letters to the editor

Executive Editor: DELINDA C. HANLEY Managing Editor: DALE SPRUSANSKY Contributing Editor: WALTER HIXSON Contributing Editor: JULIA PITNER

Other Voices Editor: JANET McMAHON Middle East Books and More Director: NATHANIEL BAILEY Finance & Admin. Dir.: CHARLES R. CARTER Art Director: RALPH-UWE SCHERER Founding Publisher: ANDREW I. KILLGORE (1919-2016)

Founding Exec. Editor: RICHARD H. CURTISS (1927-2013)

Board of Directors: HENRIETTA FANNER JANET McMAHON JANE KILLGORE

Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (ISSN 87554917) is published 7 times a year, monthly except Jan./Feb., March/April, June/July and Aug./Sept. combined, at 1902 18th St., NW, Washington, DC 20009-1707. Tel. (202) 9396050. Subscription prices (United States and possessions): one year, $29; two years, $55; three years, $75. For Canadian and Mexican subscriptions, $35 per year; for other foreign subscriptions, $70 per year. Periodicals, postage paid at Washington, DC and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, P.O. Box 91056, Long Beach, CA 90809-1056.

PublishedbytheAmericanEducationalTrust(AET),anonprofitfoundationincorporatedinWashington,DCbyretired U.S.foreignserviceofficerstoprovidetheAmericanpublicwith balancedandaccurateinformation concerningU.S.relations withMiddleEasternstates.AET’sForeignPolicyCommitteehas includedformerU.S.ambassadors,governmentofficials,and membersof Con gress,includingthelateDemo craticSen.J. WilliamFulbrightandRepublicanSen.CharlesPercy,both formerchairmenoftheSenateForeignRelationsCommittee. MembersofAET’sBoardofDirectorsandadvisorycommittees receivenofeesfortheirservices.ThenewBoardofAdvisers includes:AnisaMehdi,JohnGareeb,Dr.NajatKhelilArafat, WilliamLightfootandSusanAbulhawa.

The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs does not take partisan domestic political positions. As a solution to the Palestinian- Israeli dispute, it endorses U.N. Security Council Resolution 242’s land-for-peace formula, supported by nine successive U.S. presidents. In general, it supports Middle East solutions which it judges to be consistent with the charter of the United Nations and traditional American support for human rights, self-determination, and fair play.

Materialfromthe WashingtonReport maybereprinted withoutchargewith attributionto WashingtonReporton MiddleEastAffairs. Bylinedmaterialmustalsobeattributed totheauthor.Thisreleasedoesnotapplytophoto graphs, cartoonsorreprintsfromotherpublications. IndexedbyProQuest, Gale, EbscoInformationServices, Info Trac,LexisNexis, PublicAffairsInformationService, IndextoJewishPeriodicals,EthnicNewsWatch,PeriodicaIslamica.

CONTACT INFORMATION: Washington Report on Middle East Affairs Editorial Office and Bookstore: 1902 18th St. NW, Washington, DC 20009-9062 Phone: (202) 939-6050 • (800) 368-5788 Fax: (202) 265-4574 E-mail: wrmea@wrmea.org bookstore@wrmea.org circulation@wrmea.org advertising@wrmea.org Web sites: http://www.wrmea.org http://www.middleeastbooks.com Subscriptions, sample copies and donations: P.O. Box 91056, Long Beach, CA 90809-1056 Phone: (888) 881-5861 • Fax: (714) 226-9733 Printed in the USA

LetterstotheEditor

THE LOBBY IS THE TRUE DRIVER OF U.S. POLICY TOWARD ISRAEL

Re: Walter L. Hixson’s article, “Israel and America: Allied in Racism,” published in the March/April issue.

The premise of his analysis would make more sense if American popular opinion were actually in line with America’s extremely pro-Israel foreign policy, but it’s not.

Researcher Grant F. Smith (author of Big Israel, perhaps the best book on Israel’s political power in the U.S.) has shown that the oft-cited opinion polls supposedly showing strong popular support in the United States for Israel are skewed and deceptive, tendentiously contrived and interpreted in Israel’s favor, and that Americans generally are far less sympathetic to Israel and far more sympathetic to the Palestinians than their bipartisan foreign policy of slavish devotion to the self-professed Jewish state might suggest.

By posting this glib truism, the Washington Report is in fact promoting a favorite Zionist talking point, a lie that protects pro-Israel Jews from the uncomfortable truth: that what drives America’s bipartisan lockstep support for Israel is not some deep cultural affinity but rather the disproportionate money, power and ruthless zeal of the organized pro-Israel Jewish community. That combination of lobbying organizations, media and entertainment magnates, Washington think tanks, large donors to political campaigns and university endowments, and so on, is collectively known as (for lack of a better word) the Israel lobby.

Mark Williams, via Facebook

Thanks for the spirited response, with which I have little fundamental disagreement. Note that I began the column by saying that “one reason” Israel and the United States get along is mutual racism, not the “only reason” they get along. I didn’t cite any opinion polls and don’t dispute Grant F. Smith’s analysis of them, though evaluating polls is a tricky business. Polls aside, I do believe there is a “cultural affinity” in the United States concerning Israel and would invite readers to see my earlier column on settler colonialism and also the insightful book by Amy Kaplan (Our American Israel), among other works.

I do not believe this is an either-or question. I totally agree that the lobby (on which I’m finishing a new book) plays an extremely powerful role, but it skillfully manipulates and builds on an existing cultural foundation. The cultural affinity is exaggerated by the lobby, but it exists and is rooted in American history—and not solely because of wealthy pro-Israel donors. Religion, race and mutual histories of settler colonialism conjoin with the lobby’s nefarious activities to anchor the “special relationship” with Israel. —Walter L. Hixson

ISRAEL’S VACCINE APARTHEID

Re: Your email action alert drawing attention Rosemarie M. Esber’s letter to The Washington Post concerning Israel’s failure to provide sufficient supplies of COVID vaccines to Palestinians.

It is no surprise to see the biased Western press congratulating Israel for its COVID vaccination program. What people don’t read is any similar Israeli vaccination plan for the Palestinians! This obligation is enshrined in the Geneva Convention for all peoples under military occupation.

However, it is also unbelievable that Egypt, with a border crossing to Gaza, does nothing to help.

There are many donor countries, who are only too willing to provide the vaccines!

Barry M. Watson, Dunsville, United Kingdom

Speaking of “the biased Western press,” TheWashington Post altered Rosemarie M. Esber’s letter on its website, removing her reference to Israel’s targeting of Palestinian COVID testing sites. You can learn more about Esber’s ordeal on p. 18.

TIME FOR ONE STATE

As a Palestinian refugee who was subjected to ethnic cleansing by Jewish gangs in 1948, I appreciate the letter

Rosemarie M. Esber’s wrote to the KEEP THOSE CARDS AND LETTERS Anti-Semitism: A Challenge to Washington Post. COMING! Free Speech,” is overall a good

During our journey from our Send your letters to the editor to the Washington piece, but there’s a terribly home in Yazour/Jafa to Jericho, Report, P.O. Box 53062, Washington, DC 20009 important factual/legal error my family of seven and I slept in or e-mail <letters@wrmea.org>. near the beginning. The author caves, streets, mosques and states the 1964 Civil Rights churches. My older sister and I lived for colonial power supported by all colo- Act “does not mention religion.” The about 18 months the hunter-gatherer nialist Western powers. Now, I am call- act contains 11 individual titles, each life. Despite all this pain and injustice, I ing for the transformation of Israel/ of which addresses discrimination in committed my life to peacemaking and Palestine into one state with two peo- a different setting, such as voting, pubcompromise solutions. I was a member ples sharing power. lic accommodations, employment and of the board of Search for Common I am looking for a few Jewish intellec- education. Almost all of the act’s variGround and author of Conflict Resolu- tuals to join me and others to form what ous titles protect people on the basis tion and Ethnicity, published in 1994 by I call The Palestine Peace Movement to of their religion, but Title VI, which Praeger. In addition, I conceived the pursue this goal. If you are interested, we ensures nondiscrimination in federally idea for the U.S.-PLO dialogue and co- can become partners in this humane and assisted programs, does not. It fails ordinated the secret contacts between peaceful project. to bar discrimination based on religion the two parties. Mohamed Rabie, via email for very good reason: to allow reliAfter meeting with Israelis probably a hundred times in universities and research institutes, I realized that our CANADA LOOKS THE OTHER WAY AS IDF RECRUITS ITS CITIZENS giously affiliated schools and institutions to apply for and receive federal funds. rights are not going to be granted by a Thanks for the important article in the Barbara Harvey, via email January/February issue of the You are correct. Religion is not covWashington Report about ille- ered under Title VI. Since legal jargon is gal Israel Defense Forces (IDF) tedious, here’s a simple example from a recruitment. 2012 Forward article as to why this is Canada’s refusal to either the case: “If religious discrimination prosecute or end illegal IDF re- were prohibited under Title VI, [a Jewcruitment within its borders ish] nursing home [accepting Medicaid] shows the need for Canadians to might be barred from giving preferential demand that their government treatment to Jews in hiring employees enforce its criminal legislation. and admitting clients.” The Canada-based HESEG In Dec. 2019, President Trump Foundation (illegally) offers in- signed a somewhat opaque Executive centives to about 6,000 “lone sol- Order essentially stating that an alleged diers” worldwide every year, act of anti-Semitism ought to be remany of whom come from viewed as a potential Title VI violation Canada and the U.S. to fight for to determine if it was based on one’s Israel. Soldiers bear personal national origin, race or color. The order legal responsibility for their ac- also perfidiously endorsed a definition tions, many of which will involve of anti-Semitism that includes criticism violations of international law, or of Israel. This gives leeway for pro-Is-

OTHERVOICES isan optional16-pagesup pl e war crimes. Haaretz reports these “lone rael groups to claim that those challenging Israel’s policies, especially stumentavailableonlytosubscribersofthe Washing- soldiers” are also at far greater dents, are engaging in discrimination tonReportonMiddleEast Affairs. Foranadditional risk of suicide than Israeli covered by Title VI. $15peryear(seepostcardinsertfor Wash ington draftees. It appears that Canada It’s worth pointing out the Depart-

Re port subscriptionrates),subscriberswill receive is more concerned about not an- ment of Education’s Office for Civil

OtherVoicesinsideeachissueoftheir Washington ReportonMiddleEastAffairs. Back issues of both publications are avail able. To subscribe telephone 1 (888) 881-5861, fax (714) 226-9733, e-mail circulation@wrmea. org>, or write to P.O. Box 91056, Long Beach, CA 90809tagonizing Israel than protecting Canadian youth. Karin Brothers, Toronto, Canada CLARIFICATION ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT Rights emphasizes that the Civil Rights Act “shall not diminish or infringe upon any right protected under the First Amendment.” This not only guarantees religious freedom, but also the right to free speech. Title VI, even in light of Trump’s Executive Order, must thus 1056. The article in the March/ never be used to silence legitimate critiApril issue titled “Redefining cism of Israel. ■

Two Views

Palestinians Face Election Obstacles

As far as inner Palestinian dialogue is concerned, the elections, if held unobstructed, could present a ray of hope that, finally, Palestinians in the occupied territories will enjoy a degree of democratic representation, a first step toward a more comprehensive representation that A Palestinian artist paints a mural depicting Palestinian elections, in Gaza City on March 24, 2021. PHOTO BY MAJDI FATHI/NURPHOTO VIA GETTY IMAGES could include millions of Palestinians outside the occupied territories. But even such humble expectations are conditioned on many “ifs”: only if Palestinian factions honor their commitments to the Istanbul Agreement of Sept. 24; only if Israel allows Palestinians, including Jerusalemites, to vote unhindered and refrains from arresting Palestinian candidates; only if the U.S.-led inElections Under Fire: Palestine’s Impossible Democracy Dilemma ternational community accepts the outcome of the democratic elections without punishing victorious parties and candidates; only if the legislative and presidential elections are followed by the more consequential and substantive elections in the PalestinBy Ramzy Baroud ian National Council (PNC)—the Palestinian Parliament in exile—and so on. MANY PALESTINIAN intellectuals and political analysts find If any of these conditions is unsatisfactory, the May elections themselves in the unenviable position of having to declare a are likely to serve no practical purpose, aside from giving Abbas stance on whether they support or reject upcoming Palestinian and his rivals the veneer of legitimacy, thus allowing them to buy elections, which are scheduled for May 22 and July 31. But yet more time and acquire yet more funds from their financial there are no easy answers. benefactors.

