militarism on the Environment: An Overview of Direct & Indirect Effects.

Report for Physicians for Global Survival (Canada). [Online] Available at: http://pgs.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2007/11/militarism_environment_web.pdf Makhijani, A. (2010) Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy [Online] Available at: http://ieer.org/resource/reports/carbon-free-and-nuclear-free/ Matthew, R. (2014) “Integrating climate change into peacebuilding,” Climatic Change, 12 (3), pp. 83-93.

Matthews, H.D. et al. (2014) “National contributions to observed global warming,” Environmental Research Letters, 9, [Online] Available at: http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/9/1/014010/pdf/17489326_9_1_014010.pdf McKibben, B. (2012) “Global Warming’s Terrifying Math,” Rolling Stone Magazine, [Online] Available at: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719?page=3 McManus, K. (2006) Civil Liability for Wartime Environmental Damage: Adapting the United Nations Compensation for the Iraq War, Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review, 33 (2), pp. 417-448.

Melman, S. (1988) The Demilitarized Society: Disarmament and Conversion. Nottingham, UK: Spokesman.

Mendelsohn, R. (2011) “Climate Change, Cooperation and Resource Scarcity.” In: Dinar, S. ed. (2011) Beyond Resource Wars. Cambridge: The MIT Press. pp. 25-41.

Moss, T. (2014) “Climate of war: climate change and resource conflict,” Jane’s Defence Weekly Movement for the Abolition of War (2013) Conflict and Climate Change. Suffolk: KM Publishing.

68

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2014) Global Climate Change: Vital Signs, Key Indicators [Online] Available at: http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators/#co2 NATO (1997) “Chapter 15: Fuels, Oils Lubricants and Petroleum Handling Equipment,” Annex A: Aide Memoire on Fuels in NATO, NATO Logistics Handbook, [Online] Available at: http://www.nato.int/docu/logi-en/1997/lo-15a.htm Oil Change International (2008) A Climate of War: Behind the Numbers. Advance Edition report, [Online] Available at: http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2008/03/A%20Climate%20of%20War%20FINAL %20(March%2017%202008).pdf Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2012) OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction Highlights, [Online] Available at: http://www.oecd.org/environment/indicators-modelling-outlooks/49846090.pdf Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2014) OECD submission to the UNFCCC Standing Committee on Finance, [Online] Available at: https://unfccc.int/files/cooperation_and_support/financial_mechanism/standing_committee/application/p df/oecd_submission_to_unfccc_scf_call_for_inputs_-_20_january_2014.pdf Pemberton, M. (2009) Military vs. Climate Security: Mapping the Shift from the Bush Years to the Obama Era. Foreign Policy Studies in Focus, project of the Institute for Policy Studies report. [Online] Available at: http://www.ipsdc.org/military_vs_climate_security_mapping_the_shift_from_the_bush_years_to_the_obama_era/ Pemberton, M. (2011) Military vs Climate Security: The 2011 Budgets Compared. Foreign Policy in Focus of the Institute for Policy Studies, [Online] Available at: http://fpif.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/mil-vclimate-2010.pdf Perlo-Freeman, S. et al. (2013) Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2012. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Fact Sheet April 2013.

Pollin, R. and Garrett-Peltier , H. (2011) The U.S. Employment Effects Of Military And Domestic Spending Priorities. Report for the Political Economy Research Institute, University Of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Potten, D. (2013) The Green Climate Fund and Lessons from other Global Funds’ Experience. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research report, [Online] Available at: http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/publications/tyndallworking-paper/2013/green-climate-fund-and-lessons-other-global-funds%E2%80%99-experienc PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2010) Aerospace and Defence Sector: climate change responses. Report for PWC, [Online] Available at: http://www.pwc.co.uk/en_UK/uk/assets/pdf/climate-change-in-aerospacedefence.pdf PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2013) Busting the carbon budget: Low Carbon Economy Index. Report for PWC, [Online] Available at: http://www.pwc.co.uk/en_UK/uk/assets/pdf/climate-change-in-aerospacedefence.pdf Project Censored (2010) US Department of Defense is the Worst Polluter on the Planet, [Online] Available at: http://www.projectcensored.org/2-us-department-of-defense-is-the-worst-polluter-on-the-planet/ Regehr, E. (2013) Disarming Arctic Security, Occasional briefing paper, [Online] Available at: http://www.thesimonsfoundation.ca/projects/disarming-arctic-security 69

Reid, W. et al. (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-Being. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment report, [Online] Available at: http://www.maweb.org/en/index.aspx Roberts, M. (2009) “War, Climate Change, and Women,” Race, Poverty & the Environment, Fall, [Online] Available at: http://www.movementgeneration.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/Roberts.Climate.16-210.pdf Ryan, L., Selmet, N., and Aasrud., A (2012) Plugging the Energy Efficiency Gap with Climate Finance.

International Energy Agency Insights Series 2012. [Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/publications/insights/insightpublications/PluggingEnergyEfficiencyGapwithClimateFina nce.pdf Sanders, B. (2009) The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism. Oakland: AK Press.

Schellnhuber, H. et al. (2014) Turn Down the Heat: Climate Extremes, Regional Impacts, and the Case for Resilience. World Bank Working Paper (78424). [Online] Available at: http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climatechange/publication/turn-down-the-heat-climate-extremesregional-impacts-resilience Schwartz, M. et al. (2012) Department of Defense Energy Initiatives: Background and Issues for Congress.

Congressional Research Service, [Online] Available at: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42558.pdf Schwartz, P. and Randall, D. (2003) An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security. [Online] Available online: http://www.climate.org/topics/PDF/clim_change_scenario.pdf Stern, N. (2006) The Economics of Climate Change (The Stern Review). [Online] Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http:/www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/sternreview_index.htm Smith, D. and Vivekananda, J.(2007) A Climate of Conflict: The Links between Climate Change, Peace and War, International Alert report, [Online] Available at: http://www.internationalalert.org/resources/publications/climate-conflict Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2013) SIPRI Yearbook 2013: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security. London: Oxford University Press, 2013.

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2014) Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2013. SIPRI Fact Sheet, [Online] Available at: http://books.sipri.org/product_info?c_product_id=476 Sulewski, K. (2008) “Understanding U.S. Withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol,” Journal of International Relations, 10, pp. 35-52.

Sustainable Development Solutions Network and Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (2014) Pathways to Deep Decarbonization Interim 2014 Report, [Online] Available at: http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/DDPP_interim_2014_report.pdf Tanzler, D. et al. (2013) Adaptation to climate change for peace and stability, Adelphi report, [Online] Available at: http://www.adelphi.de/files/uploads/andere/pdf/application/pdf/adaptation_for_peace_and_stability_stu dy-complete.pdf

70

UNESCO (2012) UNESCO’s Programme of Action for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence: A vision in action, [Online] Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002177/217786e.pdf United Kingdom. Department of Defence. (2014) Global Strategic Trends – Out to 2045. Strategic Trends Programme. [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/328036/DCDC_GST_5_Se cured.pdf United Nations (1987) “Chapter 11: Peace, Security, Development, and the Environment,” In: Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, [Online] Available at: http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-11.htm United Nations (1992) United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, [Online] Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf United Nations (1992) Agenda 21, [Online] Available at: http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf United Nations (1998) Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, [Online] Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf United Nations (2004) The relationship between disarmament and development in the current international context. Report of the Secretary-General, Department for Disarmament Affairs, [Online] Available at: http://www.un.org/disarmament/HomePage/ODAPublications/DisarmamentStudySeries/PDF/DSS_31.pdf United Nations (2005) Hyogo Framework for Action, [Online] Available at: Extract from the final report of the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (A/CONF.206/6) http://www.unisdr.org/files/1037_hyogoframeworkforactionenglish.pdf United Nations (2006) Updated UNFCCC reporting guidelines on annual inventories following incorporation of the provisions of decision 14/CP.11, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [Online] Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2006/sbsta/eng/09.pdf United Nations (2012) Op-Ed Article: The World Is Over-Armed And Peace Is Under-Funded, [Online] Available at: http://www.un.org/en/events/againstnucleartestsday/2012/pdf/disarmament-opedaugust2012.pdf United Nations (2012) Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A Future Worth Choosing, Secretary-General's High-level Panel on Global Sustainability, [Online] Available at: http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&nr=374&type=400&menu=35 United Nations (2013) World Populations Prospects: The 2012 Revision, Highlights, Volume I Comprehensive Tables, [Online] Available at: http://esa.un.org/wpp/Documentation/pdf/WPP2012_HIGHLIGHTS.pdf United Nations (2014) The Millennium Development Goals Report 2014. [Online] Available at: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2014%20MDG%20report/MDG%202014%20English%20web.pdf United Nations Environment Programme (2007) UNEP in Iraq: Post-Conflict Assessment, Clean-up and Reconstruction. [Online] Available at: http://www.unep.org/disastersandconflicts/portals/155/disastersandconflicts/docs/iraq/Iraq_pccleanup_re port.pdf

71

United Nations Environment Programme (2009) From Conflict to Peacebuilding: The Role of Natural Resources and the Environment. [Online] Available at: http://environmentalpeacebuilding.org/assets/Documents/LibraryItem_010_Doc_191.pdf United Nations Environment Programme (2010) Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication. A Synthesis for Policy Makers, [Online] Available at: http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/GER_synthesis_en.pdf United Nations Environment Programme (2014) Green Economy Toolkit for Policymakers. A Guidance Manual for Green Economy Policy Assessment, [Online] Available at: http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/GEI%20Highlights/UNEP%20Assessment %20GE%20Policymaking_for%20web.pdf United Nations Environment Programme (2014) UNEP Yearbook: Emerging Issues in Our Global Environment. [Online] Available at: http://www.unep.org/yearbook/2014/PDF/UNEP_YearBook_2014.pdf United States (1998) Implications of The Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change Hearing, Committee On Foreign Relations United States Senate, One Hundred Fifth Congress, Second Session, February 11, 1998, [Online] Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-105shrg46812/pdf/CHRG-105shrg46812.pdf P. 46 United States (1999) National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 3616, [Online] Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-105hr3616pcs/pdf/BILLS-105hr3616pcs.pdf United States (2009) Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2009, U.S. Energy Information Administration Report, [Online] Available at: http://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/ghg_report/pdf/0573(2009).pdf United States (2009) Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal: Estimates of Undiscovered Oil and Gas North of the Arctic Circle. United States Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey, [Online] Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3049/fs2008-3049.pdf United States (2011) Energy for the Warfighter: Operational Energy Strategy. Department of Defense Report, [Online] Available at: http://energy.defense.gov/Portals/25/Documents/Reports/20110614_Operational_Energy_Strategy.pdf United States (2012) Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for the 21st Century Defense, Department of Defense report, [Online] Available at: http://www.defense.gov/news/defense_strategic_guidance.pdf United States (2012) Aviation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan. Submission to the Civil Aviation Organization, Federal Aviation Administration, [Online] Available at: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/environ_policy_guidance/policy/media/Avi ation_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_Reduction_Plan.pdf United States (2013) Fiscal Year 2012: Operational Energy Annual Report. Department of Defense. [Online] Available at: http://energy.defense.gov/Portals/25/Documents/Reports/20131015_FY12_OE_Annual_Report.pdf United States (2013) High-Risk Series: An Update, Report to Congressional Committees, Government Accountability Office (GAO) [Online] Available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/652133.pdf United States (2014) Climate Change Adaptation: DOD Can Improve Infrastructure Planning and Processes to Better Account for Potential Impacts. United States Government Accountability Office report. [Online] Available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/663734.pdf 72

United States (2014) National Climate Assessment. [Online] Available at: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads United States (2014) Quadrennial Defense Review. Department of Defense [Online] Available at: http://www.defense.gov/pubs/2014_Quadrennial_Defense_Review.pdf United States (2014) United States National Climate Assessment Report. [Online] Available at: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/overview/overview United States (2014) Annual Energy Outlook 2014 with Projections to 2040. U.S. Energy Information Administration, [Online] Available at: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2014).pdf United States (2014) Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Inventory Report, [Online] Available at: https://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/810 8.php United States (2014) The Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change. Office of the President, [Online] Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/the_cost_of_delaying_action_to_stem_climate_chang e.pdf United States Air Force (2011) F-35 Force Development Evaluation and Weapons School Beddown Environmental Impact Statement, Report of the Air Combat Command, [Online] Available at: http://www.nellis.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-080404-038.pdf United States Government Accountability Office (2014) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Problems Completing Software Testing May Hinder Delivery of Expected Warfighting Capabilities, Report to Congressional Committees, [Online] Available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/661842.pdf World Meteorological Organization (2013) WMO Greenhouse Gas Bulletin. [Online] Available at: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/arep/gaw/ghg/documents/GHG_Bulletin_No.9_en.pdf World Meteorological Organization (2013) Summary of current climate change findings and figures. WMO November 2013 report, [Online] Available at: http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/factsheet/documents/ClimateChangeInfoSheet201311rev5FINAL.pdf World Meteorological Organization (2014) WMO statement on the status of the global climate in 2013, [Online] Available at: http://library.wmo.int/opac/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=15957#.VAC9GvRDvuF World People’s Agreement (2010) World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth. Cochabamba, Bolivia [Online] Available at: http://pwccc.wordpress.com/support/ Newspaper Articles and News Sites Agence France-Presse (2012) “Norway orders first two F-35 fighters as part of $10bn deal,” [Online] Available at: http://www.defencetalk.com/norway-orders-first-two-f-35-fighters-as-part-of-10bn-deal43225/

73

Davenport, C. (2014) “Climate Change Deemed Growing Security Threat by Military Researchers,” The New York Times, [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/14/us/politics/climate-changedeemed-growing-security-threat-by-military-researchers.html?_r=0 Davenport, C. (2014) “Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty,” The New York Times, [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/us/politics/obama-pursuing-climate-accord-in-lieu-oftreaty.html?_r=0 Ferris, E. (2014) “Too many humanitarian crises, not enough global resources,” GlobalPost, [Online] Available at: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/commentary/too-many-humanitarian-crises-notenough-global-resources Goldenberg, S. (2014) “Delaying climate action will carry heavy economic cost, White House warned,” The Guardian, [Online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/29/delaying-climateaction-economic-cost-white-house-epa Goodnough, A. (2011) "In a Green Town, Activists See Red Over Lockheed Martin," The New York Times, [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/12/us/12burlington.html?_r=0 Hynes, P.H. (2011) “The Military Assault on Global Climate,” Truthout, [Online] Available at: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/3181:the-military-assault-on-global-climate Karbuz, S. (2011) “How Much Energy Does The U.S. Military Consume?” The Daily Energy Report, [Online] Available at: http://www.dailyenergyreport.com/how-much-energy-does-the-u-s-military-consume/ Knight, D. (1998) “U.S. Exempts Military from Kyoto Treaty,” Inter Press Service News Agency, [Online] Available: at: http://www.ipsnews.net/1998/05/climate-us-exempts-military-from-kyoto-treaty/ Leahy, S. (2011) “In Unprecedented Move, Canada Withdraws from Kyoto Protocol,” Inter Press Service News Agency, [Online] Available: at: http://www.ipsnews.net/2011/12/in-unprecedented-move-canadawithdraws-from-kyoto-protocol/ MacAskill, E. (2014) “US presses Nato members to increase defence spending,” The Guardian, [Online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/23/us-nato-members-increase-defencespending McLaughlin, D. et al. (2014) “BofA to Pay $16.7 Billion to End U.S. Mortgage Probes,” Bloomberg, [Online] Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-21/bofa-agrees-to-pay-16-65-billion-to-end-u-smortgage-probes.html Morales, A. and Parkin (2014) “Germany Pledges $1 Billion to UN Green Climate Fund,” Bloomberg, [Online] Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-16/germany-pledges-1-billion-to-ungreen-climate-fund.html Mychalejko, C. (2013) “Turtles and Tomahawk Missiles, Together at Last? War is Not the Answer to Climate Change,” Truthout, [Online] Available at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/13917-turtles-and-tomahawkmissiles-together-at-last-war-is-not-the-answer-to-climate-change Naido, K. (2012) “Two Bullets per Person: The Trillion Dollar Military Spending Club,” The Huffington Post, [Online] Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kumi-naidoo/two-bullets-per-personth_b_1431642.html Obama, B. and Hollande, F. (2014) "France and the U.S. enjoy a renewed alliance," The Washington Post, 74

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obama-and-hollande-france-and-the-us-enjoy-a-renewedalliance/2014/02/09/039ffd34-91af-11e3-b46a-5a3d0d2130da_story.html Pemberton, M. (2013) “Demilitarizing the Economy: A Movement is Underway,” Common Dreams, [Online] Available at: http://www.commondreams.org/views/2013/12/20/demilitarizing-economy-movementunderway Rubin, R. (2014) “How Ignoring Climate Change could sink the U.S. Economy,” The Washington Post, [Online] Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-rubin-how-ignoring-climatechange-could-sink-the-us-economy/2014/07/24/b7b4c00c-0df6-11e4-8341-b8072b1e7348_story.html? utm_content=buffera0d48&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer Schulman, J. (2013) “Defense Contractor: Climate Change Could Create "Business Opportunities,” Mother Jones Magazine, [Online] Available at: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/08/raytheonclimate-change-security Schwartz Greco, E. and Feffer, J. (2014) “Paying for the Climate Change Pivot,” Truthout, [Online] Available at: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/23322-paying-for-the-climate-change-pivot Seip, Lt. General Norman (Ret.) (2012) “The Military’s Dependence on Oil is Putting Our Forces at Risk” American Security Project, [Online] Available at: http://www.americansecurityproject.org/the-militarys-dependence-on-oil-is-putting-our-forces-at-risk/

Web Sites Climate Funds Update: http://www.climatefundsupdate.org/ Costs of War: http://costsofwar.org/ Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project (DDPP): http://unsdsn.org/what-we-do/deep-decarbonizationpathways/ Earth Charter: http://www.earthcharterinaction.org Environment and Security Initiative: http://www.envsec.org/index.php?lang=en Environmental Peacebuilding: http://environmentalpeacebuilding.org/ Federal Contractor Misconduct Database: http://www.contractormisconduct.org/ Green Climate Fund (GCF): http://www.gcfund.org/home.html Global Day of Action on Military Spending: http://www.gdams.org Green Economy Initiative (GEI): http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/ Global Environment Facility (GEF): http://www.thegef.org Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI): http://www.iddri.org/ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): http://www.ipcc.ch/ 75

International Peace Bureau (IPB): http://www.ipb.org Low Carbon Economy Index: http://www.pwc.co.uk/sustainability-climate-change/publications/low-carboneconomy-index.jhtml Militarism/War: The Elephant in the Living Room: http://www.climatesos.org/wpcontent/uploads/2010/12/Military_Climate_resolution_Dec10_2010_delivery.pdf National Priorities Project: https://www.nationalpriorities.org/ Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI): http://www.sipri.org/ Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming: http://peoplesclimate.org/peace/appeal/ Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN): http://unsdsn.org/ Three Trillion Dollar War: http://threetrilliondollarwar.org/ United Nations Decade of Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL): http://www.se4all.org/ United Nations Environment Programme, Climate Change: http://www.unep.org/climatechange/ United Nations Environment Programme, Green Economy: http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/ United Nations Environment Programme, Division of Environmental Law and Conventions, Preventing Military Impacts on Environments: http://www.unep.org/delc/MilitaryActivities/tabid/78544/Default.aspx United Nations Environment Programme, Disasters and Conflicts: http://www.unep.org/disastersandconflicts/ World Meteorological Organization (WMO): https://www.wmo.int/pages/index_en.html

76

About the International Peace Bureau The International Peace Bureau is the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s oldest international peace federation and is dedicated to the vision of a World Without War. Our 300 member organisations in 70 countries, together with individual members form a global network, bringing together expertise and campaigning experience in a common cause. We try to link experts and campaigns working on similar issues in order to create strong civil society movements. We are a Nobel Peace Laureate (1910); and over the years, 13 of our officers have been recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize. Every year, we award the Sean MacBride Peace Prize to an outstanding peacemaker or NGO. Our current main programme centres on Disarmament for Sustainable Development and we campaign mainly on the reallocation of military expenditure. We believe that by reducing funding for the military sector, significant amounts of money could be made available for social projects domestically or abroad and lead to the fulfilment of real human needs. At the same time, we support a range of disarmament campaigns and provide them with data on the economic dimensions of weapons and conflicts. In 2011, we launched an international campaign for the reinvestment of military expenditures â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the Global Day of Action on Military Spending (www.gdams.org).

IPB and its members are active in many UN initiatives. The IPB has had Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council since 1977. We also have associate status with the Department of Public Information. IPB is the secretariat of the Geneva-based NGO Committee for Disarmament, which is a committee of CONGO, the Conference of NGOs in Consultative Status with ECOSOC. In the early 1990s, IPB was active in the World Court Project, which secured an historic Advisory Opinion on nuclear weapons from the International Court of Justice. In 1999, IPB played a central role in organizing a major international congress, the Hague Appeal for Peace, held in the Dutch capital, which led to the creation of the Global Campaign for Peace Education (www.haguepeace.org) In 2010, IPB launched a travelling photo exhibit called Making Peace (www.makingpeace.org) with online education resources to help foster a Culture of Peace. The exhibit has been shown in Geneva, Utrecht, Stockholm, Strasbourg, Sarajevo, and Basel, with other cities planned in the future.

About the Author Tamara Lorincz, BA, BCOM, MBA, LLB (JSD) Tamara Lorincz is a Senior Researcher with the International Peace Bureau. She is a Rotary International World Peace Fellow 2013-2014 and pursuing an MA in International Politics and Security Studies at the University of Bradford in the United Kingdom. Tamara is on the national board of the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace and on the international advisory committee of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. In 2003, Tamara graduated with a combined Masters of Business and Law degree specializing in Environmental Management and Environmental Law from Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. Her research interests are Canadian foreign policy, defence procurement, military expenditures, and gender and militarism.

Contact: tamara@ipb.org

77

PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE

COMPENDIUM OF THE SOCIAL DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20 060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#CHAPTER ELEVEN

CHAPTER ELEVEN THE PROMOTION OF PEACE I. BIBLICAL ASPECTS 488. Before being God's gift to man and a human project in conformity with the divine plan, peace is in the first place a basic attribute of God: “the Lord is peace” (Jdg 6:24). Creation, which is a reflection of the divine glory, aspires to peace. God created all that exists, and all of creation forms a harmonious whole that is good in its every part (cf. Gen1:4,10,18,21,25,31). Peace is founded on the primary relationship that exists between every human being and God himself, a relationship marked by righteousness (cf. Gen 17:1). Following upon the voluntary act by which man altered the divine order, the world experienced the shedding of blood and division. Violence made its appearance in interpersonal relationships (cf. Gen 4:1-16) and in social relationships (cf. Gen 11:1-9). Peace and violence cannot dwell together, and where there is violence, God cannot be present (cf. 1 Chr 22:8-9).

489. In biblical revelation, peace is much more than the simple absence of war; it represents the fullness of life (cf. Mal 2:5). Far from being the work of human hands, it is one of the greatest gifts that God offers to all men and women, and it involves obedience to the divine plan. Peace is the effect of the blessing that God bestows upon his people: “The Lord lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace” (Num 6:26). This peace produces fruitfulness (Is 48:19), well-being (cf. Is 48:18), prosperity (cf. Is 54:13), absence of fear (cf. Lev 26:6) and profound joy (cf. Pr 12:20).

490. Peace is the goal of life in society, as is made extraordinarily clear in the messianic vision of peace: when all peoples will go up to the Lord's house, and he will teach them his ways and they will walk along the ways of peace (cf. Is 2:2-5).

A new world of peace that embraces all of nature is the promise of the messianic age (cf. Is 11:6-9), and the Messiah himself is called “Prince of peace” (Is 9:5).

Wherever his peace reigns, wherever it is present even in part, no longer will anyone be able to make the people of God fearful (cf. Zeph 3:13). It is then that peace will be lasting, because when the king rules according to God's justice,

righteousness flourishes and peace abounds “till the moon be no more” (Ps 72:7).

God longs to give peace to his people: “he will speak of peace to his people, to his saints, to those who turn to him in their hearts” (Ps 85:9). Listening to what God has to say to his people about peace, the Psalmist hears these words: “Steadfast love and faithfulness will meet; righteousness and peace will kiss” (Ps 85:11).

491. The promise of peace that runs through the entire Old Testament finds its fulfilment in the very person of Jesus. Peace, in fact, is the messianic attribute par excellence, in which all other beneficial effects of salvation are included. The Hebrew word “shalom” expresses this fullness of meaning in its etymological sense of “completeness” (cf. Is 9:5ff; Mic 5:1-4). The kingdom of the Messiah is precisely the kingdom of peace (cf. Job 25:2; Ps 29:11; 37:11; 72:3,7; 85:9,11; 119:165; 125:5, 128:6; 147:14; Song 8:10; Is 26:3,12; 32:17f.; 52:7; 54:10; 57:19; 60:17; 66:12; Hag 2:9; Zech 9:10; et al.). Jesus “is our peace” (Eph 2:14). He has broken down the dividing wall of hostility among people, reconciling them with God (cf.Eph 2:14-16). This is the very effective simplicity with which Saint Paul indicates the radical motivation spurring Christians to undertake a life and a mission of peace.

On the eve of his death, Jesus speaks of his loving relation with the Father and the unifying power that this love bestows upon his disciples. It is a farewell discourse which reveals the profound meaning of his life and can be considered a summary of all his teaching. The gift of peace is the seal on his spiritual testament: “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you” (Jn 14:27). The words of the Risen Lord will not be any different; every time that he meets his disciples they receive from him the greeting and gift of peace: “Peace be with you” (Lk 24:36; Jn 20:19,21,26).

492. The peace of Christ is in the first place reconciliation with the Father, which is brought about by the ministry Jesus entrusted to his disciples and which begins with the proclamation of peace: “Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace be to this house!”' (Lk 10:5; cf. Rom 1:7). Peace is then reconciliation with one's brothers and sisters, for in the prayer that Jesus taught us, the “Our Father”, the forgiveness that we ask of God is linked to the forgiveness that we grant to our brothers and sisters: “Forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors” (Mt 6:12). With this twofold reconciliation Christians can become peacemakers and therefore participate in the Kingdom of God, in accordance with what Jesus himself proclaims in the Beatitudes: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God” (Mt 5:9).

493. Working for peace can never be separated from announcing the Gospel, which is in fact the “good news of peace” (Acts 10:36; cf. Eph 6:15) addressed to all men and women. At the centre of “the gospel of peace” (Eph 6:15) remains the mystery of the cross, because peace is born of Christ's sacrifice (cf. Is 53:5) — “Upon him was the chastisement that made us whole, and with his stripes we were healed”.

The crucified Jesus has overcome divisions, re-establishing peace and reconciliation, precisely through the cross, “thereby bringing the hostility to an end” (Eph 2:16) and bringing the salvation of the Resurrection to mankind.

II. PEACE: FRUIT OF JUSTICE AND LOVE 494. Peace is a value [1015] and a universal duty [1016] founded on a rational and moral order of society that has its roots in God himself, “the first source of being, the essential truth and the supreme good”.[1017] Peace is not merely the absence of war, nor can it be reduced solely to the maintenance of a balance of power between enemies.[1018] Rather it is founded on a correct understanding of the human person [1019] and requires the establishment of an order based on justice and charity.