The long-awaited decree by Palestinian Authority President All of this compels us to consider the following question: is Mahmoud Abbas last January to hold legislative and presidential democracy possible under military occupation? elections in the coming months was widely welcomed, not as a Almost immediately following the last democratic Palestinian triumph for democracy, but as the first tangible positive outcome legislative elections in 2006, the outcome of which displeased Isof dialogue between rival Palestinian factions, mainly Abbas’ rael, 62 Palestinian ministers and members of the new parliaFatah party and Hamas. ment were thrown into prison, with many still imprisoned. History is repeating itself, as Israel has already begun to arrest Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and editor of the palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is these Chains Will Be Broken: palestinian stories of struggle and defiance in israeli prisons Hamas leaders and members in the West Bank. On Feb. 22, more than 20 Palestinian activists, including Hamas officials, (Clarity Press). Dr. Baroud is a non-resident senior research fellow at were detained as a clear message from the Israeli occupation to the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro- Palestinians that Israel does not recognize their dialogue, their Middle East Center (AMEC). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net. unity agreements, or their democracy.

Two days later, 67-year-old Hamas leader Omar Barghouti take place, will finally allow Palestinians to mount a united front (not to be confused with Omar Barghouti, the leading Palestinian in the struggle against Israeli occupation and for Palestinian activist in the BDS movement) was summoned by Israeli military freedom. intelligence in the occupied West Bank and warned against run- Then, there is the issue of the possible position of the “internaning in the upcoming May elections. “The Israeli officer warned tional community” regarding the outcome of the elections. News me not to run in the upcoming elections and threatened me with reports speak of efforts made by Hamas to seek guarantees from imprisonment if I did, ” Barghouti was quoted as saying by Al- Qatar and Egypt “to ensure Israel will not pursue its representaMonitor. [N.B.: Omar Barghouti died on March 25 from COVID- tives and candidates in the upcoming elections, ” Al-Monitor also 19 complications.] reported.

Palestinian Basic Law allows prisoners to run for elections, But what kind of guarantees can Arab countries obtain from Tel whether legislative or presidential, simply because the most pop- Aviv, and what kind of leverage can Doha and Cairo have when ular among Palestinian leaders are often behind bars. Marwan Israel continues to disregard the United Nations, international Barghouti is one such example. law, the International Criminal Court, and so on?

Imprisoned since 2002, Barghouti remains Fatah’s most pop- Nevertheless, can Palestinian democracy afford to subsist in ular leader, though appreciated more by the movement’s young its state of inertia? Abbas’ mandate as president expired in cadre, as opposed to Abbas’ old guard. The latter group has 2009, the PLC’s mandate expired in 2010 and, in fact, the immensely benefited from the corrupt system of political patron- Palestinian Authority was set up as an interim political body, age upon which the 85-year-old president has constructed his whose function should have ceased in 1999. Since then, the authority. “Palestinian leadership” has not enjoyed legitimacy among

To sustain this corrupt system, Abbas and his clique labored to Palestinians, deriving its relevance, instead, from the support of marginalize Barghouti, leading to the suggestion that Israel’s im- its benefactors, who are rarely interested in supporting democprisonment of Fatah’s vibrant leader serves the interests of the racy in Palestine. current Palestinian president. The only silver lining in the story is that Fatah and Hamas have

This claim has much substance, not only because Abbas has also agreed on the restructuring of the Palestine Liberation Orgadone little to pressure Israel to release Barghouti, but also be- nization (PLO), which is now largely monopolized by Abbas’ cause all credible public opinion polls suggest that Barghouti is Fatah movement. Whether the democratic revamping of the PLO far more popular among Fatah’s supporters—in fact, all Palestini- takes place or not, largely depends on the outcome of the May ans—than Abbas. and July elections.

On Feb. 11, Abbas dispatched Hussein al-Sheikh, the Minister Palestine, like other Middle Eastern countries, including Israel, of Civilian Affairs and a member of Fatah’s Central Committee, to does have a crisis of political legitimacy. Since Palestine is an ocdissuade Barghouti from running in the upcoming presidential cupied land with little or no freedom, one is justified to argue that elections. An ideal scenario for the Palestinian president would true democracy under these horrific conditions cannot possibly be to take advantage of Barghouti’s popularity by having him be achieved. lead the Fatah list in the con- (Advertisement) test for the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC). Hence, Abbas could ensure a strong turnout by Fatah supporters, while securing the chair of presidency for himself. Barg jected raising houti vehemently reAbbas’ request, thus an unexpected chal- d Palestinian Medical Relief Society, a grassroots community-based Palestinian health organization, founded in lenge to Abbas, who now 1979 by Palestinian doctors, needs your support today. risks dividing the Fatah vote, Visit www.pmrs.ps to see our work in action. losing the PLC election, again, to Hamas and losing Visit www.friendsofpmrs.org to support our work and donate. the presidential election to Barghouti. Mail your U.S. Tax-Deductible check to our American Foundation:

Between the nightly raids and crackdowns by the Israeli Friends of PMRS, Inc military and the political in- PO Box 450554 • Atlanta, GA 31145 trigues within the divided Fatah movement, one won- For more information call: (404) 441-2702 or e-mail: fabuakel@gmail.com ders if the elections, if they

Deep Splits Remain Between Palestinian Political Parties

By Asya Abdul-Hadi

DESPITE THE DILIGENT preparations to begin holding Palestinian elections in May, people in the occupied territories are skeptical that they will be held on the dates set by President Mahmoud Abbas—or that they will be held at all. The Palestinian electoral process is overshadowed by many obstacles, such as a deep split within the Fatah movement, the long divi-

sion between Palestinian political parties and Israeli interference in the elections.

On Jan. 15, 2021, Abbas issued a presidential decree setting the process for holding elections in three stages: Palestinian Legislative Council elections in May, a presidential contest in July and Palestinian National Council elections in August.

This will be the third time elections will be held since the return of PLO in 1994 and the formation of the Palestinian Authority thereafter. It will also be the first time in 15 years that such elections are held.

“I think we’re 60 percent unlikely to have our elections and 40 percent we are,” said Mustafa al-Sawaf, a Palestinian political analyst who lives in Gaza, describing the major differences between the political parties, especially within the Fatah movement.

Fourteen Palestinian political factions

began reconciliation efforts in February to discuss mechanisms of ending the divisions, as well as holding the elections.

“The electoral process is a process of struggle. We face many obstacles and, up until now, we’re doing our best,” Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, founder of the Palestinian National Initiative (PNI) told the Washington Report, stressing that unless a real change in the political system is created, the frustration among the average Palestinian will grow.

The PNI was founded by Barghouti in 2002 to represent Fatah and Hamas, aiming to end the division and bridge the gap between the groups.

On March 28, the Initiative registered its Palestinian Legislative Council candidate list headed by its secretary and founder, Mustafa Barghouti. One third of its candidacy list is made up of young people and 32 percent of the list is women. The Initiative’s program calls for “a comprehensive change to combat all forms of nepotism, favoritism and discrimination.”

Barghouti hopes that the elections are held on the set date and that divisions between the Palestinian political factions will not negatively impact the process. He called on the parties to implement what was agreed upon during February talks in Cairo, including the release of prisoners, the abolition of political arrests, and the prohibition of any interference by security apparatuses, in the West Bank or Gaza Strip, in the electoral process. Then there is the Israeli factor. “The main challenge we face is Israeli interference with regard to the reconciliation between the main Palestinian factions, preventing the elections from being held in East Jerusalem or sabotaging them in other areas,” Barghouti said. In February, Israeli military forces arrested Hamas leaders Yasser Mansour and Sheikh Adnan Asfour in the West Bank city of Nablus, storming their homes. “The arrests of Palestinian leaders in the occupied West Bank will not deter anyone from the electoral process,” Hamas leader Omar Barghouti, who has also been threatened by Israel not to run in elections, told Palestine Online. [N.B.: Omar Barghouti passed away on March 25 from COVID-19 complications.]

Khalil al-Hayya, a Palestinian legislator and senior Hamas official, said that his movement is ready to form a unified national list, stressing that the party is ready for all possibilities. Unlike Fatah, Hamas

PHOTO BY ABBAS MOMANI/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES A picture of Palestinian Marwan Barghouti, in Israeli custody for nearly two decades, at an office supporting his candidacy in the West Bank city of Ramallah on March 3, 2021. Two powerful players are challenging President Mahmoud Abbas. Mohammed Dahlan lives in the UAE and delivered a large shipment of COVID vaccines to the impoverished Gaza Strip and Barghouti, who is sometimes dubbed the “Palestinian Mandela.” Asya Abdul-Hadi, a Palestinian-American translator and interpreter living in Maryland, was born in Gaza. She worked for Newsweek,Al-Hayat,TheIndependent and ABC News before becoming a Gaza bureau chief for the Jerusalem Media Communications Center.

has maintained internal cohesion in the buildup to elections.

Regarding the reaction of Europeans and Americans to the election results, alHayya told Al-Quds newspaper, “We are managing our Palestinian national program according to our needs and our national interest and we undoubtedly take into consideration the international and regional moods. But this does not mean that we should abide by what they want. We must adhere to what we want, and I believe that there are indications that they have no problem with Hamas being part of a national government.”

The scenario of the upcoming elections will be different from that of the 2006 elections, where the main competition was between Fatah and Hamas.

Internal splits within Fatah have led to the creation of two new parties. The Democratic Reform Movement is headed by Mohammed Dahlan, a former Palestinian legislator now living in the UAE. The other potential party is run by Fatah leader and prisoner, Marwan Barghouti. Anadolu News Agency quoted Palestinian sources as saying Barghouti intends to run in the presidential election. The two emerging parties are likely to run under lists that are separate from the official Fatah list.

Quds Press published results of a poll, conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, showing that the Palestinian public favors Barghouti as a candidate over Abbas. The results also showed that the president of the Hamasrun government in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, would outperform Abbas, if he ran.

However, if Barghouti runs as the “Fatah” movement candidate against Haniyeh, the poll shows he would defeat Haniyeh, 61 percent to 37 percent. But, if Haniyeh runs against Abbas, he is likely to win 50 percent of the vote, compared to Abbas’ 43 percent.