Peace is the fruit of justice,[1020] (cf. Is 32:17) understood in the broad sense as the respect for the equilibrium of every dimension of the human person. Peace is threatened when man is not given all that is due him as a human person, when his dignity is not respected and when civil life is not directed to the common good. The defence and promotion of human rights is essential for the building up of a peaceful society and the integral development of individuals, peoples and nations.[1021] Peace is also the fruit of love. “True and lasting peace is more a matter of love than of justice, because the function of justice is merely to do away with obstacles to peace: the injury done or the damage caused. Peace itself, however, is an act and results only from love”.[1022] 495. Peace is built up day after day in the pursuit of an order willed by God[ 1023] and can flourish only when all recognize that everyone is responsible for promoting it.[1024] To prevent conflicts and violence, it is absolutely necessary that peace begin to take root as a value rooted deep within the heart of every person. In this way it can spread to families and to the different associations within society until the whole of the political community is involved.[1025] In a climate permeated with harmony and respect for justice, an authentic culture of peace [1026] can grow and can even pervade the entire international community. Peace is, consequently, the fruit of “that harmony structured into human society by its Divine Founder and which must be actualized by men as they aspire for ever greater justice”.[1027] Such an ideal of peace “cannot be obtained on earth unless the welfare of man is safeguarded and people freely and trustingly share with one another the riches of their minds and their talents”.[1028] 496. Violence is never a proper response. With the conviction of her faith in Christ and with the awareness of her mission, the Church proclaims “that violence is evil, that violence is unacceptable as a solution to problems, that violence is unworthy of man. Violence is a lie, for it goes against the truth of our faith, the truth of our

humanity. Violence destroys what it claims to defend: the dignity, the life, the freedom of human beings”.[1029] The contemporary world too needs the witness of unarmed prophets, who are often the objects of ridicule.[1030] “Those who renounce violence and bloodshed and, in order to safeguard human rights, make use of those means of defence available to the weakest, bear witness to evangelical charity, provided they do so without harming the rights and obligations of other men and societies. They bear legitimate witness to the gravity of the physical and moral risk of recourse to violence, with all its destruction and death”.[1031] III. THE FAILURE OF PEACE: WAR 497. The Magisterium condemns “the savagery of war” [1032] and asks that war be considered in a new way.[1033] In fact, “it is hardly possible to imagine that in an atomic era, war could be used as an instrument of justice”.[1034] War is a “scourge” [1035] and is never an appropriate way to resolve problems that arise between nations, “it has never been and it will never be”,[1036] because it creates new and still more complicated conflicts.[1037] When it erupts, war becomes an “unnecessary massacre”,[1038] an “adventure without return”[1039] that compromises humanity's present and threatens its future. “Nothing is lost by peace; everything may be lost by war”.[1040] The damage caused by an armed conflict is not only material but also moral.[1041] In the end, war is “the failure of all true humanism”,[1042] “it is always a defeat for humanity”: [1043] “never again some peoples against others, never again! ... no more war, no more war!” [1044] 498. Seeking alternative solutions to war for resolving international conflicts has taken on tremendous urgency today, since “the terrifying power of the means of destruction — to which even medium and small-sized countries have access — and the ever closer links between the peoples of the whole world make it very difficult or practically impossible to limit the consequences of a conflict”.[1045] It is therefore essential to seek out the causes underlying bellicose conflicts, especially those connected with structural situations of injustice, poverty and exploitation, which require intervention so that they may be removed. “For this reason, another name for peace is development. Just as there is a collective responsibility for avoiding war, so too there is a collective responsibility for promoting development”.[1046] 499. States do not always possess adequate means to provide effectively for their own defence, from this derives the need and importance of international and regional organizations, which should be in a position to work together to resolve conflicts and promote peace, re-establishing relationships of mutual trust that make recourse to war unthinkable.[1047] “There is reason to hope ... that by meeting and negotiating, men may come to discover better the bonds that unite them together, deriving from the human nature which they have in common; and that they may

also come to discover that one of the most profound requirements of their common nature is this: that between them and their respective peoples it is not fear which should reign but love, a love which tends to express itself in a collaboration that is loyal, manifold in form and productive of many benefits”.[1048] a. Legitimate defence 500. A war of aggression is intrinsically immoral. In the tragic case where such a war breaks out, leaders of the State that has been attacked have the right and the duty to organize a defence even using the force of arms.[1049] To be licit, the use of force must correspond to certain strict conditions: “the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave and certain; all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective; there must be serious prospects of success; the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the ‘just war' doctrine. The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good”.[1050 ] If this responsibility justifies the possession of sufficient means to exercise this right to defence, States still have the obligation to do everything possible “to ensure that the conditions of peace exist, not only within their own territory but throughout the world”.[1051] It is important to remember that “it is one thing to wage a war of self-defence; it is quite another to seek to impose domination on another nation.

The possession of war potential does not justify the use of force for political or military objectives. Nor does the mere fact that war has unfortunately broken out mean that all is fair between the warring parties”.[1052] 501. The Charter of the United Nations, born from the tragedy of the Second World War with the intention of preserving future generations from the scourge of war, is based on a generalized prohibition of a recourse to force to resolve disputes between States, with the exception of two cases: legitimate defence and measures taken by the Security Council within the area of its responsibilities for maintaining peace. In every case, exercising the right to self-defence must respect “the traditional limits of necessity and proportionality”.[1053] Therefore, engaging in a preventive war without clear proof that an attack is imminent cannot fail to raise serious moral and juridical questions. International legitimacy for the use of armed force, on the basis of rigorous assessment and with well-founded motivations, can only be given by the decision of a competent body that identifies specific situations as threats to peace and authorizes an intrusion into the sphere of autonomy usually reserved to a State.

b. Defending peace 502. The requirements of legitimate defence justify the existence in States of armed forces, the activity of which should be at the service of peace. Those who defend the security and freedom of a country, in such a spirit, make an authentic contribution to peace.[1054] Everyone who serves in the armed forces is concretely called to defend good, truth and justice in the world. Many are those who, in such circumstances, have sacrificed their lives for these values and in defence of innocent lives. Very significant in this regard is the increasing number of military personnel serving in multinational forces on humanitarian or peace-keeping missions promoted by the United Nations.[1055] 503. Every member of the armed forces is morally obliged to resist orders that call for perpetrating crimes against the law of nations and the universal principles of this law.[1056] Military personnel remain fully responsible for the acts they commit in violation of the rights of individuals and peoples, or of the norms of international humanitarian law. Such acts cannot be justified by claiming obedience to the orders of superiors.

Conscientious objectors who, out of principle, refuse military service in those cases where it is obligatory because their conscience rejects any kind of recourse to the use of force or because they are opposed to the participation in a particular conflict, must be open to accepting alternative forms of service. “It seems just that laws should make humane provision for the case of conscientious objectors who refuse to carry arms, provided they accept some other form of community service”.[1057] c. The duty to protect the innocent 504. The right to use force for purposes of legitimate defence is associated with the duty to protect and help innocent victims who are not able to defend themselves from acts of aggression. In modern conflicts, which are often within a State, the precepts of international humanitarian law must be fully respected. Far too often, the civilian population is hit and at times even becomes a target of war. In some cases, they are brutally massacred or taken from their homes and land by forced transfers, under the guise of “ethnic cleansing”,[1058] which is always unacceptable. In such tragic circumstances, humanitarian aid must reach the civilian population and must never be used to influence those receiving it; the good of the human person must take precedence over the interests of the parties to the conflict.

505. The principle of humanity inscribed in the conscience of every person and all peoples includes the obligation to protect civil populations from the effects of war.

“That minimum protection of the dignity of every person, guaranteed by international humanitarian law, is all too often violated in the name of military or

political demands which should never prevail over the value of the human person.

Today we are aware of the need to find a new consensus on humanitarian principles and to reinforce their foundation to prevent the recurrence of atrocities and abuse”.[1059] A particular category of war victim is formed by refugees, forced by combat to flee the places where they habitually live and to seek refuge in foreign countries. The Church is close to them not only with her pastoral presence and material support, but also with her commitment to defend their human dignity: “Concern for refugees must lead us to reaffirm and highlight universally recognized human rights, and to ask that the effective recognition of these rights be guaranteed to refugees”.[1060] 506. Attempts to eliminate entire national, ethnic, religious or linguistic groups are crimes against God and humanity itself, and those responsible for such crimes must answer for them before justice.[1061] The twentieth century bears the tragic mark of different genocides: from that of the Armenians to that of the Ukrainians, from that of the Cambodians to those perpetrated in Africa and in the Balkans. Among these, the Holocaust of the Jewish people, the Shoah, stands out: “the days of the Shoah marked a true night of history, with unimaginable crimes against God and humanity”.[1062] The international community as a whole has the moral obligation to intervene on behalf of those groups whose very survival is threatened or whose basic human rights are seriously violated. As members of an international community, States cannot remain indifferent; on the contrary, if all other available means should prove ineffective, it is “legitimate and even obligatory to take concrete measures to disarm the aggressor”.[1063] The principle of national sovereignty cannot be claimed as a motive for preventing an intervention in defence of innocent victims.[1064] The measures adopted must be carried out in full respect of international law and the fundamental principle of equality among States.

There is also present within the international community an International Criminal Court to punish those responsible for particularly serious acts such as genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression. The Magisterium has not failed to encourage this initiative time and again.[1065] d. Measures against those who threaten peace 507. Sanctions, in the forms prescribed by the contemporary international order, seek to correct the behaviour of the government of a country that violates the rules of peaceful and ordered international coexistence or that practises serious forms of oppression with regard to its population. The purpose of these sanctions must be clearly defined and the measures adopted must from time to time be objectively evaluated by the competent bodies of the international community as to their effectiveness and their real impact on the civilian population. The true objective of

such measures is open to the way to negotiation and dialogue. Sanctions must never be used as a means for the direct punishment of an entire population: it is not licit that entire populations, and above all their most vulnerable members, be made to suffer because of such sanctions. Economic sanctions in particular are an instrument to be used with great discernment and must be subjected to strict legal and ethical criteria.[1066] An economic embargo must be of limited duration and cannot be justified when the resulting effects are indiscriminate. e. Disarmament 508. The Church's social teaching proposes the goal of “general, balanced and controlled disarmament”.[1067] The enormous increase in arms represents a grave threat to stability and peace. The principle of sufficiency, by virtue of which each State may possess only the means necessary for its legitimate defence, must be applied both by States that buy arms and by those that produce and furnish them.[1068] Any excessive stockpiling or indiscriminate trading in arms cannot be morally justified. Such phenomena must also be evaluated in light of international norms regarding the non-proliferation, production, trade and use of different types of arms. Arms can never be treated like other goods exchanged on international or domestic markets.[1069] Moreover, the Magisterium has made a moral evaluation of the phenomenon of deterrence. “The accumulation of arms strikes many as a paradoxically suitable way of deterring potential adversaries from war. They see it as the most effective means of ensuring peace among nations. This method of deterrence gives rise to strong moral reservations. The arms race does not ensure peace. Far from eliminating the causes of war, it risks aggravating them”.[1070] Policies of nuclear deterrence, typical of the Cold War period, must be replaced with concrete measures of disarmament based on dialogue and multilateral negotiations.

509. Arms of mass destruction — whether biological, chemical or nuclear — represent a particularly serious threat. Those who possess them have an enormous responsibility before God and all of humanity.[1071] The principle of the nonproliferation of nuclear arms, together with measures of nuclear disarmament and the prohibition of nuclear tests, are intimately interconnected objectives that must be met as soon as possible by means of effective controls at the international level.[1072] The ban on the development, production, stockpiling and use of chemical and biological weapons as well as the provisions that require their destruction, complete the international regulatory norms aimed at banning such baleful weapons,[1073] the use of which is explicitly condemned by the Magisterium: “Any act of war aimed indiscriminately at the destruction of entire cities or extensive areas along with their population is a crime against God and man himself. It merits unequivocal and unhesitating condemnation”.[1074]

510. Disarmament must include the banning of weapons that inflict excessively traumatic injury or that strike indiscriminately. This includes anti- personnel landmines, a type of small arm that is inhumanly insidious because it continues to cause harm even long after the cessation of hostilities. States that produce them, sell them and continue to use them are responsible for seriously delaying the total elimination of these death-dealing weapons.[1075] The international community must continue its committed efforts aimed at mine-clearance, fostering effective cooperation — including education and technical training — with those countries that do not have adequate means to clear their territory of mines with all due urgency and that are not able to offer the necessary assistance to victims of mines.

511. Appropriate measures are needed to control the production, sale, importation and exportation of small arms and light weapons, armaments that facilitate many outbreaks of violence to occur. The sale and trafficking of such weapons constitute a serious threat to peace: these arms kill and are used for the most part in internal and regional conflicts; their ready availability increases both the risk of new conflicts and the intensity of those already underway. The position of States that apply severe controls on the international transfer of heavy arms while they never, or only very rarely, restrict the sale and trafficking of small arms and light weapons is an unacceptable contradiction. It is indispensable and urgent that Governments adopt appropriate measures to control the production, stockpiling, sale and trafficking of such arms [1076] in order to stop their growing proliferation, in large part among groups of combatants that are not part of the military forces of a State.

512. The use of children and adolescents as soldiers in armed conflicts — despite the fact that their young age should bar them from being recruited —must be condemned. Obliged by force to take part in combat or choosing to do so on their own initiative without being fully aware of the consequences, these children are not only deprived of an education and a normal childhood, they are also trained to kill.

This constitutes an intolerable crime. The use of child soldiers in combat forces of any kind must be stopped and, at the same time, every possible assistance must be given to the care, education and rehabilitation of those children who have been involved in combat[1077]. f. The condemnation of terrorism 513. Terrorism is one of the most brutal forms of violence traumatizing the international community today; it sows hatred, death, and an urge for revenge and reprisal.[1078] From being a subversive strategy typical of certain extremist organizations, aimed at the destruction of material goods or the killing of people, terrorism has now become a shadowy network of political collusion. It can also make use of sophisticated technology, often has immense financial resources at its disposal and is involved in large- scale planning, striking completely innocent people who become chance victims of terrorist actions.[1079] The targets of terrorist attacks are generally places of daily life and not military objectives in the

context of a declared war. Terrorism acts and strikes under the veil of darkness, with no regard for any of the rules by which men have always sought to set limits to conflicts, for example through international humanitarian law; “in many cases, terrorist methods are regarded as new strategies of war”[1080]. Nor must we overlook the causes that can lead to such unacceptable forms of making demands.

The fight against terrorism presupposes the moral duty to help create those conditions that will prevent it from arising or developing.

514. Terrorism is to be condemned in the most absolute terms. It shows complete contempt for human life and can never be justified, since the human person is always an end and never a means. Acts of terrorism strike at the heart of human dignity and are an offence against all humanity; “there exists, therefore, a right to defend oneself from terrorism”.[1081] However, this right cannot be exercised in the absence of moral and legal norms, because the struggle against terrorists must be carried out with respect for human rights and for the principles of a State ruled by law.[1082] The identification of the guilty party must be duly proven, because criminal responsibility is always personal, and therefore cannot be extended to the religions, nations or ethnic groups to which the terrorists belong. International cooperation in the fight against terrorist activity “cannot be limited solely to repressive and punitive operations. It is essential that the use of force, even when necessary, be accompanied by a courageous and lucid analysis of the reasons behind terrorist attacks”.[1083] Also needed is a particular commitment on the “political and educational levels” [1084] in order to resolve, with courage and determination, the problems that in certain dramatic circumstances can foster terrorism: “the recruitment of terrorists in fact is easier in situations where rights are trampled and injustices are tolerated over a long period of time”[1085].

515. It is a profanation and a blasphemy to declare oneself a terrorist in God's name.[1086] In such cases, God, and not only man, is exploited by a person who claims to possess the totality of God's truth rather than one who seeks to be possessed by the truth. To define as “martyrs” those who die while carrying out terrorist attacks distorts the concept of martyrdom, which is the witness of a person who gives himself up to death rather than deny God and his love. Martyrdom cannot be the act of a person who kills in the name of God. No religion may tolerate terrorism and much less preach it.[1087] Rather, religions must work together to remove the causes of terrorism and promote friendship among peoples[1088].

IV. THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE CHURCH TO PEACE 516. The promotion of peace in the world is an integral part of the Church's mission of continuing Christ's work of redemption on earth. In fact, the Church is, in Christ, a “ ‘sacrament' or sign and instrument of peace in the world and for the world”.[1089] The promotion of true peace is an expression of Christian faith in the

love that God has for every human being. From a liberating faith in God's love there arises a new vision of the world and a new way of approaching others, whether the other is an individual or an entire people. It is a faith that transforms and renews life, inspired by the peace that Christ left to his disciples (cf. Jn 14:27).

Moved solely by this faith, the Church intends to promote the unity of Christians and a fruitful cooperation with believers of other religions. Differences of religion must not be a cause of conflict; the shared quest for peace on the part of all believers is a vital source of unity among peoples.[1090] The Church calls on individuals, peoples, States and nations to share her concern for re-establishing and consolidating peace, placing particular emphasis on the important role of international law[1091].

517. The Church teaches that true peace is made possible only through forgiveness and reconciliation.[1092] It is not easy to forgive when faced with the consequences of war and conflict because violence, especially when it leads “to the very depths of inhumanity and suffering”,[1093] leaves behind a heavy burden of pain. This pain can only be eased by a deep, faithful and courageous reflection on the part of all parties, a reflection capable of facing present difficulties with an attitude that has been purified by repentance. The weight of the past, which cannot be forgotten, can be accepted only when mutual forgiveness is offered and received; this is a long and difficult process, but one that is not impossible[1094].

518. Mutual forgiveness must not eliminate the need for justice and still less does it block the path that leads to truth. On the contrary, justice and truth represent the concrete requisites for reconciliation. Initiatives aimed at establishing international judicial bodies are therefore appropriate. In virtue of the principle of universal jurisdiction and guided by suitable procedural norms that respect the rights of the accused and of the victims, such bodies are able to ascertain the truth about crimes perpetrated during armed conflicts.[1095] However, in order to re-establish relationships of mutual acceptance between divided peoples in the name of reconciliation, it is necessary to go beyond the determination of criminal behaviour, both of commission and omission, and the procedures for seeking reparation.[1096] It is necessary, moreover, to promote respect for the right to peace. This right “encourages the building of a society in which structures of power give way to structures of cooperation, with a view to the common good”[1097].

519. It is through prayer that the Church engages in the battle for peace. Prayer opens the heart not only to a deep relationship with God but also to an encounter with others marked by respect, understanding, esteem and love.[1098] Prayer instils courage and lends support to all “true friends of peace”,[1099] those who love peace and strive to promote it in the various circumstances in which they live.

Liturgical prayer is “the summit towards which the action of the Church tends and, at the same time, the source from which she draws her strength”.[1100] In particular, the Eucharistic celebration, “the source and summit of the Christian

life”[1101], is a limitless wellspring for all authentic Christian commitment to peace[1102].

520. The World Days of Peace are particularly intense moments of prayer for peace and for the commitment to build a world of peace. Pope Paul VI instituted these Days to dedicate to “thoughts and resolutions of Peace a special observance on the first day of the civil year”.[1103] The Papal Messages on these annual occasions represent a rich source for the renewal and development of the Church's social doctrine and show the Church's constant pastoral activity aimed at the promotion of peace. “Peace expresses itself only in peace, a peace which is not separate from the demands of justice, but which is fostered by personal sacrifice, clemency, mercy and love”[1104].

NOTES [1015] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 1986 World Day of Peace, 1: AAS 78 (1986), 278-279.

[1016] Cf. Paul VI, Message for the 1969 World Day of Peace: AAS 60 (1968), 771; John Paul II, Message for the 2004 World Day of Peace, 4: AAS 96 (2004), 116.

[1017] John Paul II, Message for the 1982 World Day of Peace 4: AAS 74 (1982), 328.

[1018] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 78:AAS 58 (1966), 1101-1102.

[1019] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 51: AAS 83 (1991), 856-857.

[1020] Cf. Paul VI, Message for the 1972 World Day of Peace: AAS 63 (1971), 868.

[1021] Cf. Paul VI, Message for the 1969 World Day of Peace: AAS 60 (1968), 772; John Paul II, Message for the 1999 World Day of Peace, 12: AAS 91 (1999), 386-387.

[1022] Pius XI, Encyclical Letter Ubi Arcano: AAS 14 (1922), 686. In the Encyclical, reference is made to Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 29, a. 3, ad 3um: Ed. Leon. 8, 238; cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 78: AAS 58 (1966), 1101-1102.

[1023] Cf. Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 76: AAS 59 (1967), 294-295.

[1024] Cf. Paul VI, Message for the 1974 World Day of Peace: AAS 65 (1973), 672.

[1025] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2317.

[1026] John Paul II, Address to the Diplomatic Corps (13 January 1997), 3: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 15 January 1997, pp. 6-7.

[1027] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 78: AAS58 (1966), 1101; cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2304.

[1028] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 78: AAS58 (1966), 1101.

[1029] John Paul II, Address at Drogheda, Ireland (29 September 1979), 9: AAS 71 (1979), 1081; cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi, 37: AAS 68 (1976), 29.

[1030] Cf. John Paul II, Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (12 November 1983), 5: AAS 76 (1984), 398-399.

[1031] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2306.

[1032] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 77: AAS58 (1966), 1100; cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2307-2317.

[1033] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes,80:AAS 58 (1966), 1103-1104.

[1034] John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Pacem in Terris: AAS 55 (1963), 291.

[1035] Leo XIII, Address to the College of Cardinals: Acta Leonis XIII, 19 (1899), 270-272.

[1036] John Paul II, Meeting with Officials of the Roman Vicariate (17 January 1991):L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 21 January 1991, p. 1; cf. John Paul II, Address to the Latin-Rite Bishops of the Arabian Peninsula (1 October 1990), 4: AAS 83 (1991), 475.

[1037] Cf. Paul VI, Address to Cardinals (24 June 1965): AAS 57 (1965), 643-644.

[1038] Benedict XV, Appeal to the Leaders of the Warring Nations (1 August 1917): AAS 9 (1917), 423.

[1039] John Paul II, Prayer for peace during General Audience (16 January 1991):Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II, XIV, 1 (1991), 121.

[1040] Pius XII, Radio Message (24 August 1939): AAS 31 (1939) 334; John Paul II, Message for the 1993 World Day of Peace, 4: AAS 85 (1993), 433-434; cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Pacem in Terris: AAS 55 (1963), 288.

[1041] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes 79:AAS 58 (1966), 1102-1103.

[1042] John Paul II, Message for the 1999 World Day of Peace, 11: AAS 91 (1999), 385.

[1043] John Paul II, Address to the Diplomatic Corps (13 January 2003), 4: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 15 January 2003, p. 3.

[1044] Paul VI, Address to the General Assembly of the United Nations (4 October 1965), 5:AAS 57 (1965), 881.

[1045] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 51: AAS 83 (1991), 857.

[1046] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 52: AAS 83 (1991), 858.

[1047] Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Pacem in Terris: AAS 55 (1963), 288-289.

[1048] John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Pacem in Terris: AAS 55 (1963), 291.

[1049] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2265.

[1050] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2309.

[1051] Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, The International Arms Trade. An ethical reflection (1 May 1994), ch. 1, 6: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Vatican City 1994, p. 13.

[1052] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 79: AAS58 (1966), 1103.

[1053] John Paul II, Message for the 2004 World Day of Peace, 6: AAS 96 (2004), 117.

[1054] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 79:AAS 58 (1966), 1102-1103; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2310.

[1055] Cf. John Paul II, Message to the Third International Meeting of Military Ordinaries (11 March 1994), 4: AAS 87 (1995), 74.

[1056] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2313.

[1057] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 79: AAS58 (1966), 1103; cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2311.

[1058] John Paul II, Sunday Angelus (7 March 1993), 4: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 10 March 1993, p. 1; John Paul II, Address to the OSCE Council of Ministers (30 November 1993), 4: AAS 86 (1994), 751.

[1059] John Paul II, Address at General Audience (11 August 1999), 5: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 25 August 1999, p. 6.

[1060] John Paul II, 1990 Message for Lent, 3: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 12 February 1990, p. 5.

[1061] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 1999 World Day of Peace, 7: AAS 91 (1999), 382; John Paul II, Message for the 2000 World Day of Peace, 7: AAS 92 (2000), 362.

[1062] John Paul II, Address at the Regina Coeli (18 April 1993), 3: L'Osservatore Romano,English edition, 21 April 1993, p. 12; cf. Commission for Religious Relations with Judaism,We Remember. A Reflection on the Shoah (16 March 1998), Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Vatican City 1998.

[1063] John Paul II, Message for the 2000 World Day of Peace, 11: AAS 92 (2000), 363.

[1064] Cf. John Paul II, Address to the Diplomatic Corps (16 January 1993), 13:L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 20 January 1993, p. 9; cf. John Paul II, Address to the International Conference on Nutrition sponsored by FAO and WHO (5 December 1992), 3: AAS 85 (1993), 922-923; John Paul II, Message for the 2004 World Day of Peace, 9: AAS96 (2004), 120.

[1065] Cf. John Paul II, Sunday Angelus (14 June 1998): L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 17 June 1998, p. 1; John Paul II, Address to participants in the World Congress on Pastoral Promotion of Human Rights (4 July 1998), 5: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 29 July 1998, p. 8; John Paul II, Message for the 1999 World Day of Peace, 7: AAS91 (1999), 382; cf. also Pius XII, Address at the Sixth International Congress of Criminal Law (3 October 1953): AAS 45 (1953), 730-744.

[1066] Cf. John Paul II, Address to the Diplomatic Corps (9 January 1995), 7: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 11 January 1995, p. 6.

[1067] John Paul II, Message for the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations (14 October 1985), 6: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 14 November 1985, p.

4.

[1068] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, The International Arms Trade.

An ethical reflection (1 May 1994), ch. 1, 9-11, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Vatican City 1994, p. 14.

[1069] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2316; John Paul II, Address to the World of Work, Verona, Italy (17 April 1988), 6: Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II, XI, 1 (1988), 940.

[1070] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2315.

[1071] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 80:AAS 58 (1966), 1104; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2314; John Paul II, Message for the 1986 World Day of Peace, 2: AAS 78 (1986), 280.

[1072] Cf. John Paul II, Address to the Diplomatic Corps (13 January 1996), 7:L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 17 January 1996, p. 2.

[1073] The Holy See is a party to juridical instruments dealing with nuclear, biological and chemical weapons in order to support such initiatives of the international community.

[1074] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 80: AAS58 (1966), 1104.

[1075] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 1999 World Day of Peace, 11: AAS 91 (1999), 385-386.

[1076] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 1999 World Day of Peace, 11: AAS 91 (1999), 385-386.

[1077] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 1999 World Day of Peace, 11: AAS 91 (1999), 385-386.

[1078] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2297.

[1079] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 2002 World Day of Peace, 4: AAS 94 (2002), 134.

[1080] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 79: AAS58 (1966), 1102.

[1081] John Paul II, Message for the 2002 World Day of Peace, 5: AAS 94 (2002), 134.