Dahlan indicated that he will support Marwan Barghouti’s candidacy, in an interview with the Arabic Channel DW. However, Dahlan clearly has political aspirations of his own.

According to the Palestinian Press Agency, Safa, on Jan. 16, Dahlan’s party announced its intention to participate in the upcoming elections. “The movement will participate under an independent list in the event that an agreement on a unified list with Fatah is not reached,” stated Sufyan Abu Zaida, the general secretary of the Democratic Reform Movement’s political wing in Gaza, on his Facebook page. Given the deep division between Abbas and Dahlan, it is unlikely such an agreement will be reached.

Safa reported that new amendments to the electoral system have been introduced, and legal experts believe they were designed to eliminate any attempts by Dahlan’s Reform Movement to participate in the elections. One amendment states that an individual with a criminal record cannot run for office. Dahlan was convicted of corruption more than a decade ago.

Another article prohibits “any electoral list or any presidential candidate to spend more than $1 million on their election campaign.” This explains Fatah’s concern that Emirati money may boost Dahlan’s chances of winning the legislative elections over the official list of the Fatah movement.

Two prominent members of Dahlan’s party, including Abdel Hakim Awad, the election commission official in the movement, returned to the Gaza Strip in February to prepare for the elections. Many view it as no coincidence that Dahlan has subsequently worked to secure more than 40,000 COVID-19 vaccines for Gazans, courtesy of the UAE.

The division in the Fatah movement was further deepened by the expulsion of one of its prominent members, Nasser alQudwa, over his attempt to field a separate list of candidates in the election. In a statement in March, Fatah’s Central Committee said it had given al-Qudwa two days to reverse his decision and drop his breakaway challenge, but that he had failed to comply.

In his response to the expulsion, alQudwa, a member of the committee and a nephew of late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, said, “The decision taken by the influential party in the Central Committee dated March 8, 2021, raises sadness and pity for the state of affairs in our movement, without any respect to the internal order, political logic, history and traditions.”

“On my part, I will remain a Fatah member to the bone, and what happened will not change anything in this regard,” he added.

Even if the obstacles facing the elections are overcome and the elections are held, it is unlikely that they will end the division between Hamas and Fatah, or within Fatah. Nor does it seem likely any agreement over a unified national agenda will be reached. ■

oject ofr P A P A Alliances en’Middle East Childr

(Advertisement)

Special Report

Israel Election Results: Is it Kahanist Ben-Gvir That Bothers You? By Gideon Levy

Israeli settlers carry Itamar Ben-Gvir, Religious Zionism party leader, as they celebrate the Jewish Purim holiday at Shuhada Street in the West Bank town of Hebron, on March 21, 2019.

AN ELECTORAL LIST that in Europe would have been classified straight away as neo-Nazi, has just made it into the Knesset. There is no other way to describe the Religious Zionism party. Xenophobia, homophobia and nationalism, combined with religious fundamentalism and violence, with no restraint on any of this: What else can you call it? No Western European country would have the audacity to include such a faction in its government. In Europe, this fascism would be unacceptable. In Israel, it’s on the verge of being part of the next government.

But this isn’t the worst news from election night. Even worse is the fact that the right, as usual, won the election. Everyone is talking about Binyamin Netanyahu, but the real winner is the Israeli right. Once again, it has won big. More than 70 MKs in the next Knesset will be proud members of the cruel, hard right. A more Gideon Levy is an Israeli journalist and author. This article was first published in Haaretz, March 25, 2021. © Haaretz. Reprinted with permission.

solid majority than any possible coalition could dilute.

Just because some on the right also despise Netanyahu, it doesn’t make them any less rightist. Before and after Netanyahu, they represent a violent, arrogant, insulated Israel that chooses to disregard the rest of the world. Among the opposite camp, too, there are rightists pretending to be centrists, but even without them, most of the Knesset is right-wing. Most Israelis voted for the right. Lost in the shuffle amid all the calculations about the blocs that could be for or against Bibi, was the fact that Israel was once again shown to be a rightist country.

Religious Zionism’s entry into the Knesset, and the identity of its members, is causing something of an uproar among the defeated camp, but this is self-righteous and hypocritical. It’s good that this camp is waking up but, as usual, it is doing so belatedly. Yes, the thought of Itamar Ben-Gvir and Orit Strock being in the Knesset is horrifying, but it’s easy to focus on them and ascribe Continued on page 46

Israel and Judaism

Increasingly, Jewish Critics of Israeli Policies Are Using The Term “Apartheid” By Allan C. Brownfeld

An Israeli settler walks past a Palestinian house with verandas covered in meshing, with one bearing a protest sign reading in English “Arabs are prohibited, this is Apartheid St.,” along Shuhada Street, which Michael Manikin called a “sterile street” forbidden to Palestinians, in Hebron in the occupied West Bank on Jan. 28, 2020.

INCREASINGLY, Jewish and Israeli critics of Israel’s policies in the occupied territories are using the term “apartheid” to describe them. In January 2021, the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem issued a statement which declared that the Israeli government was an “apartheid regime.” It stated that, “A regime that uses laws, practices and organized violence to establish and maintain the supremacy of one group over another is an apartheid regime.”

B’Tselem argues that the Israeli regime “of apartheid” rests on four pillars: citizenship, land, freedom of movement and political participation. Virtually any person of Jewish ancestry anywhere in the world can claim Israeli citizenship; immigration to Israel is all but impossible for Palestinians, and only a minority of Palestinians—about 1.6 million out of seven million—-who live on land controlled by Israel are citizens of Israel and even their rights are limited compared with their nearly seven million Jewish counterparts.

This report has been largely ignored in the media and by mainstream American Jewish organizations. One who paid close attention was Rabbi Brian Walt, the founder and rabbi emeritus of Congregation Mishkan Shalom, an activist congregation in Philadelphia. He was the founding executive director of Rabbis for Human RightsNorth America and is a member of the Rabbinical Council of Jewish Voice for Peace. Rabbi Walt grew up in South Africa and knows a great deal about apartheid.

In an article published on Feb. 17 in Truthout, Rabbi Walt recalls, “When I first heard that B’Tselem was saying matter-of-factly that Israel and the lands it occupies constitute an apartheid system, I immediately flashed back to 2008, to the moment when the truth became clear to me when I led a Rabbis for Human Rights-North America (T’ruah) trip to Israel and the occupied West Bank. When we arrived in Hebron, Michael Manikin, a leader with the Israeli human rights group Breaking the Silence, gestured to Shuhada Street, the street our group was about to walk down, and told us it

Allan C. Brownfeld is a syndicated columnist and associate editor of the Lincoln Review, a journal published by the Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, and editor of Issues, the quarterly journal of the American Council for Judaism.

was a ‘sterile street’—a street forbidden to Palestinians. Only Jews and other tourists were permitted to walk down the street.”

Rabbi Walt remembers that, “I was horrified. My heart beat fast as tears rolled down my face. As a child growing up in apartheid South Africa, I was intimately familiar with separate beaches, buses, cabs, entrances to post offices and public benches with ‘whites only’ signs. But even in Apartheid South Africa, there were no ‘sterile streets’ that only white people could walk on. In South Africa, as a student at the University of Cape Town, I had fought against apartheid. I worked on issues of economic justice for domestic workers and founded and edited a Jewish student newspaper dedicated to ending apartheid. Throughout my anti-apartheid activism, Israel was always an essential part of my Jewish identity. I was a committed progressive Zionist. Creating a just, democratic Israel that reflected the highest moral values of Judaism was—and remains—a core commitment.”

Over decades, Rabbi Walt engaged in political activism on the West Bank with groups such as the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions and encountered disturbing realities. He witnessed the demolition of Palestinian homes, the expropriation of Palestinian land for Jewish settlements, olive orchards uprooted by settlers, and Palestinians uprooted from homes in Jerusalem that they had owned for generations.

“Those experiences were so shocking,” notes Walt, “that, if I hadn’t seen them with my own eyes, I would never have believed they were true. These experiences reminded me of very similar injustices that I had seen in South Africa...At that moment in Hebron, I felt a new determination to name what I saw as apartheid. We, the Jewish people, must tell the truth. We can no longer cover up the shocking systemic discrimination and oppression of the Palestinians by the State of Israel—a state that relies on our support and acts in our names and in the name of our tradition.”

More and more Israelis have been using the term “apartheid” to describe their country’s occupation. Professor David Shulman of the Hebrew University notes that, “No matter how we look at it, unless our minds have been poisoned by the ideologies of the religious right, the occupation is a crime. It is first of all based on the permanent disenfranchisement of a huge population...In the end, it is the ongoing moral failure of the country as a whole that is most consequential, most dangerous, most unacceptable. This failure weighs...heavily on our humanity. We are, so we claim, the children of the prophets. Once, they say, we were slaves in Egypt. We know all that can be known about slavery, suffering, prejudice, ghettos, hate, expulsion, exile. I find it astonishing that we, of all people, have reinvented apartheid in the West Bank.”

In 2019, in a position paper entitled “Our Approach to Zionism,” Jewish Voice for Peace stated, “Jewish Voice for Peace is guided by a vision of justice, equality and freedom for all people. We unequivocally oppose Zionism because it is counter to those ideals...While it had many strains historically, the Zionism that took hold and stands today is a settler-colonial movement, establishing an apartheid state where Jews have more rights than others. Our own history teaches us how dangerous this can be.”

Hagai El-Ad, the director of B’Tselem, declares that, “Calling things by their proper name—apartheid—is not a moment of despair, rather it is a moment of moral clarity, a step on a long walk inspired by hope. See the reality for what it is. Name it without flinching—and help bring about the realization of a just future. People of conscience must reject apartheid in Israel just as clearly and forcefully as we reject white supremacy in the U.S...”

ICC OPENS WAR CRIMES INVESTIGATION

In March, Fatou Bensouda, the outgoing International Criminal Court (ICC) chief prosecutor opened a formal investigation into alleged war crimes in the occupied Palestinian Territories. Bensouda, who served a nine-year term until the election of Karim Khan who takes over her seat in June 2021, said the probe would cover events in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip since June 13, 2014. The Hague-based court ruled that it could exercise its criminal jurisdiction over the territories.

Israel rejected Bensouda’s decision while Palestinians praised it. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said it was “antiSemitic.” The ICC has authority to prosecute those accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes on the territory of states party to the Rome Statute, its founding treaty. Israel has never ratified the Rome Statute, but the Secretary General of the U.N. accepted the accession of the Palestinians in 2015.

Many Israeli and Jewish human rights advocates welcome the ICC investigation. Writing in Mondoweiss (March 4, 2021), Larry Derfner, for many years a columnist for the Jerusalem Post and now a contributor to Haaretz, notes that, “There’s a natural resistance to saying that your country deserves to be investigated for war crimes by the ICC in The Hague. But if you believe that Israel’s open-ended occupation and the settlements and lethal onslaughts in Gaza that go with it are morally untenable, how do you avoid that conclusion?”

Derfner, the author of No Country For Jewish Liberals, declares that, “The arguments against an investigation don’t stand up. I suspect Netanyahu knows that the real reason the ICC doesn’t investigate Iran or Syria...or a number of other regimes whose criminality exceeds...Israel’s...is because the wrongs these regimes commit don’t effect a state that has granted the ICC jurisdiction over it by signing the Rome Statute. Neither Iran nor Syria or the other countries are terrorizing states that have signed the Rome Statute, so unfortunately North Korea, Zimbabwe, etc. are free to plague their citizens as much as they want to and they will fall outside the ICC’s purview. Israel hasn’t signed the Rome Statute either but the difference is that Palestine has. Palestine—recognized by the U.N. General Assembly as the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza—is where Israel’s persecution has been taking place. It was the government of Palestine, the Palestinian Authority, that asked the ICC to investigate Israel for war crimes.”

Israel says that all it is doing in the occupied territories is defending itself against ter-

rorists. The Hague defines war crimes mainly as “grave breaches” of the Geneva Convention. These are “(1) willful killing, (2) torture or inhumane treatment, including biological experiments, (3) willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, (4) extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.”

Larry Derfner concludes, “Is it fair that the ICC is investigating Israel for war crimes? In the narrow legal sense, yes. In the larger moral sense, it’s more than fair.”

The new ICC role, says Michael Sfard, an Israeli human rights attorney, means that it cannot “evade” an investigation and possible prosecution of Israeli officials over the illegal settlements policy on the West Bank. Speaking to Ori Nir on an Americans for Peace Now webinar in February, Sfard said that the ICC can now begin an investigation in earnest:

“And Israel is in a box. It will say that it has legal mechanisms to investigate war crimes stemming from its assaults on Gaza and other atrocities but it has no such fig leaf for the settlements...On the issue of settlements, Israel does not claim to investigate and prosecute. For Israel, settlements are not illegal, and so it’s an official policy.... If the ICC were to drop a case against Israel, that would cause a domino effect of developing world countries leaving the court. So it’s an existential problem for the ICC.”

In Sfard’s view, “The ICC case will create an enormous restraining effect on Israel over time. We are seeing it already. Consider the case of Al Khan al Ahmad, a West Bank village Israel slated for demolition and the forcible ‘transfer’ of its 200 residents. Netanyahu committed himself to remove it and the Israeli right-wing is obsessed with such moves, and yet Netanyahu has not followed through even in an election season, because the ICC prosecutor issued a statement saying, ‘I remind the parties that forcible transfer is a war crime.’ That’s all she said, and boom, the transfer of Al Khan al Ahmad evaporated and they are there to this day...I think the Palestinians have had this kind of card in their sleeve...It will also put the annexation completely on the highest shelf...Of course, annexation is ongoing all the time, de facto. But the one-act annexation that Netanyahu wanted a few months ago now seems beyond the horizon.”

While Netanyahu calls the ICC probe “the essence of anti-Semitism,” it has the apparent support of the European Union. EU spokesman Peter Stano said that, “The ICC is an independent and impartial judicial institution with no political objectives to pursue.” He reiterated that the EU “respects the court’s independence and impartiality,” an implicit rebuke to Israel’s charge of antiJewish bias. Stano said that, “The ICC is a court of last resort, a fundamental safety net to help victims achieve justice where this is not possible at the national level, thus where the state concerned is genuinely unwilling or unable to carry out the investigation or the prosecution.”

In an apparent reference to Israel, the EU urged “states parties to the Rome Statute and non-states parties to have a dialogue with the ICC which should be non-confrontational, non-politicized, and based on law and facts.”

Israel’s continuing occupation and the growing use of the term “apartheid” to characterize its policies brings back memories of the time I spent in South Africa during the years of apartheid. For several years, I was the correspondent in Washington for Afrikaans-language newspapers, Die Burger in Cape Town and Beeld in Johannesburg. I visited the country on a number of occasions and had many conversations about its future with my Afrikaner friends. I remember one of them telling me that, “In this country, 5 million white people can control more than 20 million black people indefinitely. But in order to do so, we must become a totalitarian state. But we are Western Christian people who believe in freedom. Our children do not want to live in a totalitarian state. They will leave for America, Canada and Australia. Apartheid violates all of our values. We must bring apartheid to an end.”

That, of course, is what happened. White South Africans, recognizing that apartheid was immoral, voluntarily abandoned it. There were, of course, those who wished to maintain apartheid, but they were a minority. South Africa became a multi-racial democracy. In Israel, there are a growing number of men and women who understand that their country has become eerily similar to South Africa under apartheid. Sadly, at the present time, they are a minority. The majority seems comfortable with the occupation and are prepared to live with millions of second-class Palestinian noncitizens under their control. The fact that this represents a violation of Jewish values and the moral and humane Jewish ethical tradition seems not to disturb them. Already tens of thousands of their children have left the country. White South Africans chose democracy and abandoned apartheid. This is the choice now facing Israelis.

It is also a choice facing American Jews. Will American Jewish groups continue to support an Israel which is embracing apartheid at the same time they are opposing white nationalism and other forms of bigotry in the American society? More and more American Jews are making clear that they will not. Time will tell which group will prevail—both in Israel and in the U.S. ■

(Advertisement)

IRmep Polls, Telling Hard Truths Since 2014

Poll:Americans Say Israel Should Not be a Leading Recipient of U.S. Aid Given Evidence of Apartheid By Grant F. Smith

IRmep Poll: “A major Israeli human rights nonprofit says apartheid is rampant inside Israel & territories it occupies. Should Israel continue to be the leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid?”

Source: IRmep representative poll of 2,194 American adults through Google Surveys on March 22-25, 2021. Answer order randomly reversed. RMSE score sample bias 5.7 percent.

B’TSELEMfound growing apartheid inside Israel and controlled territories. Given that reality, a 38.1 percent plurality of Americans say Israel should not be a leading U.S. aid recipient. Our upcoming conference focuses on Israel, its U.S. lobby and the apartheid question.

Israeli NGO B’Tselem’s January 2021 report, “A regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea: This is apartheid,” repeated claims made for many years by Palestinian and regional researchers as well as travelers to the region. Israel not only operates a de facto apartheid regime within territories it militarily controls, it also has implemented a robust apartheid system domestically.

B’Tselem is a Jerusalem-based non-profit organization. It documents human rights violations in Israel, Israeli-occupied territories, combats official and news media denial of the existence of such violations, and works to create a human rights culture in Israel. B’Tselem was founded in 1989 with the support of ten Knesset members and a large group of Israeli lawyers, academics and medical professionals.

When advised that such a major Israeli human rights nonprofit found widespread apartheid inside Israel and occupied territories, a plurality of Americans (38.1 percent) said Israel should no longer be the leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid, while 33 percent said it should be a leading aid recipient.

Regional differences in opinion varied, with pluralities of 43.4 percent of Northeasterners, 39.1 percent of Midwesterners and 36.2 percent of Westerners saying Israel should not be a leading U.S. aid recipient. 36.4 percent of Southerners said Israel should not be a leading aid recipient, while 36.1 percent said it should.

Note: Join the conversation! The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs and Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy are hosting the latest edition of the IsraelLobbyCon series focused on the Israel lobby and apartheid themed, "End U.S. Support for Israeli Apartheid?" on April 17 and 24.

Grant F. Smith is the director of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington, DC. For more IRmep polls, visit https://IRmep.org/Polls. Smith’s latest book, the israel lobby enters state government, is available at Middle East Books and More.

Special Report

The Washington Post Redacted Facts About Israel’s Destruction of COVID-19 Clinics

By Rosemarie M. Esber, Ph.D.

Palestinian engineer Raed Maswade inspects the rubble of his drive-through coronavirus testing center in the city of Hebron, on July 21, 2020, after it was demolished by Israeli authorities for allegedly being built without the necessary permits. Maswade decided to build the clinic in memory of his grandfather, who died from COVID. Israeli soldiers watched construction of the desperately needed facility for two months before sending in the bulldozers.

COVID-19has been a scourge worldwide and even more so in poor countries with few resources and scarce vaccines—like Palestine.

I responded to a Washington Postarticle lauding Israel’s success in vaccinating its population with a letter to the editor. I stated that as the occupying power, Israel is responsible for vaccinating the Palestinians. Instead, the Government of Israel has destroyed clinics, harassed Palestinian volunteers and medical staff and blocked vaccines from reaching occupied Gaza, East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

The Post published my letter on March 8. However, on March 10, the Post published a “correction” online and in print stating, “Rosemarie M. Esber’s March 8 letter, ‘Gaza needs vaccines, too,’ incorrectly said that ‘Israel has destroyed testing sites’ to prevent Palestinians from getting coronavirus tests and vaccines.” The Post redacted the facts and published misinformation—without informing me.

I sent to the Post’s editors media reports from ABC News, B’Tselem—the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights—Haaretz, The Times of Israel, Mondoweiss, Palestine Chronicle, Doctors Without Borders, and The South African. The stories corroborate that the Government of Israel destroyed multiple Palestinian COVID19 clinics, materials and testing sites, and prevented medical care to Palestinians in the reported sites of Jenin, Hebron, Khirbet Ibziq and Silwan. The published reports are further supported by firsthand accounts from Palestinians living in occupied Gaza and the West Bank.

I repeatedly asked several Post editors to reinstate the facts in my letter and to issue a correction online and in print. I received no response from the editors.

Rosemarie M. Esber, Ph.D., is the author of Under the Cover of War: The Zionist Expulsion of the Palestinians.

Instead, on March 12, the Post published a biased letter with false information, which a Post editor nonetheless described as “a fair criticism,” despite clear-cut evidence to the contrary. One commenter about the Post’s retraction of readily verifiable facts tweeted, “Doesn’t the Post have Google?”

It is shocking that the Washington Post— a newspaper of record—would deliberately suppress verifiable facts and contravene its own Policies and Standards to “tell the truth as nearly as the truth may be ascertained,” and to “tell ALL the truth so far as it can learn it, concerning the important affairs of America and the world.”

I requested a meeting to discuss the Post’s editorial policy on Israel and Palestine reportage. The managing editor of news responded he was not responsible. The editorial page editor wrote that he was too busy to meet with representatives of several human rights organizations.

With no opportunity to present the facts directly to the editors, I posted the media reports in the letters’ online comments. They corroborate that the Government of Israel is obstructing critical testing, and preventing vaccines and medical care from reaching Palestinians, as well as blocking the basic human necessities of clean water and reliable electricity—which are vital to sustain life—and to deliver basic medical care and treatment.

ISRAEL’S RESPONSIBILITY IN OCCUPIED PALESTINE

The international community, including the United Nations Security Council, the International Court of Justice, and the International Committee of the Red Cross, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, “consider the Palestinian West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza, to be under Israeli military occupation, and Israel the occupying power in them.”

Israel is therefore “responsible for ensuring and maintaining public hygiene and the healthcare systems of the occupied populations living under their control, including measures to prevent the spread of infectious disease and epidemics.”

The Institute for Middle East Understanding’s fact sheet on “Israel’s Responsibility to Vaccinate Palestinians during the Pandemic” states that according to Article 56 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, “To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the occupying power has the duty of ensuring and maintaining public hygiene and the healthcare systems of the occupied populations living under their control, including measures to prevent the spread of infectious disease and epidemics.” Since Israel is donating vaccines to other countries, it certainly has the means to vaccinate the Palestinians, which is Israel’s immediate responsibility.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch condemned Israel’s discriminatory policy in a Jan. 21, 2021 statement declaring, “The Israeli government must stop ignoring its international obligations as an occupying power and immediately act to ensure that COVID-19 vaccines are equally and fairly provided to Palestinians living under its occupation in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.”

SUPPORTING AND FUNDING HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES

The U.S. government has supported the Zionist colonization of Palestine since Woodrow Wilson endorsed the 1917 Balfour Declaration, in which the British promised to facilitate Zionist immigration to Palestine, a land it did not possess.