[1082] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 2004 World Day of Peace, 8: AAS 96 (2004), 119.

[1083] John Paul II, Message for the 2004 World Day of Peace, 8: AAS 96 (2004), 119.

[1084] John Paul II, Message for the 2004 World Day of Peace, 8: AAS 96 (2004), 119.

[1085] John Paul II, Message for the 2002 World Day of Peace, 5: AAS 94 (2002), 134.

[1086] Cf. John Paul II, Address to Representatives from the World of Culture, Art and Science, Astana, Kazakhstan (24 September 2001), 5: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 26 September 2001, p. 7.

[1087] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 2002 World Day of Peace, 7: AAS 95 (2002), 135-136.

[1088] Cf. “Decalogue of Assisi for Peace”, 1, in the letter addressed by John Paul II to Heads of State and of Government on 24 February 2002: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 6 March 2002, p. 12.

[1089] John Paul II, Message for the 2000 World Day of Peace, 20: AAS 92 (2000), 369.

[1090] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 1988 World Day of Peace, 3: AAS 80 (1988), 282-284.

[1091] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 2004 World Day of Peace, 9: AAS 96 (2004), 120.

[1092] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 2002 World Day of Peace, 9: AAS 94 (2002), 136-137; John Paul II, Message for the 2004 World Day of Peace, 10: AAS 96 (2004), 121.

[1093] John Paul II, Letter on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the outbreak of the Second World War (27 August 1989), 2: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 4 September 1989, p. 1.

[1094] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 1997 World Day of Peace, 3 and 4: AAS 89 (1997), 193.

[1095] Cf. Pius XII, Address to the Sixth International Congress on Criminal Law (3 October 1953): AAS 65 (1953), 730-744; John Paul II, Address to the Diplomatic Corps (13 January 1997), 4: L'Osservatore Romano, English edition, 15 January 1997, p. 7; John Paul II, Message for the 1999 World Day of Peace, 7: AAS 91 (1999), 382.

[1096] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 1997 World Day of Peace, 3, 4, 6: AAS 89 (1997), 193, 196-197.

[1097] John Paul II, Message for the 1999 World Day of Peace, 11: AAS 91 (1999), 385.

[1098] Cf. John Paul II, Message for the 1992 World Day of Peace, 4: AAS 84 (1992), 323-324.

[1099] Paul VI, Message for the 1968 World Day of Peace: AAS 59 (1967), 1098.

[1100] Second Vatican Ecumenical Concilium, 10: AAS56 (1964), 102.

Council,

[1101] Second Vatican Ecumenical Gentium, 11: AAS 57 (1965), 15.

Constitution Sacrosanctum

Council,

Constitution Lumen

[1102] The eucharistic celebration begins with a greeting of peace, the greeting of Christ to his disciples. The Gloria is a prayer for peace for all the people of God on the earth. Prayer for peace is made through the anaphora at Mass: an appeal for the peace and unity of the Church, for the peace of the entire family of God in this life, for the advancement of peace and salvation in the world. During the communion rite the Church prays that the Lord will “grant us peace in our day” and remembers Christ's gift that consists of his peace, invoking “the peace and unity of his Kingdom”. Before communion, the entire assembly exchanges a sign of peace and the assembly prays that the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world will “grant us peace”. The eucharistic celebration concludes with the assembly being dismissed in the peace of Christ. There are many prayers that invoke peace for the world. In these, peace is sometimes associated with justice, for example, as in the opening prayer for the Eighth Sunday in Ordinary Time, in which the Church asks God to guide the course of world events in justice and peace, according to his will.

[1103] Paul VI, Message for the 1968 World Day of Peace: AAS 59 (1967), 1100.

[1104] Paul VI, Message for the 1976 World Day of Peace: AAS 67 (1975), 671.

The Holy See

MESSAGE OF HIS HOLINESS POPE FRANCIS ON THE OCCASION OF THE VIENNA CONFERENCE ON THE HUMANITARIAN IMPACT OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS [Multimedia] To His Excellency Mr Sebastian Kurz Federal Minister for Europe, Integration and Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Austria President of the Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons I am pleased to greet you, Mr President, and all the representatives from various Nations and International Organizations, as well as civil society, who are participating in the Vienna Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons.

Nuclear weapons are a global problem, affecting all nations, and impacting future generations and the planet that is our home. A global ethic is needed if we are to reduce the nuclear threat and work towards nuclear disarmament. Now, more than ever, technological, social and political interdependence urgently calls for an ethic of solidarity (cf. John Paul II, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 38), which encourages peoples to work together for a more secure world, and a future that is increasingly rooted in moral values and responsibility on a global scale.

The humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons are predictable and planetary. While the focus is often placed on nuclear weapons’ potential for mass-killing, more attention must be given to the “unnecessary suffering” brought on by their use. Military codes and international law, among others, have long banned peoples from inflicting unnecessary suffering. If such suffering is banned in the waging of conventional war, then it should all the more be banned in nuclear conflict. There are those among us who are victims of these weapons; they warn us not to commit the same irreparable mistakes which have devastated populations and creation. I extend warm greetings to the Hibakusha, as well as other victims of nuclear weapons testing who are present at this meeting. I encourage them all to be prophetic voices, calling the human family to a deeper appreciation of beauty, love, cooperation and fraternity, while reminding the world of the risks of nuclear weapons which have the potential to destroy us and civilization.

2 Nuclear deterrence and the threat of mutually assured destruction cannot be the basis for an ethics of fraternity and peaceful coexistence among peoples and states. The youth of today and tomorrow deserve far more. They deserve a peaceful world order based on the unity of the human family, grounded on respect, cooperation, solidarity and compassion. Now is the time to counter the logic of fear with the ethic of responsibility, and so foster a climate of trust and sincere dialogue.

Spending on nuclear weapons squanders the wealth of nations. To prioritize such spending is a mistake and a misallocation of resources which would be far better invested in the areas of integral human development, education, health and the fight against extreme poverty. When these resources are squandered, the poor and the weak living on the margins of society pay the price.

The desire for peace, security and stability is one of the deepest longings of the human heart. It is rooted in the Creator who makes all people members of the one human family. This desire can never be satisfied by military means alone, much less the possession of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. Peace cannot “be reduced solely to maintaining a balance of power between enemies; nor is it brought about by dictatorship” (Gaudium et Spes, 78). Peace must be built on justice, socio-economic development, freedom, respect for fundamental human rights, the participation of all in public affairs and the building of trust between peoples. Pope Paul VI stated this succinctly in his Encyclical Populorum Progressio: “Development is the new name for peace” (76). It is incumbent on us to adopt concrete actions which promote peace and security, while remaining always aware of the limitation of short-sighted approaches to problems of national and international security. We must be profoundly committed to strengthening mutual trust, for only through such trust can true and lasting peace among nations be established (cf. John XXIII,

Pacem in Terris, 113).

In the context of this Conference, I wish to encourage sincere and open dialogue between parties internal to each nuclear state, between various nuclear states, and between nuclear states and non-nuclear states. This dialogue must be inclusive, involving international organizations, religious communities and civil society, and oriented towards the common good and not the protection of vested interests. “A world without nuclear weapons” is a goal shared by all nations and echoed by world leaders, as well as the aspiration of millions of men and women. The future and the survival of the human family hinges on moving beyond this ideal and ensuring that it becomes a reality.

I am convinced that the desire for peace and fraternity planted deep in the human heart will bear fruit in concrete ways to ensure that nuclear weapons are banned once and for all, to the benefit of our common home. The security of our own future depends on guaranteeing the peaceful security of others, for if peace, security and stability are not established globally, they will not be enjoyed at all. Individually and collectively, we are responsible for the present and future well-being of our brothers and sisters. It is my great hope that this responsibility will inform our efforts in favour of nuclear disarmament, for a world without nuclear weapons is truly possible.

NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: TIME FOR ABOLITION A CONTRIBUTION OF THE HOLY SEE ***

PERMANENT MISSION OF THE HOLY SEE TO THE UNITED NATIONS AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN GENEVA ***

VIENNA, 08 DECEMBER 2014

1

Nuclear weapons are a global problem. They affect not just nuclear-armed states, but other non-nuclear signatories of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, non-signatories, unacknowledged possessing states and allies under “the nuclear umbrella.” They also impact future generations and the planet that is our home. The reduction of the nuclear threat and disarmament requires a global ethic. Now more than ever the facts of technological and political interdependence cry out for an ethic of solidarity in which we work with one another for a less dangerous, morally responsible global future.

Breaches of Trust

Our existing disarmament treaties are more than just legal obligations. They are also moral commitments based on trust between states and their representatives, and they are rooted in the trust that citizens place in their governments. Under the NPT, the duty of the nuclear powers and all other parties under what has been described as “a grand bargain” between nuclear and nonnuclear states is to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures to disarm. In the case of nuclear weapons, moreover, beyond the details of any agreement, there are moral stakes for the whole of humanity including future generations.

The purpose of this paper is to encourage discussion of the factors that underpin the moral case for nuclear disarmament, and, in particular, to scrutinize the counterargument for the belief that nuclear deterrence is a stable basis for peace. The strategic nuclear situation has changed dramatically since the end of the Cold War. Rather than providing security, as the defenders of nuclear deterrence contend, reliance on a strategy of nuclear deterrence has created a less secure world. In a multi-polar world, the concept of nuclear deterrence works less as a stabilizing force and more as an incentive for countries to break out of the non-proliferation regime and develop nuclear arsenals of their own.

Contrary to the frequent assertions of nuclear strategists, the history of the nuclear age has shown that nuclear deterrence has failed to prevent unanticipated events that might have led to nuclear war between possessing states. These include: nuclear accidents, malfunctions, mishaps, false alarms and close calls. Even the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, previously characterized in popular literature as a success for diplomatic brinksmanship, involved events that all too easily could have launched a nuclear war independent of the intentions of national decision-makers.

2

A Changed Strategic Environment

Today because of the changing strategic environment, the structure of nuclear deterrence is less stable and more worrisome than at the height of the Cold War. The contemporary global environment includes the dangerous proliferation of nuclear weapons to non-nuclear states, as well as a growing risk of nuclear terrorism and nuclear weapons use. Possessing states believe preventing proliferation to some countries is necessary, while they have for years ignored the unacknowledged growth of nuclear arsenals in others. This double standard undermines the universality on which the NPT was constructed.

Under the weight of these developments, the architecture of nuclear deterrence has begun to crumble. The expansion and fears of expansion of the nuclear club bring new, unpredictable forces to bear on the bi-lateral strategic balance that has constituted nuclear deterrence. The superpowers no longer seem to share an acute risk of mutual nuclear war. Instead, the proximate threat of nuclear war mainly comes now from regional powers.

Furthermore, the merchandizing and export of nuclear material and expertise for civilian nuclear energy purposes has also increased the risk that terrorist groups will acquire nuclear weapons. In addition, instability threatens nuclear-armed states with the capture of nuclear weapons and related materials by insurgents with aspirations for global violence. The spread of global terrorism through weak and failed states, together with sustained insurgencies in nuclear-armed states, further complicates efforts for arms control and disarmament.

In addition, the process of disarmament by the major nuclear powers has slowed. The most recent arms reduction treaty between the superpowers (2010) fell far short of expectations; it left the world far from the goal of nuclear disarmament. Many more missiles remain on both sides than what even at the height of the Cold War was thought to be the minimum needed for stable deterrence. In addition, certain nuclear weapon possessors have taken actions or articulated policies which continue to make nuclear war-fighting an option for the future even where there is no nuclear provocation.

While the superpowers now deploy fewer weapons on alert, their numbers are still worryingly large. In addition many more thousands are stored in readiness for deployment. There are big gaps in accounting for fissile material over many decades, and the pace of re-processing materials for peaceful purposes has slowed. Missiles and other vehicles for weapons transport have yet to be reduced. Controls on delivery systems are lacking.

3Â Â

For sixty years nuclear deterrence has been thought to provide only “a peace of a sort.” Nuclear deterrence is believed to have prevented nuclear war between the superpowers, but it has also deprived the world of genuine peace and kept it under sustained risk of nuclear catastrophe. Since the end of the Cold War more than twenty years ago the end of the nuclear stand-off has failed to provide a peace dividend that would help to improve the situation of the world’s poor. Indeed, enormous amounts of money are still being spent on ‘modernizing’ the nuclear arsenals of the very states that are ostensibly reducing their nuclear weapons numbers.

Finally, it must be admitted that the very possession of nuclear weapons, even for purposes of deterrence, is morally problematic. While a consensus continues to grow that any possible use of such weapons is radically inconsistent with the demands of human dignity, in the past the Church has nonetheless expressed a provisional acceptance of their possession for reasons of deterrence, under the condition that this be “a step on the way toward progressive disarmament.” This condition has not been fulfilled—far from it. In the absence of further progress toward complete disarmament, and without concrete steps toward a more secure and a more genuine peace, the nuclear weapon establishment has lost much of its legitimacy.

The Problem of Intention

It is now time to question the distinction between possession and use which has long been a governing assumption of much ethical discourse on nuclear deterrence. Use of nuclear weapons is absolutely prohibited, but their possession is judged acceptable on condition that the weapons are held solely for deterrent purposes, that is, to dissuade adversaries from employing them.

The language of intention obscures the fact that nuclear armories, as instruments of military strategy, inherently bear active disposition for use. Nuclear weaponry does not simply lie dormant until the conditional intention is converted into an actual one at the moment when a nuclear attack is launched by one’s adversary. The machinery of nuclear deterrence does not work that way. It involves a whole set of acts that are pre-disposed to use: strategic designs, targeting plans, training drills, readiness checks, alerts, screening for conscientious objectors among operators, and so on.

The political and military officials of nuclear possessing states assume the responsibility to use these weapons if deterrence fails. But since what is intended is mass destruction—with extensive and lasting collateral damage, inhumane suffering, and the risk of escalation—the system of nuclear deterrence can no longer be deemed a policy that stands firmly on moral ground.

4

Toward a Non-nuclear Peace

The time has come for new thinking on how to challenge complacency surrounding the belief in nuclear deterrence. Changed circumstances bring new responsibilities for decision-makers. The apparent benefits that nuclear deterrence once provided have been compromised, and proliferation results in grave new dangers. The time has come to embrace the abolition of nuclear weapons as an essential foundation of collective security. Realists argue that nuclear deterrence as a security framework must be abandoned slowly and with calculation, if at all. But, is it realistic to allow the current unstable nuclear environment to persist with minor, incremental and essentially bilateral changes? Shall we continue to ignore the conditions that lead to nuclear instability, as systems of international control remain unable to restore stability? Is it realistic, moreover, to deny that the disparity between nuclear and nonnuclear states is one of the major factors resulting in destabilization of the NonProliferation Regime? Can we count on strategic ‘realism’ to build us a secure peace?

We would be foolish to imagine so.

A genuine peace cannot grow out of an instrumental prudence that establishes a precarious ethics focused narrowly on the technical instruments of war. What is needed is a constructive ethic rooted in a deeper vision of peace, an ethic in which means and ends coincide more closely, where the positive components of peace inform and limit the use of force. World leaders must be reminded that the commitment to disarm embedded in the NPT and other international documents is more than a legal-political detail, it is a moral commitment on which the future of the world depends. Pacta sunt servanda (“Treaties must be observed”) is a first principle of the international system because it is the foundation on which trust can be built.

Solidarity and a Global Ethic of Abolition

Responsibility for the abolition of nuclear weapons is an essential component of the global common good. Abolition is one of those tasks that exceed the capacity of any single nation or any set of nations to resolve on their own. Reduction and disarmament of nuclear arsenals requires a global ethic to guide global cooperation.

On this issue in particular, now more than ever, the logic of technological interdependence cries out for an ethic of solidarity in which we work with one another for a less dangerous, morally responsible global future. It diminishes our humanity when the development of harmful technologies so often controls the imaginations and moral judgments of the brightest among us. To dwell in a humane society, we must govern our technologies with conscious attention to our global responsibilities.

5

In search of the political will to eradicate nuclear weapons, and out of concern for the world our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren will inherit, the human family will have to become united in order to overcome powerful institutionalized interests that are invested in nuclear armaments. Only in solidarity will we recognize our common humanity, grow in awareness of the threats we face in common, and discover the paths beyond the impasse in which the world now finds itself.

The process of nuclear disarmament promised by the Non-Proliferation Treaty and repeatedly endorsed by religious and civic leaders is far from realization. At a time when political will among world leaders for the abolition of nuclear weapons is lacking, solidarity across nations could break through the blockages of diplomacy-asusual to open a way to the elimination of these weapons of mass destruction. In the 1980s people round the world voiced their “No” to nuclear war-fighting. In this decade, the time has come for people of all nations to say, in solidarity, once and for all “a ‘No’ to nuclear weapons.”

Fifty years ago Pope John XXIII proposed that “nuclear weapons should be banned” and “all should come to agree on fitting program of disarmament.” Since that time the Holy See has repeatedly called for the abolition of nuclear weapons. At the General Assembly last September, Archbishop Dominque Mamberti endorsed the Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon’s “Five Point Plan for Nuclear Disarmament” and called for a worldwide conference to draw up a convention on abolition. “The Holy See,” he explained, in another talk, “shares the thoughts and sentiments of most men and women of good will who aspire to the elimination of nuclear weapons.” Chief among these are the former American statesmen who have become advocates of abolition. Their conversion from proponents of nuclear deterrence to advocates of nuclear abolition is a sign of the times that solidarity in this cause is possible between secular and religious leaders as well as between possessing and non-possessing states. Now is the time to affirm not only the immorality of the use of nuclear weapons, but the immorality of their possession, thereby clearing the road to nuclear abolition.

Other Ethical Issues Pressing for Disarmament

With solidarity as a basis for a global ethic of abolition, let us examine some of the particular factors that put in question the moral legitimacy of the architecture of the “peace of a sort” supposedly provided by deterrence between the major nuclear powers. We propose looking at four specific concerns: (1) the costs of the nuclear stalemate to the global common good, (2) the unstable security inherent in the current nuclear environment under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, (3) the built-in injustice in the NPT regime, and (4) the price to the poor and vulnerable of current nuclear policies.

6

(1) Threats to the Global Common Good Last year’s international conference in Oslo highlighted the egregious-humanitarian consequences that inevitably result from any use of nuclear weapons. These consequences amount to basic offenses against humanity and the global common good. So, too, would such use bring about widespread harm to other life forms and even eco-systems. In addition, maintenance of the world’s nuclear weapons establishment results in misallocation of human talent, institutional capacities and funding resources. Promotion of the global common good will require re-setting those allocations, re-ordering priorities toward peaceful human development.

Though it may be said, by way of a narrow casuistry, that possession of nuclear weapons is not per se evil, it does come very close to being so, because the only way such weapons work, even as a deterrent, is to threaten death to masses of human beings. And even should nuclear weapons be employed for narrowly restricted military goals, - so called “tactical” nuclear weapons - civilians would nonetheless be killed as “collateral damage”. Contaminants would be dispersed far into the future, resulting in harm to the environment for decades, even centuries, to come.

While most attention is giving to the mass-killing power of nuclear weapons, scientists and international lawyers are now giving attention to the “unnecessary suffering” inflicted by the use of nuclear weapons. It has been observed that survivors of a nuclear conflict will envy the dead. The infliction of unnecessary suffering has long been banned by military codes and international law. What is true in conventional war is all the more true of nuclear conflict.

To the immediate and long-term effects of radiation sickness must be added the suffering due to starvation, the disruption and contamination of water supplies, the spread of disease across a newly vulnerable population, and the inability of ecosystems to restore themselves to sustainable levels after nuclear detonations. The continuing radioactive disaster at the civilian nuclear energy plant at Chernobyl and Fukushima should be a stark reminder to us that technical fixes are non-trivial and certainly not feasible in the far worse situation of a nuclear weapon detonation in conflict. Not only human lives but the land and water and marine resources would be damaged for the foreseeable future.

(2) Illusions of Security Proponents of nuclear weapons and opponents of abolition have often presented nuclear deterrence as a major pillar of international peace. Some historians, however, offer a different perspective. Despite the common assertion that the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved lives and brought the Japanese to sue for peace, records of the deliberation of the Japanese government, revisionist historians 7

argue, show that it was not the dropping of the atomic bombs but the entrance of Soviet Union into the war that led to the collapse of Japanese resistance and its surrender to the U.S. Even before Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Japanese Empire had already suffered more death and destruction in “conventional” fire-bombing of Japanese cities without surrendering than from the dropping of the two nuclear bombs.

Nuclear arsenals, moreover, have proved no obstacle to conventional war in the nuclear era. They did not intimidate smaller powers from going to war or fighting against nuclear adversaries in different regions at different times. Indeed, nuclear weapons have themselves been a casus belli in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Other examples of cyber or conventional attacks were conducted because of real or alleged nuclear weapons programs. In the lead up to the Cuban Missile Crisis, moreover, both sides had engaged in provocative acts that led them to the brink. In 2003, false assessments of weapons of mass destruction development became a pretext for a war of choice against Iraq that unleashed a cascade of problems we too antiseptically call “instability” that continues to roll through that country and across the region.

The possession of nuclear weapons, moreover, seems to have posed little deterrent to attacks on nuclear powers from smaller, non-nuclear powers and non-state actors. It has not prevented conventional war between nuclear-armed states, and it has not dissuaded terrorists from attacking the nuclear powers. All the nuclear weapons states have endured terrorist attacks, often repeated ones.

Thus, the argument that nuclear deterrence preserves the peace is specious. The “peace of a sort” provided by nuclear deterrence is a misnomer and tends to cloud our collective vision. Prolongation of the current nuclear polyarchy has set the stage for wars and for ongoing tensions. It is an expensive system that can’t protect from prolonged low-level wars, inter-state wars or terrorist attacks. Accordingly, the misleading assumption that nuclear deterrence prevents war should no longer inspire reluctance to accepting international abolition of nuclear arsenals. If it ever was true, today it has become a dodge from meeting responsibilities to this generation and the next.

(3) Inequality among NPT Signatories The non-proliferation regime is rooted in inequality. In the grand bargain at the treaty’s foundation the non-possessing powers granted a monopoly on nuclear weapons to the possessing powers in return for a “transformative” good faith pledge by the nuclear weapons states to reduce and disarm their existing nuclear arsenals.

What was intended to be a temporary state of affairs appears to have become a permanent reality, establishing a class structure in the international system between possessing and non-possessing states.

8

While other factors also underlie national status, the inequality between non-nuclear and nuclear states matters enormously because it appears to establish a unique kind of security which makes a nuclear-armed country immune to external pressures and so more able to impose its will on the world. For that reason, the nuclear disparity becomes an incentive for non-nuclear-armed states to break out of the NPT agreement in pursuit of major power status. Thus, the asymmetry of the relationship between nuclear and non-nuclear states affects the stability, the durability and the effectiveness of the nonproliferation regime.

In the absence of effective practical disarmament, efforts to enforce nonproliferation give rise to suspicions that the NPT is an instrument of an irremediably unequal world order. With the Cold War now a quarter century behind us, nonnuclear states increasingly perceive the regime as managing the system to serve the interests of those with nuclear weapons. Without solid progress toward disarmament as pledged under the NPT, questions continue to grow over the legitimacy of the system. Nonpossession begins to appear inconsistent with the sovereign equality of nations and the inherent right of states to security and self-defense. Nuclear capability is still regarded in certain countries as a prerequisite of diplomatic influence and great power status, building incentives for proliferation and thus undermining global security.

Furthermore, at the same time as the nuclear powers enforce, with the assistance of the IAEA, strict non-proliferation measures on potential break-out states, there is no international monitoring and enforcement mechanism to implement the disarmament provisions of the NPT. There are no agreed-upon means to insure that the promise of transformation to a nuclear-arms-free world moves ahead. In the absence of a functioning Conference on Disarmament, those decisions are left to bilateral negotiation and unilateral policymaking, yielding slow and sometimes nearmeaningless shifts in the nuclear balance. Under the 2010 NPT Action Plan, the nuclear-weapon States have committed to accelerate concrete progress on the steps leading to nuclear disarmament, contained in the Final Document of the 2000 Review Conference, in a way that promotes international stability, peace and undiminished and increased security. So far, the only accountability has been via non-governmental organizations monitoring the implementation of the 2010 NPT Action Plan. However, the nuclear weapons States are required to report their disarmament undertakings to the NPT Review Conference Preparatory Committee in 2014, and the 2015 Review Conference will take stock and consider the next steps for the full implementation of article VI. Re-establishing the stability, legitimacy and universality of the NPT regime demands the establishment of norms and mechanisms for supervision of nuclear disarmament on the part of all nuclear weapons states. If there is little or no progress toward disarmament by the nuclear states, it is inevitable that the NPT will be regarded as an unjust perpetuation of the status quo. Only insofar as the nuclear-armed states move

9Â Â

toward disarmament will the rest of the world regard the nonproliferation regime as just.

(4) Neglect of the Poor and the Vulnerable For decades the cost of the nuclear polyarchy to the world’s poor has been evident.

Fifty years ago, the Second Vatican Council declared, “[T]he [nuclear] arms race is an utterly treacherous trap for humanity, and one which injures the poor to an incredible degree.” Today, the production, maintenance and deployment of nuclear weapons continue to siphon off resources that otherwise might have been made available for the amelioration of poverty and socio-economic development for the poor. The prolongation of the nuclear establishment continues to perpetuate patterns of impoverishment both domestically and internationally.

In most societies, duties to the poor and vulnerable are primary moral obligations. In 2005 the international community in adopting the Responsibility to Protect agreed that it is the responsibility of government to protect its populations from basic deprivation, and it has allowed the international community to intervene when governments fail to do so. Humanitarian agencies and world religions likewise see support of the poor and promotion of development as essential to the global common good. But, after establishing the reduction of extreme poverty as one of the Millennial Goals in 2000, the United Nations’ goal of the reduction of the numbers of people living in absolute poverty by one half by the year 2015 is far from realization.

Contributions by developed nations to this important developmental contribution to peace have fallen short. Further delay in meeting those goals could be satisfied by matching savings from cuts in spending for nuclear weapons to expenditures in support for poverty reduction.

The re-allocation of funding from arms to development is essential to social justice.

For social justice consists in the justice of our institutional arrangements. The disparity of resources between situations dedicated to human development and those dedicated to nuclear armament is a fundamental injustice in the global political order. Re-allocation of resources from wasteful and dangerous weapons programs to the constructive and peaceful purposes of global human development would undo shameful imbalances in public funding and institutional capacities.

Peace does not consist in the mere “absence of war,” but rather in enjoyment of a full set of rights and goods that foster the complete development of the whole person in community. The Millennium Development goals provide a handy summary of the material goods a peaceful life would include: the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, universal primary education, the empowerment of women, reduced childhood mortality, maternal health, combatting HIV/AIDs and other diseases, environmental sustainability, and a global partnership in development.