During the 1948 Palestine war, the Israelis expelled more than 800,000 Palestinians from their homes and lands. Israel expelled another 200,000 Palestinians during the 1967 war. Through discriminatory laws and policies, Israel continues its policy of forcibly removing the Palestinians, or making living conditions so unbearable that the Palestinians perish or emigrate. Nevertheless, successive U.S. administrations have supported the State of Israel, despite its flagrant breach of U.N. resolutions since December 1948.

The Biden administration and the U.S. Congress have pledged unwavering military, political and economic fealty to the State of Israel—despite its daily human rights abuses. The U.S. government has unconditionally transferred $3 trillion in U.S. taxpayers’ dollars to Israel, which is over $10 million per day—when more than ever we need our tax dollars at home to “build back better.” The U.S. government has also shielded Israel’s impunity at the United Nations, which has seriously corroded America’s own moral authority.

The U.S. and state governments are also attempting to deny Americans their First Amendment right to boycott Israel’s gross violations of international and human rights laws and to suppress freedom of speech— particularly at universities. As of 2020, 32 states have passed bills or executive orders to discourage or punish boycotts of Israel, even though 72 percent of Americans oppose such laws that stifle legitimate protest.

The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement “works to end international support for Israel’s oppression of Palestinians and pressure Israel to comply with international law.” BDS is a nonviolent effort of the Palestinian civil society to achieve freedom, justice, and equality. “BDS upholds the simple principle that Palestinians are entitled to the same rights as the rest of humanity.”

Senator Joe Biden was “proud to have been a leading voice in the U.S. Senate against the white supremacist regime of South Africa.” He called the South African apartheid government “repulsive” and “repugnant.” Yet, Biden has vowed to “firmly reject the BDS movement,” which he asserts “singles out Israel and too often veers into anti-Semitism.” President Joe Biden is defending the indefensible when the South African government describes Israel “as the only apartheid state in the world.”

VIOLATING U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL LAW

President Biden pledged his administration would be “upholding human rights” and “respecting laws.” In the case of Israel,

PHOTO BY MOSTAFA ALKHAROUF/ANADOLU AGENCY VIA

An Israeli-run Jerusalem Municipality team along with Israeli soldiers and bulldozers demolish the house owned by Hatem Abu Rayaleh, a disabled Palestinian, near the al-Issawiya neighborhood claiming that it was unlicensed, in East Jerusalem on March 1, 2021. The Israeli government has significantly stepped up the demolition of homes in East Jerusalem this year, despite the COVID-19 pandemic and the accompanying economic crisis.

he has done neither. In fact, the BidenHarris administration has pledged to continue unconditional support for Israel despite its defiance of international law. Vice President Kamala Harris stated, “The Biden-Harris administration will sustain our unbreakable commitment to Israel’s security, including the unprecedented military and intelligence cooperation pioneered during the Obama-Biden administration and the guarantee that Israel will always maintain its qualitative military edge.”

Biden and Congress also ignore U.S. laws such as the Leahy Law, which “prohibits the United States from providing any weapons or training to ‘any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State has credible evidence that such unit has committed gross violations of human rights.’”

Officials in Biden’s cabinet are on record dismissing international and human rights law. During her confirmation hearing for U.N. Ambassador, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, stated “I look forward to standing with Israel.” As a representative of the United States government and the American people, Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield’s responsibility is to stand for the equal enforcement and respect of the rule of law and human rights—including, in the first instance, by the U.S. government.

DAMAGING INTERNATIONAL STANDING

Defending serial abusers of human rights and international humanitarian laws— whether by allies or not—seriously harms U.S. standing in the world, its credibility, and the national security. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, like Biden, stated he “would not tie military assistance to Israel to things like annexation or other decisions by the Israeli government with which we might disagree.” The Biden administration policy therefore is one of indulgence toward Israel’s contravention of international law.

Why should other countries be obliged to respect the rule of law and human rights when the U.S. government and the Israeli government exempt themselves?

The world is watching the United States’ hypocritical “do as we say and not as we do” human rights policy. In recent meetings, China was quick to publicly rebuke Secretary Blinken and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan about U.S. problems with racial injustices, and specifically the Black Lives Matter’s movement. Russia also reminded the world of American’s own history of “slaughtering” the Indigenous Peoples, and the enslavement of African Americans.

ENFORCE INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

In his remarks about the “skyrocketing” anti-Asian American attacks across the United States, President Biden said, “Our silence is complicity. We cannot be complicit. We have to speak out. We have to act.” Likewise, Biden must speak out and demand that Israel immediately lift the illegal blockade of Gaza (abetted by Egypt), end the military occupation, reverse the annexation of Jerusalem (and the Golan Heights), and stop Israel’s illegal settlement activities on occupied lands and resources. Otherwise, the Biden administration, like his predecessors, will remain complicit in Israel’s egregious discriminatory record.

Despite misinformation or bias from The Washington Post and other corporate media,American taxpayers are increasingly aware of Israel’s daily human rights abuses against the Palestinians. They are tired of supporting a militaristic system of Zionist supremacy that evicts elders and the disabled from their homes, imprisons and tortures children and political prisoners, steals land and water, murders and maims civilians with impunity, and humiliates Palestinians on a daily basis.

Palestinians are human beings and are deserving of the same equal human and civil rights enjoyed by most Israelis. Anything short of equality under the law—as B’Tselem concluded in its recent report—is apartheid. ■

From the Diaspora

The Nakba of Sheikh Jarrah: How Israel Uses “The Law” to Ethnically Cleanse East Jerusalem

By Ramzy Baroud

Palestinian, Israeli and foreign activists lift banners and placards during a demonstration against Israeli occupation, evictions and settlement activity in the Palestinian territories and East Jerusalem, in Jerusalem’s Palestinian Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, on March 19, 2021.

A PALESTINIAN MAN, Atef Yousef Hanaysha, was killed by Israeli occupation forces on March 19 during a weekly protest against illegal Israeli settlement expansion in Beit Dajan, near Nablus, in the northern West Bank.

Although tragic, the above news reads like a routine item from occupied Palestine, where shooting and killing unarmed protesters is part of the daily reality. However, this is not true. Since right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced, in September 2019, his intentions to formally and illegally annex nearly a third of the occupied Palestinian West Bank, tensions have remained high.

The killing of Hanaysha is only the tip of the iceberg. In occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank, a massive battle is already underway. On one side, Israeli soldiers, army bulldozers and armed illegal Jewish settlers are carrying out daily missions of evicting Palestinian families, displacing farmers, burning orchards, demolishing homes and confiscating land. On the other side, Palestinian civilians, often disorganized, unprotected and leaderless, are fighting back.

The territorial boundaries of this battle are largely located in occupied East Jerusalem and in the so-called “Area C” of the West Bank—nearly 60 percent of the total size of the occupied West Bank—which is under complete and direct Israeli military control. No other place represents the perfect microcosm of this uneven war like that of the neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah in occupied East Jerusalem.

Fourteen Palestinian and Arab organizations issued a “joint urgent appeal to the United Nations Special Procedures on forced evictions in East Jerusalem” on March 10, to stop the Israeli evictions in the area. Successive decisions by Israeli courts have paved the way for the Israeli army and police to evict 15 Palestinian fam-

Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of palestine Chronicle. His latest book is these Chains Will Be Broken: palestinian stories of struggle and defiance in israeli prisons(available from AET’s Middle East Books and More). Dr. Baroud is a non-resident senior research fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro-Middle East Center (AMEC). His website is <www.ramzybaroud.net>.

ilies—37 households of around 195 pleases. Since those “absentee” Pales- Much of the evictions in East Jerusalem people—in the Karm Al-Ja’ouni area in tinians were not allowed to exercise their take place within the context of these three Sheikh Jarrah and Batn Al-Hawa neighbor- right of return, as stipulated by interna- interconnected and strange legal arguhood in the town of Silwan. tional law, the Israeli law was a state- ments: the Absentees’ Law, the Legal and

These imminent evictions are not the sanctioned wholesale theft. It ultimately Administrative Matters Law and the Master first, nor will they be the last. Israel occupied aimed at achieving two objectives: one, to Plan 2000. Understood together, one is Palestinian East Jerusalem in June 1967 ensure Palestinian refugees do not return easily able to decipher the nature of the Isand formally, though illegally, annexed it in or attempt to claim their stolen properties raeli colonial scheme in East Jerusalem, 1980. Since then, the Israeli government in Palestine and, two, to give Israel a legal where Israeli individuals, in coordination has vehemently rejected international criti- cover for permanently confiscating Pales- with settler organizations, work together to cism of the Israeli occupation, dubbing, in- tinian lands and homes. fulfill the vision of the state. stead, Jerusalem as the “eternal and undi- The Israeli military occupation of the re- In their joint appeal, Palestinian human vided capital of Israel.” mainder of historic Palestine in 1967 neces- rights organizations describe the flow of

To ensure its annexation of the city is ir- sitated, from an Israeli colonial perspective, how eviction orders, issued by Israeli reversible, the Israeli government approved the creation of fresh laws that would allow courts, culminate into the construction of ilthe Master Plan 2000, a massive scheme the state and the illegal settlement enter- legal Jewish settlements. Confiscated that was undertaken by Israel to rearrange prise to claim yet more Palestinian proper- Palestinian properties are usually transthe boundaries of the city in such a way that ties. This took place in 1970 in the form of ferred to a branch within the Israeli Ministry it would ensure a permanent demographic the Legal and Administrative Matters Law. of Justice called the Israeli Custodian Genmajority for Israeli Jews at the expense of According to the new legal framework, only eral. The latter holds on to these properties the city’s native inhabitants. The Master Israeli Jews were allowed to claim lost land until they are claimed by Israeli Jews, in acPlan was no more than a blueprint for a and property in Palestinian areas. cordance with the 1970 law. Once Israeli state-sponsored ethnic cleansing (Advertisement) courts honor Israeli Jewish individucampaign, which saw the destruction als’ legal claims to the confiscated of thousands of Palestinian homes Palestinian lands, these individuals and the subsequent eviction of nu- often transfer their ownership rights merous families. or management to settler organiza-

While news headlines occasionally tions. In no time, the latter organizapresent the habitual evictions of tions utilize the newly-acquired propPalestinian families in Sheikh Jarrah, erty to expand existing settlements Silwan and other parts of East or to start new ones. Jerusalem as if they are a matter that While the Israeli state claims to involves counterclaims by Palestinian play an impartial role in this scheme, residents and Jewish settlers, the it is actually the facilitator of the entire story is, in fact, a wider representation process. The final outcome maniof Palestine’s modern history. fests in the ever-predictable scene,

Indeed, the innocent families which where an Israeli flag is triumphantly are now facing “the imminent risk of hoisted over a Palestinian home and forced eviction” are re-living their an- a Palestinian family is assigned an cestral nightmare of the Nakba—the Playgrounds for Palestine is a project to build playgrounds for our children. It is a minimal recognition of their right to childhood and U.N.-supplied tent and a few blanethnic cleansing of historic Palestine creative expression. It is an act of love. kets. in 1948. Playgrounds for Palestine (PfP) is a registered 501(c)3 non-profit While the above picture can be

Two years after the native inhabi- organization, established in 2001. We’re an all-volunteer organiza- dismissed by some as another routants of historic Palestine were dis- tion (no paid staff) that raises money throughout the year to construct playgrounds and fund programs for tine, common occurrence, the situapossessed of their homes and lands children in Palestine. tion in the occupied West Bank and and ethnically cleansed altogether, Selling Organic, Fair Trade Palestinian olive East Jerusalem has become exIsrael enacted the so-called Absen- oil is PfP’s principle source of fundraising. is year, PfP launched AIDA, a private tremely volatile. Palestinians feel that tees’ Property Law of 1950. label olive oil from Palestinian farmers. they have nothing more to lose and

The law, which, of course, has no Please come by and taste it at our table. Netanyahu’s government is more legal or moral validity, simply We hope you’ll love it and make it a staple in your pantry. emboldened than ever. The killing of granted the properties of Palestini- Atef Hanaysha, and others like him, ans who were evicted or fled the war For more information or to make a donation visit: https://playgroundsforpalestine.org • P.O. Box 559 • Yardley, PA 19067 is only the beginning of that immito the state, to do with it as it nent, widespread confrontation. ■

Special Report

U.S. Palestinian Activist Defeats Israeli “Defamation” Lawsuit By Nora Barrows-Friedman

Razan al-Najjar (r), a 21-year-old Palestinian paramedic, works with a colleague to tend to an injured man during the Great March of Return protests, in the southern Gaza Strip, on April 1, 2018. She was killed by an Israeli sniper two months later.