10

The philosopher William James sought a “moral equivalent of war,” a fulsome commitment of personal energies to a cause that would substitute for war as a great human undertaking. Writing at the time of the First Gulf War, Saint John Paul II called for “a concerted worldwide effort to promote development” as an endeavor of peace. He wrote, “[A]nother name for peace is development. Just as there is a responsibility for avoiding war,” he wrote, “so too there is a collective responsibility for promoting development.” Through their own work, he argued, the poor should be trusted to make their own contributions to economic prosperity. But to do so, they “need to be provided with realistic opportunities.” Re-allocation of resources from nuclear armaments to development programs is an eminently appropriate way to make those opportunities possible by further contributions to attaining the newlyupdated Millennial Development Goals. In one move, there would be a double contribution to peace: reducing the danger of nuclear war and satisfaction of the collective responsibility for promoting development.

Reason, Rationality and Peace As U. S. president John F. Kennedy began his work toward a nuclear test ban, he asserted in a June 1963 speech at American University that peace through nuclear disarmament is “the necessary, rational end of rational men.” The rationality that gives rise to peace is not the technical reasoning of weapons scientists and armscontrol specialists. It consists rather in the broad moral reasoning that arises from examined living and is sourced by our historic wisdom traditions. At its best, it posits a morality of ends as the basic architecture of politics. Technical reason—the morality of means—should be its servant, not its governor. It is moral reason that tells us nuclear abolition is possible. It is moral reason that tells us how to utilize technocratic reason in the work of disarmament. It is moral reason that recognizes deterrence as an obstacle to peace, and leads us to seek alternative paths to a peaceful world.

Moral reasoning is not a simple rational calculation. It is reasoning informed by virtue, that is, “right reason”; it is reason shaped by the examined experience of moral lives, what the ancients called “wisdom.” Autonomous technical reason, unguided by a deeper moral vision and tempered by the virtues of the good human life, can result in catastrophe, as the misuse of the Just War Tradition in support of unjust wars over the centuries demonstrates. Moral reason is a beacon to a fully human life. It is only reason, in this larger sense, the logic of ends, which can lead us to a nuclear-free world.

In short, to achieve nuclear abolition, we need to resist succumbing to the limits set by political realism. While recognizing how these concepts can provide a prudent curb on unwarranted exuberance, we must ultimately reject them as the defining outlook for our common political future. The fear that drives the reluctance to disarm must be replaced by a spirit of solidarity that binds humanity to achieve the global common good of which peace is the fullest expression.

11

Come & See A Call from Palestinian Christians

A Journey for Peace with Justice Guidelines for Christians Contemplating a Pilgrimage to the Holy Land 2

Come & See

Come & See A Call from Palestinian Christians

A Call from Palestinian Christians

3

Introduction These guidelines were developed in 2010 at a consultative meeting in Geneva to promote justice tourism for pilgrims to PalestineIsrael.

Representing 14 countries, a group of 27 theologians, Palestinian Christian activists and professionals in the tourism industry called on Christian pilgrims to live their faith as they visit the Holy Land, going beyond homage of ancient sites to show concern for the Palestinian people living there whose lives are severely constricted by the Israeli occupation of their lands. The meeting was organized by Alternative Tourism Group (ATG) in cooperation with the Ecumenical Coalition on Tourism (ECOT), Kairos Palestine and the World Council of Churches (WCC) through its initiative the Palestine-Israel Ecumenical Forum (PIEF).

ATG is a Palestinian NGO specializing in tours and pilgrimages that incorporate critical examinations of the Holy Landâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history, culture and politics.

4

Come & See

Affirming our Common Humanity: A Pilgrimage of Transformation The decision to visit the Holy Land is the first step in an amazing journey. Whether this will be your first pilgrimage to the Holy Land or you have visited many times before, we ask you to consider how Christians might best reflect the teachings of Jesus Christ when they are in the land where He walked.

This journey will reveal —in contrast to daily headlines that make us feel helpless and inured to suffering and violence— that there is hope for bringing the fruits of peace to all.

What is yet needed is the momentum and commitment of people of faith and courage.

This pilgrimage of transformation will show us how each of us can be a peacemaker in our own small or large ways.

“If you want peace work for justice” Pope Paul VI

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality” Archbishop Desmond Tutu

These guidelines has been written for visionary pilgrims and visitors seeking an authentic, face-to-face human encounters in the Holy Land, who wish to connect with the Palestinian Christians -- the “Living Stones” who share their faith. It contains tools including Biblical reflection (page 10) and a Code of Conduct for Tourists in the Holy Land (page 16) to help plan and prepare—practically and spiritually-- a Pilgrimage of Transformation.

Additional detailed planning and education resources are listed on pages 18-22.

Today you are invited to a journey of truth and transformation that will reveal the love of God to you through the eyes of the Palestinian people who, despite having suffered decades of occupation and dispossession-- maintain their dignity, faith, and capacity for hope.

A Call from Palestinian Christians

5

The Kairos Call from Palestinian Christians: In a Land Holy to Three Faiths, Occupation is a Sin Kairos (

): an ancient Greek word meaning the right or opportune moment

In December 2009, Palestinian Christian leaders launched the Kairos document, a statement that shares their daily realities of life under occupation and calls on Christian sisters and brothers and churches worldwide to be witnesses to these realities, to be in solidarity, and to take action. The following are excerpts.

Today we have reached a dead end in the tragedy of the Palestinian people. The decisionmakers content themselves with managing the crisis rather than committing themselves to the serious task of finding a way to resolve it…It is a policy in which human beings are destroyed, and this must be of concern to the Church…

These days, everyone is speaking about peace in the Middle East and the peace process. So far, however, these are simply words; the reality is one of Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, deprivation of our freedom and all that results from this situation…

“They say: ‘Peace, peace’ when there is no peace” (Jer. 6:14).

We believe that our land has a universal mission. In this universality, the meaning of the promises, of the land, of the election, of the people of God open up to include all of humanity, starting from all the peoples of this land... It was the initiation of the fulfillment of the Kingdom of God on earth.

“The earth is the Lord’s and

God sent the patriarchs, the prophets and the all that is in it, the world, and apostles to this land so that they might carry forth a universal mission to the world. Today those who live in it we constitute three religions in this land, (Ps. 24:1).

Judaism, Christianity and Islam…It is the duty of those of us who live here, to respect the will of God for this land. It is our duty to liberate it from the evil of injustice and war. It is God’s land and therefore it must be a land of reconciliation, peace and love...

”

Our appeal is to reach a common vision, built on equality and sharing, not on superiority, negation of the other or aggression, using the pretext of fear and security.

6

Come & See

We say that love is possible and mutual trust is possible. Thus, peace is possible and definitive reconciliation also. Thus, justice and security will be attained for all.

In order to understand our reality, we say to the Churches: Come and see. We will fulfill our role to make known to you the truth of our reality, receiving you as pilgrims coming to us to pray, carrying a message of peace, love and reconciliation. You will know the facts and the people of this land, Palestinians and Israelis alike. At the same time we call on you to say a word of truth and to take a position of truth with regard to Israelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s occupation of Palestinian land.

The entire document along with other resources can be found on the Kairos Palestine website: www.kairospalestine.ps

A Call from Palestinian Christians

7

Justice Tourism and the Palestinian Tourist Sector Transformational pilgrims to Palestine are also justice tourists, seeking to understand and make a positive difference in the lives of people whose lands they visit. Meeting Palestinians who are living under occupation is an act of solidarity that brings hope to the people and contributes to their economic development.

Like the rest of the Palestinian economy, tourism faces unique difficulties caused by the Occupation. Israel controls all entrances into Palestine and, favoring its own tourist industry, Israel severely restricts business in Palestine.

However, while more tourists still visit only Israel, the number of visitors to Palestine has been increasing annually. The Palestinian community has developed compelling and unique tour itineraries and programmes for visitors and pilgrims. The Code of Conduct for tourists to Palestine provides information, guidelines, and protocols for visitors while publications such as the excellent Palestine and Palestinians Guidebook are tremendously informative resources for trip planning.

Justice tourism to Palestine has as its ultimate goal: “promoting peace with justice for the people in the Holy Land.” Engaging churches, social movements and faith-based organizations to promote Pilgrimages for Transformation, it is hoped that pilgrims will be inspired by and will work for justice-based peace and reconciliation for the Palestinians and Israelis.

8

Come & See

“Justice tourism, one of the most effective means of promoting understanding, mutual education, economic exchange and environmental protection, has a central role to play in these efforts…tourists with a commitment to social justice – justice tourists - have the opportunity, not only to make positive contributions to the communities they visit, but to become holders of the knowledge that will one day lead to equality, democracy, and

”

human rights for all.

Rami Kassis Alternative Tourism Group

Affirming the Love of God for All

We know that certain theologians in the West try to attach a biblical and theological legitimacy to the infringement of our rights.

Thus, the promises, according to their interpretation, have become a menace to our very existence. The “good news” in the Gospel itself has become “ a harbinger of death” for us. We call on these theologians to deepen their reflection of the Word of God and to rectify their interpretations so that they might see in the Word of God a source of life for all peoples. [2.3.3]

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge…” Hosea 4:6a (RSV)

“...It is a call to repentance, to revisit fundamentalist theological positions that support certain unjust political options with regard to the Palestinian people. It is a call to stand alongside the oppressed and preserve the word of God as good news for all...God is not the ally of one against the other, nor the opponent of one in the face of the other. God is the Lord of all and loves all,

Our connectedness to this land is a natural right. It is not an ideological or a theological question only. It is a matter of life and death.

There are those who do not agree with us, even defining us as enemies only because we declare that we want to live as free people in our land. We suffer from the occupation of our land because we are Palestinians. And as Christian Palestinians we suffer from the wrong interpretation of some theologians.

Faced with this, our task is to safeguard the demanding justice from all Word of God as a source of life and not of death, so that “the good news” remains what it is, “good news for us and for all. In face of those who use the Bible to threaten our existence as Christian and Muslim Palestinians, we renew our faith in God because we know that the word of God cannot be the source of our destruction. [2.3.4] from Kairos Palestine, an appeal from Palestinian Christians

...”

Beyond the rhetoric and the media spin is a reality of suffering that has been denied for decades. Churches have done a grave disservice to their flocks by ignoring the plight of millions of dispossessed Palestinians. As Christians living in the Holy Land, we have faith

A Call from Palestinian Christians

9

that when our fellow Christians from around the world gain access to a more comprehensive picture of our reality, they will no longer be able to ignore our cry for peace with justice.

In many countries today, the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and the oppression this brings to their daily lives is not well understood and is often obscured in the media and by powerful interests. While some are misled and disempowered to speak or act, many Christians and other people of conscience feel disturbed by a one-sided narrative that justifies the ongoing occupation and its gross human rights violations.

With this background, some come to the Holy Land as spectators, touring holy sites as they would museums, not caring or realizing that for Palestinian Christians these are living places of worship. Reflecting the pious practices of the Pharisees, they search for a personal blessing, seeking to renew an egocentric, individualistic faith. What they choose to see and do only reinforces their prejudices, preconceived notions, and limited understanding of a complex situation.

Yet true faith requires more from a Christian than purveying stereotypes and untruths and supporting injustice. The genuine Christian pilgrim seeks the living Christ in the now, in solidarity with the oppressed, the poor, and the imprisoned. They look for truth and seek justice, supporting and blessing both Palestinian and Israeli peacemakers.

10

Come & See

Spiritual Elements of an Authentic Pilgrimage A true Christian pilgrimage to Palestine is an invitation to “come and see”: a journey to find new and deeper truths about ourselves and the meaning of our Christian faith and be transformed so that we may test and approve what is the will of God – what is good and well-pleasing and perfect.” (Romans 12: 2).

“ Justice denied anywhere

”

diminishes justice everywhere Martin Luther King Jr.

We embark on a purposeful and respectful journey with the Palestinian Christians through their land and history, taking sufficient time to listen, reflect, and pray with them.

Hearing their stories may challenge us to unlearn much of what we “know” and “understand” about Palestine and to relearn through experiencing the realities of Palestinian life and their struggle for justice.

Christian pilgrimage must comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.

Based on the relationships we build with Palestinian Christians on our pilgrimage, we can seek truth and paths to peace and reconciliation by:

1. Listening to the Biblical reflections of local Christians, the descendants of the first Christians, whose experiences have given them a deep and personal understanding of the Scriptures that forms the basis of Palestinian Christian theology.

2. Making connections between our lifestyles and the national policies of our countries and the injustices Palestinians live with each and every day. As these connections become clear, accept the responsibility to respond by working for a transformation in our own lives and home communities.

3. Experiencing the diverse environment of Palestine by accompanying Christian Palestinians on visits to their Muslim brothers and sisters to share and learn from each other.

4. Offering a voice of comfort to the Palestinian people as we hear about their daily humiliation, anger, frustrations, and struggles.

5. Committing to stand with Palestinians in their struggle for dignity and freedom.

A Call from Palestinian Christians

11

12

Come & See

Biblical Insights for a Pilgrimage of Transformation Too often, we can be like the dead Lazarus, wrapped in cloth, unaware of the world around us, and the people in it. Jesus calls us to come out, to come back to life, to make the difference we are meant to make in the world. As St Paul says in 2. Cor, 5:17: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!”

The story of Lazarus reminds us that for God nothing is impossible —even death is not an obstacle— and that we must not accept the premise that a just peace in Palestine-Israel is beyond reach.

The Bible itself is an inspiration to see our entire lives as a pilgrimage and to live like a pilgrim every day. The whole Bible is about God’s determination to bring his creation back to a new relation with the divine, to “…a better country, that is, a heavenly one.”

(Hebrews 11: 16) In Hebrews 13 we also learn about “...brotherly love and hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.”

What should be even more important to Christians than the holy sites are the communion of living saints at the pilgrimage places. Journeying to a place of divine blessing, presence, and power should be done in the context of human living. Because we are all members of Christ’s body, we cannot be witnesses to other Christians’ lives without caring about their expressions of faith, their traditions, their joys and struggles.