IN A SIGNIFICANT VICTORY for free speech, a California court has ruled in favor of a Palestinian American activist who was sued for defamation by a former Israeli soldier over a Facebook post. The suit was explicitly meant to bully, silence and smear activists for Palestinian rights.

The soldier was represented by Shurat HaDin, an Israeli lawfare group with ties to Mossad, Israel’s spying and assassination agency—and whose co-founder led an extremist cell that carried out attacks on Palestinian civilians in the 1980s.

As part of the lawsuit, the group requested that the California court apply Israeli defamation laws in order to attach criminal penalties to their claim. On March 1, the court not only rebuked the request to apply Israeli law, but entirely dismissed the lawsuit and upheld the activist’s speech as a matter of public interest.

On June 1, 2018, Suhair Nafal, who was based in Chicago at the time, wrote a post on Facebook about Razan al-Najjar, the young medic who was shot and killed that day by Israeli snipers. Al-Najjar was helping treat and evacuate wounded protesters participating in the Great March of Return in the Gaza Strip when she was shot, wearing clothing clearly identifying her as a medic.

Angered over the killing, Nafal included a photo of al-Najjar in her post, initially alongside a photo of an American-born Israeli soldier that had been used by the army as a marketing tool.

The image of Rebecca Rumshiskaya—a young woman in full military gear standing in the desert, smiling and holding a large M16 rifle—had been posted to the official Facebook page of the Israeli army in May 2014, but has since apparently been deleted.

That photo went viral after the killing of al-Najjar, even though Rumshiskaya was not involved in the war crime at that time and had reportedly left the army three years prior. Court documents show that she currently lives in Israel and is a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen.

In her post, Nafal did not accuse Rumshiskaya of killing al-Najjar. The image was meant to highlight the injustice of a foreigner without ties to Palestine moving across the world to shoot dead an indigenous Palestinian, she told The Electronic Intifada.

Nora Barrows-Friedman is a staff writer and associate editor at The Electronic Intifada, and is the author of In Our Power: U.S. Students Organize for Justice in Palestine, available from Middle East Books and More. Reprinted with permission from The Electronic Intifada.

Nafal said she edited her post shortly after it was published and removed the photo of Rumshiskaya, replacing it with an image of another unidentified female Israeli soldier.

Her post went viral and she had received threatening messages and comments on articles in Israeli media. “But then it slowly went away and nothing happened—until a few months ago,” she told The Electronic Intifada.

Last September, nearly two years after Nafal published the post, she was notified that Rumshiskaya was suing her for defamation.

Israel-based attorney Nitsana DarshanLeitner, director of Shurat HaDin, worked with California lawyer Michael Weiser to petition the court to override California’s defamation laws—and apply much more draconian Israeli law instead.

Israel’s defamation laws have a statute of limitations period of seven years, whereas California’s are limited to one year. Israel’s law also applies criminal penalties for defamation—up to one year in prison—while defamation is a civil matter in California.

They claimed that Nafal’s implications that Rumshiskaya “committed murder and a war crime as part of her job” as an Israeli soldier was an act of libel, and that Israel “has a crucial interest that libel claims arising from such allegations will be heard on their merits and not be dismissed on limitation grounds in particular online cases.”

WAR ON BDS

Shurat HaDin uses lawfare—spurious and politically motivated legal proceedings— in an effort to harass, silence and deter supporters of Palestinian rights.

For example, the group has used this tactic to bully a U.S. trade union over its support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign for Palestinian rights, and in 2018 filed a lawsuit against activists in New Zealand for helping persuade pop star Lorde to cancel a Tel Aviv concert in accordance with the BDS call.

Shurat HaDin did not win these lawsuits, but they did waste money and time for defendants.

Notably, Darshan-Leitner boasted to The Jerusalem Post in September that her lawsuit was simply an opportunity to threaten and intimidate activists for Palestinian rights. “Rebecca’s lawsuit is the spearhead of our struggle against the global boycott movement against Israel,” Darshan-Leitner said. “This is a message to all BDS activists, who should know that they too may be held responsible for their anti-Zionist activity and may even need to pay a heavy price,” she added.

Shurat HaDin had raised more than $280,000 in donations to support its spurious lawsuit against Nafal.

“This wasn’t just a regular lawsuit,” Nafal’s lawyer Haytham Faraj told The Electronic Intifada. “We filed a motion to dismiss, and we immediately got hit with a motion asking the judge to consider the application of Israeli law.”

Shurat HaDin produced lengthy declara-

tions from handpicked experts arguing why Israeli law should apply in this case, as well as Hebrew-language copies of Israeli defamation law translated into English.

“Although we were able to win at a relatively early stage,” Faraj added, “they were ready for a fight. It was systematic.”

In a court document, Faraj called the suit “an example of the most vile type of attempted oppression of free speech by so-called private actors in conspiracy with a foreign government” to silence the free speech rights of a U.S. citizen in expressing criticism of a foreign country “and its official actions.”

Not only did the judge dismiss the lawsuit against Nafal on procedural grounds, but Nafal and Faraj countersued under a California law that allows sanctions against anyone who files a lawsuit seeking to curb speech about matters of public interest.

Nadal’s lawyers called for the court to sanction Darshan-Leitner over her “unauthorized practice of law” in California, and Weiser, as well, for aiding her. The court, however, did not grant that request.

I’m proud to announce that I have joined forces with @ShuratHaDin to file suit against a BDS supporter who viciously defamed a former @IDF soldier. If we succeed, the precedent could have far reaching implications in cases where American statute of limitations have expired. —on Twitter, Michael Weiser (@Mike WeiserEsq) Sept. 22, 2020 FIGHTING BACK

Winning this lawsuit is a significant victory for activists for Palestinian rights, Faraj said. It is a reminder that even with the Israel lobby’s well-funded efforts to silence criticism of Israel, that criticism is protected free speech.

The judge’s ruling that Nafal’s Facebook posts were political speech on a topic of public interest and therefore subject to the protections of California law “means that even if this lawsuit had been brought within the time allowed in California, we would have won on substance—not just on procedure,” Faraj explained.

California statute seeks to prevent anyone from trying to chill speech on matters of public interest by abusing the judicial process, Faraj added.

“The judge found that the Israeli soldier was guilty of just that and granted our request to have all our costs and fees recovered,” he said. “So instead of [Nafal] paying the Israeli agent, the Israeli agent must now pay [Nafal].”

Faraj will soon be submitting a motion to recover damages after tabulating the time he and Nafal spent fighting this lawsuit.

But while the lawsuit was handily defeated, Faraj said he is not quick to celebrate. “Even when you win, you start to selfcensor,” he explained, adding that the purpose of lawsuits like these is to scare activists, students and scholars into silencing themselves, and to waste their time and financial resources.

However, Nafal said that this process has only emboldened her.

“I was self-censoring the whole time while this was going on, because I know they were watching,” she said.

“But now, I feel this sense of empowerment and I feel protected by this state and this judge…And I want to speak louder.” ■

Special Report

Lawmakers Embracing Fantasy of Being Both “Pro-Israel” and “Pro-Palestine”

By Dale Sprusansky

Progressive Nina Turner, pictured protesting the closure of a hospital in Philadelphia, is currently running in a special election to represent Ohio's 11th congressional district. Turner recently told a Jewish Democratic group that she is “strongly pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian.” Photo was taken on July 11, 2019.

IT’S BEEN WELL-DOCUMENTED that many Democrats are increasingly willing to criticize Israeli policies and place conditions on U.S. aid to the country. This way of thinking, however, is largely confined to the rank and file of the party, and rarely reflected in the way Democratic legislators speak and vote.

Even many self-styled “woke” progressive politicians, who advocate for a wide-range of leftist policies, are reluctant to go all-in when it comes to holding Israel accountable to the law.

While such progressives typically distinguish themselves from “mainstream” Democrats by speaking of Palestinian rights, they do so while also regurgitating many traditional pro-Israel talking points. The result is a new brand of Democrat that incongruently seeks to appease both sides of the Israel-Palestine divide.

ORIGINS IN THE LIBERAL ZIONIST LOBBY

It’s no wonder some progressive politicians have taken to espousing support for “both sides.” Given that unequivocal support for Israel is now associated with the presidency of Donald Trump, many on the left are weary of taking such a stand. This has created something of a chasm between progressive politicians and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the unwaveringly pro-Israel lobby organization that has traditionally steered bipartisan support for Israel.

The “liberal Zionist” group J Street, on the other hand, serves as a natural home for progressives seeking to distinguish themselves from the status quo while also not pushing too many buttons. J Street’s slogan, “pro-Israel, pro-peace,” presents a safe, respectable middle ground. Unlike AIPAC, J Street speaks of Palestinian rights, supports the Iran nuclear deal, all while still espousing a deep commitment to Israel. The J Street platform can be sold as new and progressive, while simultaneously offering political cover from charges of anti-Semitism and blind hatred of Israel.

While one cannot deny that J Street is progressive incomparison to AIPAC, the organization’s “pro-Israel, pro-peace” mantra reveals the fatal flaw at the heart of liberal Zionism: How does supporting the oppressor facilitate peace? It’s a question progressive politi-

THE OHIO CASE STUDY

While most congressional elections ended in November, a heated race is currently taking place in Ohio’s 11th congressional district to fill the seat vacated by Rep. Marcia Fudge’s appointment as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

Nina Turner, a progressive former state senator endorsed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), is one of two presumptive frontrunners to assume Fudge’s seat. Her primary opponent, county commissioner Shontel Brown, is campaigning as an establishment Democrat. As such, she has predictably taken an unequivocally pro-Israel stance, resulting in an endorsement from the hawkish Democratic Majority for Israel political action committee.

Turner, on the other hand, has thus far run as a “pro-both sides” progressive. “I am strongly pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian,” she declared on a March 4 forum hosted by the Jewish Democratic Council of America.

“I believe firmly in the right of Israelis to live in safety and peace, free from fear of violence and terrorism from Hamas and other extremists, so of course I support continued U.S. aid to Israel to confront the security challenges,” Turner said. “I also believe that Palestinians are entitled to the same human rights and safety from violence, and to be able to have self-determination in a state of their own,” she added.