“Jesus looked up to heaven and prayed to his Father, closing with these words: “Lazarus, come out!” When Lazarus came out of the tomb, Jesus told the people to remove his

”

grave clothes.

John 11:43-44

“He has told you, O mortal, what is good and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly

”

with your God? Micah 6:8

“Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who

”

mourn

Roman 12: 15

A Call from Palestinian Christians

13

God intervenes in human history whenever life is threatened, abused and destroyed– for the slain Abel, Uriah, Naboth, the slaves in Egypt, the poor and the widows. God revives the dry bones that “come to life, stand on their feet and become a great army” (Ezekiel 37:10). The reign of God is present wherever life is set free, the blind see, the lame walk and the good news of liberation is announced.

God sends the prophets to liberate people from oppression and speak words of judgment. God is on an eternal pilgrimage into our here and now for the sake of justice and love. God’s incarnation in Christ is God’s way of entering into the moral struggles of the world and showing us how to live a truly human life. Jesus identifies himself with all those unjustly treated in order to expose injustice. (See the Parable of the Last Judgment, Matt.25: 25-35)

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable

”

year of the Lord.

Luke 4:18ff (RSV)

“If you love God, you would love the people of God, the people that God created.

Many of us Christians love the church - our buildings, monuments, traditions, relics, liturgies, and symbols. In the name of God, we love what we have created but fail to love what God has created – the human being and the rest

”

of creation.

Deenabandhu Manchala World Council of Churches

14

Come & See

A Call from Palestinian Christians

15

Connecting with Palestinian Christians For decades, millions of Christian have journeyed to the Holy Land and returned home without even realizing that their pilgrimage was missing something very important: face-to-face human encounters with those who share their faith. Palestinian Christians’ continuous presence for more than 2,000 years in the land of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection gives them a unique connection to Christianity and its traditions.

They also share, along with the rest of the Arab world, a culture of hospitality renowned for its warmth and generosity. In addition, Palestinian Christians have vast experience welcoming pilgrims to their land, continuing a tradition their ancestors began centuries ago.

As hosts, the Palestinian Christians are able to show visitors holy sites rarely seen by ordinary tourists and can illuminate these sites with a faith that is physically linked to these places.

For Palestinian Christians, the holy sites are not mere tourist destinations —they are often their own local churches— places that have meaning in their every day worship. The people in these communities -- the “Living Stones” -- are the keepers of sacred tradition in the Holy Land and protectors of the places that mark events in the life of Christ and the prophets.

16

Come & See

“Come to him, a living stone, rejected by men but approved, nonetheless, and precious in God’s eyes. You too are living stones, build as an edifice of spirit, into a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus

”

Christ.

1 Peter 2:4-5

“Palestinian hospitality is a long lasting tradition dating back to the times of Jesus Christ some

”

2000 years ago.

Father Richard Potts, editor of The Liguorian. www.TravelPalestine.ps

Who Are the Palestinian Christians ?

No one knows exactly the numbers of Palestinian Christians since the great majority of them live in the Diaspora and there is no proper census to know their numbers. Their estimated number, living in Palestine, Israel and the Diaspora, is estimated between 800,000 to one million. They are an integral part of the indigenous Palestinian population and their mother tongue is Arabic. Their history is linked with the early church established in Jerusalem some 2000 years back and their presence never been disconnected in this land. At present, around 50,000 Christians live in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip and make up about 1.2 percent of the total population. In Israel their number is estimated at around 160,000 people. Despite this small percentage, the Christians in Palestine lead a very dynamic community and very active in the field of social services and education. Approximately 45% from the NGOs in Palestine are run by churches or church-related organizations.

The majority of Palestinian Christians living abroad are found in USA, South America, Australia, Canada and Europe. This situation is due to the expulsion of around 750,000 Palestinians, including 150,000 Christians, who became refugees in the year 1948, the year of Nakba (Arabic for â&#x20AC;&#x153;catastropheâ&#x20AC;?). The dispersal of Palestinians since 1948 has spared no one family or group including Palestinian Christians.

Palestinian Christians in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip belong to the four Christian families: Oriental Orthodox Churches, Eastern Orthodox (Caledonian) Churches, Catholic Churches, and Evangelical Churches. In addition to 13 officially recognized denominations, there are some smaller ones, mainly evangelicals.

Palestinian Christians live almost in every governorate in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, although the majority of them live around the holy sites in Bethlehem and Jerusalem.

There are approximately ten town and village councils headed by Christian mayors in addition to a number of legislators and ministers in the Palestinian authority.

A Call from Palestinian Christians

17

Meeting the People of Palestine: Suggestions for meaningful face-to-face encounters with “the living stones.”

1. Visit Palestinian churches, attend their services, and worship with them. Stay and talk. More than a dozen denominations -- representing all four Christian families -exist in Palestine, so it will not be hard to find your church.

2. Choose to tour with a Palestinian tour group and/or guide (see Resources, page 19) for all or at least some of the time. Israeli tour companies are permitted to come into the West Bank, but tourists have found that Israeli tour guides have a very different interpretation of the Palestinian reality, and will discourage tourist from having contact with any “Arabs.”

3. While Israeli tour companies regularly bring their tourists to Bethlehem to visit the Church of Nativity, rarely do their busses spend more than an hour there and no money is circulated into the local economy. You can support the Palestinian economy by enjoying the town of Bethlehem and beyond -- eating in restaurants, visiting shops and staying in hotels.

4. Visit Palestinian social, cultural, educational or theological centers.

5. Make contact with one of the numerous Palestinian civil society groups and organizations who focus on women’s issues, children, human rights, or people with disabilities.

Ask if you may visit their programs.

6. Arrange to stay with or visit a Palestinian family. Local tourist companies are happy to match you with a host family whether that is for just one meal or for several days as an overnight guest.

7. Obtain a Palestinian guidebook such as Palestine and Palestinians to give you more ideas and guide you through the country (see Resources, page 19).

8. Explore the country on foot. A journey on the “road less traveled” is an opportunity for encounters with nature, landscape, and culture that would otherwise be inaccessible by vehicle.

18

Come & See

A Code of Conduct for Travelers to the Holy Land This code was developed with input from Palestinian and international organizations in order to present a unified message about responsible tourism in the region. Below are excerpts that we belief are most important for Christians to incorporate into their pilgrimages.

Preparation

To prepare your trip to Palestine, we encourage you to consider including the following in your preparation: 1. Choose an inclusive and balanced itinerary that allows you to visit and stay in different places.

2. Educate yourself by reading guidebooks, travel accounts and articles about current news and events. [See Resources, page 19-23] 3. Establish contact with Palestinians to get up-to-date information about the current situation, safety, local history, culture and customs.

4. Approach travelling with a desire to learn rather than just observe. Leave prejudices behind.

Your trip

Adopting a considerate attitude towards the people you encounter, the environment, and host communities when travelling in Palestine helps to make sure that your trip is beneficial both for you as a tourist and for the hosts.

5. Your attitude

• Respect and learn about the local culture. Although taking pictures is in general welcome, be aware of people›s sensitivity about being photographed: always ask first for their approval.

• Observe local customs. Respect local dress codes and dress modestly.

• Interact and spend time with local people. Be aware that your cultural values may differ from theirs. They may, for example, have different concepts of time, personal space, communication and society. Other values are not wrong or inferior, just diffeent.

6. Your behaviour:

• Be aware of shortsighted emotional reactions, such as giving money out of compassion. This can be offensive.

A Call from Palestinian Christians

19

• Make sure that you encounter and engage with the local communities who are struggling for the respect of their dignity.

• Support communities in a responsible way, without encouraging them to change their customs in order to adopt yours.

• When visiting holy sites, allow members of the respective religious community to guide you.

7. Your use of natural resources:

• Co-operate with locals in conserving precious natural resources. Commit yourself to a moderate use when possible • Be open to experience local standards rather than expecting to find the same conditions as in your home town and/or country.

8. Support the local economy:

• Appreciate local expertise by paying adequately.

• Buy local products.

• Contribute to ensuring that tourism has a beneficial outcome for the local community.Use local transportation, guides, accommodation, restaurants and markets to benefit the local economy.

• Consider giving tips where customary.

9. Remember that the people you encounter have lived under military occupation for many years. Be sensitive when discussing related topics and listen to their points of view.

10. Be inspired by the pilgrim›s journey: take your time to live and experience the daily life of the local people.

Returning home

When you return from Palestine do not hesitate to share your experiences with friends and relations. Your Palestinian hosts will be very happy to know that you keep them in your mind and that you tell their and your stories. In this way, you can strengthen the human side of tourism and enhance its benefits to communities and individuals.

11. Share your experience

• Think of creating links between your community and the community you visited.

• Tell the stories of the people you met.

• Discuss and debrief with other members of your group (if you travelled together with others).

• Share with your family; inform your community; write articles.

20

Come & See

12. Stick to the commitments you made during your trip: • Remember the promises you made to the local people you met and honour them.

• Keep the people in your thoughts, pray for them and act when your actions are needed.

13. Allow yourself to be enriched by learning experiences: • Question your stereotypes/generalisations, both the ones you had before the trip and the ones emerging from your experience abroad.

• Address prejudices and injustice where you meet them.

14. Take action

• Learn about the involvement and responsibilities of your home country in the Middle East. Expose and confront them when they have been unfair. Address statements you do not agree with, such as inaccurate tourism brochures, stereotyped views of Palestine in conversation and inaccurate or biased media portrayals.

Excerpted from: A Code of Conduct for Tourism in the Holy Land: A Palestinian Inititive, printed by the Palestinian Initiative for Responsible Tourism (PIRT) in 2009. For the complete Code of Conduct or for more information about PIRT, please visit www.pirt.ps

A Call from Palestinian Christians

21

LEARNING ABOUT THE ISSUES SELECTED RESOURCES For additional resources, please visit

www.pirt.ps to view our expanding list.

PALESTINIAN HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS: Al Haq

Independent Palestinian non-governmental human rights organization www.alhaq.org

Applied Research Institute of Jerusalem (ARIJ)

Promoting sustainable development in the occupied Palestinian territory http://www.arij.org

Badil

Resource Center for Palestinian Residency& Refugee Rights www.badil.org

Defence for Children International â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Palestine Section

Promoting and protecting the rights of Palestinian children in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) www.dci-pal.org

International Center of Bethlehem

Lutheran-based, ecumenically-oriented institution empowering the local community www.annadwa.org/dar

International Middle East Media Center Independent media coverage of Israel-Palestine www.imemc.org

Joint Advocacy Initiative (JAI) of the East Jerusalem YMCA and YWCA of Palestine

Working for peace with justice in Palestine, based on humanitarian and Christian values. www.jai-pal.org

22

Come & See

Kairos Palestine

Christian Palestinians’ word to the world about what is happening in Palestine www.kairospalestine.ps

Palestine Center for Human Rights

NGO based in Gaza dedicated to protecting human rights www.pchrgaza.org

Palestinian Bible Society

Committed to making the Word of God available to Palestinians www.pbs-web.com

Sabeel

Palestinian Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center www.sabeel.org

ISRAELI HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS: Alternative Information Center

Promoting the human and national rights of the Palestinian people www.alternativenews.org

Breaking the Silence

Israeli soldiers document their time in the Occupied Palestinian Territories www.shovrimshtika.org/index_e.asp

B’tselem

The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories www.btselem.org

Gisha

Legal Center for Freedom of Movement www.gisha.org

Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions

Non-violent, direct-action organization to resist Israeli demolition of Palestinian houses www.icahd.org

A Call from Palestinian Christians

23

Rabbis for Human Rights

Seeks to prevent human rights violations in Israel and in areas for which Israel has taken responsibility www.rhr.org.il

Who Profits?

Exposing the Israeli occupation industry www.whoprofits.org

Zochrot

Israeli citizens working to raise awareness of the Nakba www.nakbainhebrew.org/index.php?lang=english

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT)

Faith-based non-violent support in situations of lethal conflict www.cpt.org

The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI)

Accompaniment and advocacy efforts to end the occupation (An initiative of the World Council of Churches) www.eappi.org

International Solidarity Movement

Non-violent resistance though international solidarity www.palsolidarity.org

UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Reports on the Occupied Palestinian Territory http://www.ohchr.org/EN/countries/MENARegion/Pages/PSIndex.aspx

24

Come & See

BOOKS: Of the Middle East (2005) by Robert Fisk I am a Palestinian Christian (1995) by Mitri Raheb Palestine—Peace not Apartheid (2006) by Jimmy Carter Palestine in Pieces: Graphic perspectives on the Israeli Occupation (2009) by Kathleen & Bill Christison The Question of Palestine (1992) by Edward W. Said DOCUMENTARIES: Hope in a Slingshot (2008)

www.roninfilms.com.au/feature/1706.html

Occupation 101 (2006) www.occupation101.com

Slingshot Hip Hop (2008) www.slingshothiphop.com/dvd

With God on our Side (2010) www.withgodonourside.com

A Call from Palestinian Christians

25

PALESTINIAN PILGRIMAGE AND TOURIST RESOURCES: Alternative Tourism Group

Palestinian NGO specializing in justice tourism www.atg.ps

Travel Palestine

The Official Website for Tourism in Palestine www.travelpalestine.ps

Palestinian Initiative for Responsible Tourism

A network of organizations advocating responsible tourism in the Holy Land www.pirt.ps

Visit Palestine

«Your guide to Palestine» www.visitpalestine.ps

GUIDEBOOKS: Palestine and the Palestinians (Second edition 2008)

Published by and available from Alternative Tourism Group: www.atg.ps

26

Come & See

Issued by :

Alternative Tourism Group In cooperation with

Palestine-Israel Ecumenical Forum Ecumenical Coalition on Tourism (PIEF)

A Call from Palestinian Christians

Kairos Palestine

27