In response to a Jewish Insider questionnaire, Turner continued this “both sides” theme. “I support assistance for Israel for the legitimate security threats it faces. I also support continued humanitarian aid to the Palestinians,” she said. “Security and justice for Israelis and security and justice for Palestinians are two sides of the same coin—you don’t get one without the other. Both are equal people in God’s eyes, and both deserve the same.”

Turner’s position is understandable, and even commendable, from a broad moral standpoint. Indeed, it sounds a lot like Christian theologian Thomas Aquinas’ famous definition of love: “willing the good of the other—as other.” There’s nothing wrong with willing a just peace and mutual security for both sides.

However, from a practical geopolitical standpoint, Turner’s positions are impossible to square. Can you simultaneously support the colonizer while defending the rights of the colonized? In fact, Turner’s approach, while wrapped in more pro-Palestinian veneer than one typically hears from politicians, is actually an endorsement of the status quo long pushed and implemented by traditional pro-Israel Democrats and Republicans.

Here’showTurner’sapproachhas pannedoutinrealityoverthepastfew decades:TheU.S.statesitisworkingto facilitateatwo-statesolution,evenas IsraelexpandsitssettlementsanditsleaderscampaignonneverallowingaPalestinianstatetoexist.U.S.assistancecontinuesanywaybecausethepowerful pro-Israellobbypointstothe“existential threat” dujour facingIsrael,beitHamas, HezbollahorIran.

It is of course worth noting that Israel helped create Hamas in an effort to sow crippling internal division between Hamas’ God-fearing supporters and the secular Palestine Liberation Organization. Hezbollah, on the other hand, came to power in part due to Israel’s brutal invasion and occupation of southern Lebanon in 1982. Finally, Iran only emerged as an “existential threat” to Israel after the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference laid the groundwork for Arab-Israeli peace, thus jeopardizing Israel’s ability to portray itself as surrounded by enemies. Iran was eager to participate in the Madrid process, but was snubbed by the U.S., per Israel’s request.

Suffice it to say, Israel and its lobby will always find ways to present Turner and others with “legitimate” security threats that necessitate the constant flow of billions in aid. In combating these threats, particularly Hamas, Israel will always leave behind homeless, starving and mangled Palestinians for the U.S. to assist via a few hundred million dollars in humanitarian aid.

Turner says Palestinians deserve “safety from violence” and “self-determination,” but it’s hard to imagine this coming to fruition when the U.S. funds the violence being inflicted upon them and looks the other way as Israel’s colonizing activity progressively strips them of their land, let alone their national aspirations.

Turner is correct to state that the fates of the Israelis and Palestinians are “two sides of the same coin,” but only in the sense that under the current paradigm supported and funded by the U.S., the Israeli side of the coin is always facing up, while the Palestinian end is perpetually jammed in the dirt.

Long story short, there are uneven power, legal and moral dichotomies that make the “pro-both sides” position untenable.

Perhaps the best way Turner could make her statements congruent and truly progressive would be to contemplate the words of Israeli columnist Gideon Levy, who has often compared the U.S.-Israel relationship to the “affinity” shared between addicts and their enablers.

“Adrugaddict…suppliedwithmore money,hewillbesogratefultoyou.But areyoureallycaringabouthim?”Levy asks.“Trytosendhimtoarehabilitation center.Hewillbesomadatyou,butisn’t thisrealcare?Doesanyoneherehavethe slightestdoubtthatIsraelisoccupation-addicted?Doyouhaveanykindofdoubtthat thisaddictionisdangerous,firstofallfor Israel’sfuture?TherealvictimsareobviouslythePalestinians,andinmanyways theentireMiddleEast.”

If Turner and other progressives are serious about changing U.S. policy for the better, they would be wise to stop emphasizing their support for both Israel and Palestine. It’s akin to fueling the addict while providing some relief to those victimized by the addict’s behavior.

Indeed, Turner came close to adopting this approach when she told Jewish Insider, “I don’t believe any taxpayer money should be going toward entrenching the occupation of the Palestinian territories, settlement expansion, the detention of children or annexation.” This is precisely the correct tone to take, but it is utterly incompatible with supporting “both sides.”

For the good of Palestine and Israel, it’s time to stop equivocating and to be squarely pro-Palestine. Doing so seeks to free Palestinians from the bondage of occupation and injustice, while also freeing Israel from its addiction to colonialism, inequality and militarism. Being pro-Palestine is how to love—to will the good of— “both sides” via practical politics. ■

Christianity in the Middle East

An Interview with Father Abraham By Rev. Alex Awad

An engraving by Lemaitre from Palestine of the mosque erected in Hebron on the site of the Patriarch Abraham’s tomb. Geographique, Historique et Archeologique by Salomon Munk, L'Univers pittoresque, published by Firmin Didot Freres, Paris, 1845.

IF A ONE-DAY TIME MACHINE is invented and travel to the past becomes possible, one of the people I would love to meet and have a conversation with is the biblical patriarch, Abraham. However, since that is out of the realm of reality, I will present an imaginary interview with Abraham.

Q:Father Abraham, you finished your mission on earth thousands of years ago but you are still a celebrity on this planet. Recently, Pope Francis visited your birthplace in Iraq and the pope along with a host of top Iraqi leaders poured praise on you during their press conferences, prayers, messages and public addresses. Moreover, before the election in the U.S., the Trump administration took a shot at peace between Israel and a few Arab countries and called the project “The Abraham Accords.” You continue to be popular among billions of Muslims, Jews and Christians. What do you think of all this attention?

Abraham:To start with, I would like to confess that before I chose to follow God, he chose me. Every merit that I attained and anything that I accomplished can be traced to God’s grace. All I had to do was to trust in God’s wisdom and follow his lead. The more I believed, the more I was blessed. This attention that I am receiving from your compatriots is welcome, as long as it is coming from men and women who honor me because they want to celebrate God’s grace and goodness. I welcome people using my name and example to end conflicts and establish peace and justice. What I detest is when my name is used by conniving people and shrewd politicians to cover up their evil designs.

Q: Father Abraham, 25 years ago, a man named Baruch Goldstein, who highly esteemed you, entered the Cave of Machpelah where it is believed that you and members of your immediate family were laid to rest. It was dawn and Muslims were having their morning prayers. Goldstein used his automatic gun to kill 29 men in cold blood before the crowd turned on and killed him. What do you say about Goldstein and people like him who highly adore you and yet kill others in your name and in name of your God?

Abraham: God is merciful and just. The massacre that Goldstein committed is in total defiance of the heart, will and character

Rev. Dr. Alex Awad is a retired United Methodist Missionary. He and his wife, Brenda, served in Jerusalem and in Bethlehem for more than 25 years. Rev. Awad served as pastor of East Jerusalem Baptist Church, dean of students at Bethlehem Bible College, and director of the Shepherd Society. Awad has written two books, Through the Eyes of the Victims and Palestinian Memories. Rev. Awad is a member of the Palestinian Christian Alliance for Peace (PCAP).

of God. In Arabic, Hebron, the city where I was buried, is called Al-Khalil, meaning,”the friend.” Arabs and Muslims consider me “a friend of God” and that is confirmed by both Jewish prophets and the Christian Bible (Isaiah 41:8; James 2:23) and in the Qur’an (Surah 4:125). A friend of God is a friend of all people. True friends of God do not go around killing other people to get credit with God. Goldstein was totally misguided and any Jew, Muslim or Christian that commits atrocities in the name of God is equally misguided. And yes, Christians, Muslims and Jews have a dark history of crimes and massacres against each other. Neither God nor I are pleased to see innocent people being massacred in our name.

Q: Father, Jewish settlers who live in Hebron are very zealous for you and your burial place. They have forcefully taken lands from Palestinians in Hebron to establish a settlement that would guarantee a Jewish presence and dominance in Hebron. These settlers daily attack Palestinians and intimidate all the citizens of Hebron assuming that they are doing you and your legacy a favor. They are zealous about the Cave and those who are buried there. What message do you have for those who are willing to kill and do harm with the stated goal of “protecting” the Cave and the city of Hebron?

Abraham: From my perspective and after following the human story for thousands of years, I am appalled that some humans continue to think that God cares more for dead stones and tombs than for living souls. As Jesus said, “God is spirit and those who worship him must do so in spirit and in truth.” God longs for the sanctity of the human heart more than the sanctity of any earthly place. I say to the zealots of Hebron, focus on your heart and love your Palestinian neighbor. Only then, the earth that you walk upon will become holy ground.

Q:I hear you talk a lot about justice, is this something that you learned through your walk with your God?

Abraham: I am glad that you asked this question because a lot of Jews, Muslims and Christians know many stories about my life and my walk with God but are not aware that God instructed me to be a teacher of justice. God gave me a specific command to teach my children and my grandchildren to do what is just. Look at what is written about me:

Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just, so that the Lord will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him. Genesis 18:17-19

Perhaps I am the first human that was chosen by God to instruct people to do justice. Notice another aspect that many people who think that they are following in my footsteps ignore. It is the fact that the promises that God generously gave me, and my descendants were linked with us doing justice and righteousness.

Q:So how did you go about teaching justice and righteousness?

Abraham: During my time on earth, we did not have schools, colleges and universities as you know them. I taught my household to do justice by setting an example before them. For instance, when the shepherds of my nephew, Lot, quarreled with my shepherds, I told my nephew:

Let’s not have any quarreling between you and me, or between your herders and mine, for we are close relatives. Is not the whole land before you? Let’s part company. If you go to the left, I’ll go to the right; if you go to the right, I’ll go to the left. (Genesis 13:8-9)

Another example is after my wife Sarah died, and I needed a place to bury her. When I found the proper place, I went to the Hittites who owned the Cave of Machpelah, and I asked them if I could buy the land and the Cave to bury my wife. The Hittites offered me the land free of charge. But I insisted on paying the full price for the land. Mind you, this is the very land that God promised to give to me. I did not use my religious rights, nor did I use violence to take over the Cave and the land around it.

A third example about my passion for justice is when God told me that he was planning to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Not fully understanding what was going on, I argued and pleaded with God to deal justly with the righteous inhabitants of the cities.

Q: In one large U.S. city I attended an interfaith meeting called “The Cousins Club.” The title expresses that we—Jews, Muslims and Christians—are all cousins through our connection to you. What do you think of these interfaith meetings? Would you attend one?

Abraham: As one of my children wrote in the Book of Psalms, “How good and pleasant it is when brothers (and sisters) live together in unity.” Psalm 133:1. From one perspective, if I were still living on earth and invited, and they were willing to receive such an incredibly old man, I would attend. But from my current vantage point, I see things that I do not like in these interfaith meetings. The people eat a lot of food, drink all kinds of drinks, sing, dance and listen to lively music but they shy away from discussing the reasons why Christians, Muslims and Jews are killing each other in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. These interfaith gatherings are self-serving. I don’t mind the celebration time as long as the meetings also include serious discussion of how participants strive to influence politicians to make peace in the Middle East and around the world.

Q: Thank you Father Abraham for responding to these questions. Do you have a final statement to the folks who will read this interview?

Abraham: Yes! Look at your world today—millions are suffering from hunger. Think about the millions who feel the pain of wars and military conflicts. Consider the untold numbers of young men and women who are unemployed and are utterly hopeless. Turn your eyes to the plight of refugees and those who languish from homelessness. Add to this list the millions who suffer from the curse of racism and discrimination. On the other hand, consider how God blessed humanity with enough wealth, wisdom, technological abilities and goodwill to address all the above challenges. Practicing justice is the key to healing many of humanity’s wounds. ■

Gaza on the Ground

Gaza Calls for Fair Vaccine Distribution

By Mohammed Omer

The United Nations human rights body released a statement on Jan. 14, saying that it is Israel’s responsibility to provide equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines for Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. The U.N. said that differential access is “morally and legally” unacceptable under international law as laid out in the Geneva Conventions, PHOTO BY MOHAMMED ABED/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES on the regulation of occupied territories. “As Palestinians living under occupation, Israel has an obligation to inoculate the population” says Umm Fayez Al-Khalidi, a 45-year-old teacher living in Gaza. Ignoring that responsibility, instead, in mid-FebVials of the Russian Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine are pictured in Gaza City on March 25, 2021. Thousands of Palestinian health workers, the elderly and patients with cancer or kidney disease were set to get vaccines as the health ministry ramped up its inoculation campaign. ruary, Israel sent spare vaccines to Honduras, Guatemala, Hungary and the Czech Republic to ISRAEL LEADS with the world’s highest rate of COVID-19 vacci- reward those countries for opening embassies or recognizing Isnations per capita. By April 1, Israel had fully vaccinated 50 percent raeli sovereignty in Jerusalem. of its 9 million citizens, including settlers living in the West Bank, as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and other members of Congress, well as foreigners living in Israel. But at the same time, in the West joined human rights groups and the U.N. to criticize Israel for Bank and Gaza, where Israel remains an occupying power, Pales- its vaccination distribution failures. “As the occupying power, tinians only just started getting limited amounts of vaccines in late Israel is responsible for the health of all the people under its February. That is when Israel finally allowed the transfer of a few control,” said Sanders on Twitter. “It is outrageous that Nethousand Sputnik V doses donated by Russia for the 5 million Pales- tanyahu would use spare vaccines to reward his foreign allies tinians in the West Bank. Gaza initially received just 2,000 doses while so many Palestinians in the occupied territories are still for 2 million Gazans from Russia, followed by a much larger donation waiting.” from the UAE. The first vaccinations went to frontline health workers. Addressing the equitable distribution of vaccines against the

Israel, meanwhile, sent its stockpile elsewhere. coronavirus in the Security Council on Feb. 17, U.N. SecretaryGeneral António Guterres proposed the creation of an emerAward-winning journalist Mohammed Omer reports regularly on gency task force of the G20 countries to prepare and help implethe Gaza Strip. ment a global immunization plan.

“The rollout of COVID-19 vaccines is generating hope,” he told the 15-member council’s video conference meeting. “At this critical moment, vaccine equity is the biggest moral test before the global community.”

Israel failed that moral test, waiting until early March to vaccinate Palestinians who come to work in Israel or in Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

The PA received 61,440 vaccines on March 16, through COVAX, a global vaccine program for poor and middle-income countries backed by the World Health Organization. Some 20,000 doses from that shipment were sent to Gaza later the same day. Then on March 29, China sent another 100,000 doses of their Sinopharm vaccine.

Six Israeli and Palestinian human rights organizations filed a petition with the High Court of Justice on March 24, demanding that Israel act to ensure the vaccination of Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The petition suggested Israel hand over surplus supplies of its own vaccine stocks.

As the world continues to fight COVID19, together and in collaboration, many questions are being asked about the allocation of and access to vaccines as they become available.

Yet, back in Gaza, Umm Momen Hijazi, a cancer patient who had to stop her chemotherapy for a year due to travel restrictions, is still waiting for her vaccine. Umm Momen described how she has been isolated from others, including her own grandchildren, since she belongs to the vulnerable group of cancer patients.

“We are all waiting for the vaccine rollout to unite us, as much as the COVID lockdown did,” she said, adding, “It does not look like this is happening. The occupation has already locked us in and treated us as lesser human beings for decades. Some have the golden spoon, and others will have to wait for some luck,” she commented.

The inoculation drive in Gaza “will result in more immunity among the people and further curb the spread of the pandemic,” said Palestinian Health Ministry spokesperson Ashraf Al Qedra. COVID has drawn attention to the worldwide inequity in health care and vaccine distribution between rich and poor nations. Gaza has been no exception, but the vaccine distribution there has been largely fueled by political tension and polarization.

“At the end, there is one thing that I wish to underscore—no one is safe until everyone is safe,” says Umm Momen. Yet, she knows the vaccine will be used as yet another tool to crush Gaza.

“What we will always have is the Palestinian will to continue as long as we have oxygen in our lungs,” she adds.

Vaccine discrimination is a main topic amid the talks about the upcoming Palestinian presidential and legislative council elections. It’s the latest outrage, added to the high unemployment, collapsing health care, travel restrictions, shortages of essential supplies and energy rationing, that have made the Palestinians’ daily lives increasingly more difficult during the decades of Israel’s occupation and blockade. ■

(Advertisement)

PALESTIN OUR CHI NE: ILDREN, OU R DUTY!

OVER 16 YEARS

Congress Watch

Congressional Republicans Oppose Returning to the Iran Nuclear Agreement

By Shirl McArthur

However, although the so-called “maximum pressure” policy of the previous administration only emboldened Iran’s hardliners, Congressional Republicans and some Democrats continue to oppose returning to the JCPOA. At a Senate confirmation hearing for Wendy Sherman as deputy secretary of state, Sen. James Risch (R-ID) said that, to him, rejoinPHOTO COURTESY PHIL PASQUINI ing the JCPOA “is a non-starter.” But Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said that by seeking to expand the agreement, “I worry that we may be setting ourselves up for The U.S. Capitol as seen from the metal security fence topped by razor wire installed after the insurrection of failure.” January 6, 2021. Several measures were introduced, and THE WASHINGTON Report’s previous issue reported that 150 one letter was sent to Biden opposing returning to the agreement. representatives signed a Dec. 23 letter to President Joseph Biden On Feb. 3, 52 Republican representatives, led by Rep. Greg saying that they endorse his “call for diplomacy as the best path Murphy (R-NC), signed a letter to Biden urging him not to return to to halt and reverse Iran’s nuclear program, decrease tensions in the agreement. The letter’s signers claim the JCPOA was “a failure the region, and facilitate our nation’s reincorporation into the in- to begin with,” and indirectly funded “the killing of American soldiers ternational community.” Then, on Feb. 24, Sen. Edward Markey and innocent people.” (D-MA), with 10 cosponsors, introduced S. 434, the “Iran Diplo- Six measures were introduced specifically opposing the return to macy” bill, to “seek a diplomatic resolution to Iran’s nuclear pro- the JCPOA unless Iran complies with several conditions, mostly ungram.” Recognizing that most objections to the Joint Comprehen- related to Iran’s nuclear program. Gaining the most support are idensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear agreement’s official tical Feb. 24 House and Senate resolutions, “opposing the lifting of name, are that it doesn’t deal with Iran’s other destabilizing ac- sanctions imposed with respect to Iran without addressing the full tions, S. 434 says that, after both Iran and the U.S. return to full scope of Iran’s malign activities, including its nuclear program, balcompliance with their commitments under the JCPOA, the U.S. listic and cruise missile capabilities, weapons proliferation, support should lead international efforts to deal with other aspect of Iran’s for terrorism, hostage-taking, gross human rights violations, and behavior. other destabilizing activities.” The Senate resolution, S.Res. 72, introduced by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), has 31 Republican cosponShirl McArthur is a retired foreign service officer. He lives in the sors, and the House resolution, H.Res. 157, introduced by Rep. Washington, DC metropolitan area. Mike Gallagher (R-WI), has 34cosponsors.

In the Senate, on Feb. 3, Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) and two cosponsors, introduced the non-binding S.Res. 31, which would urge “the president not to return to the JCPOA unless the agreement is revised and Iran meets specified conditions.” In the House, H.R. 1203 was introduced on Feb. 22 by Rep. Lisa McClain (R-MI), with 10 cosponsors, to “limit the U.S. from rejoining the JCPOA,” and H.R. 1231 was introduced Feb. 23 by Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-TX) “to prohibit the reentry of the U.S. into the JCPOA unless the president makes certain certifications relating to Iran.” On March 2, Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY) and six cosponsors introduced H.R. 1479 “to prohibit the use of federal funds relating to rejoining the JCPOA with Iran.”

More responsibly, companion bills were introduced in the House and Senate “to provide for congressional review of actions to terminate or waive sanctions imposed with respect to Iran.” S. 488, introduced Feb. 25 by Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-TN), has 32 cosponsors, and H.R. 1699, introduced March 9 by Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), has 43cosponsors.

The non-binding H.Res. 214, expressing the sense of the House “that Iran must cease enriching uranium to 20 percent purity and abandon its pursuit of a nuclear weapon” was introduced March 10 by Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA) and five cosponsors.

On Feb. 5, Reps. Don Bacon (R-NE) and Joe Wilson (R-SC) also introduced H.R. 857, “to impose sanctions on certain persons contributing to the proliferation of arms of Iran.” Two bills targeting Iran, similar to the bills from the last Congress, were introduced. H.R. 733, the “Stop Evasions of Iran Sanctions” bill, was introduced Feb. 2 by Rep. Bryan Steil (R-WI), with four cosponsors. H.R. 819, “to require a report on oligarchs and parastatal entities of Iran,” was introduced Feb. 4 by Rep. David Kustoff (RTN). It has 10 cosponsors.

RELEASE OF REPORT ON THE KHASHOGGI MURDER BRINGS CONGRESSIONAL REACTION

The Feb. 11 release of the Director of National Intelligence report on the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi elicited limited, but strong, congressional reaction. On March 1, Reps. Tom Malinowski (D-NJ) and 19cosponsors introduced H.R. 1464, the “Saudi Arabia Accountability for Gross Violations of Human Rights” bill. It would prohibit travel to the U.S. by all parties named in the report, including Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. On March 2, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) introduced H.R. 1511 “to impose sanctions with respect to the crown prince of Saudi Arabia.” The bill would freeze bin Salman’s assets in the U.S. and make him inadmissible to the country. The bill has nine cosponsors.

Earlier, on Feb. 4, Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) introduced S. 226, the “Jamal Khashoggi Press Freedom Accountability” bill, “to protect journalists and other members of the press from gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.”

On Jan. 15, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Gregory Meeks (D-NY), introduced two joint resolutions, H.J.Res. 15 and H.J.Res. 16, “providing for congressional disapproval of the proposed foreign military sale to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia of certain defense articles and services.” Each of the measures has 29cosponsors.

On Feb. 26, Reps. David Trone (D-MD), Gerry Connolly (D-VA) and James McGovern (D-MA), introduced the non-binding H.Res. 175 calling on “the U.S. government to cease all arms transfers to Saudi Arabia” until Saudi Arabia meets certain conditions, including demonstrating “true accountability for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.”

On Feb. 25, 41 representatives, led by Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Ro Khanna (D-CA), and Debbie Dingell (D-MI), signed a letter to Biden expressing their “strong support” for his “decision to end U.S. participation in offensive operations in the Saudi/UAE-led war in Yemen.”

BILLS INTRODUCED TO REPEAL AUTHORIZATIONS FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE

On Jan. 11, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) introduced H.R. 255 and H.R. 256 to repeal the authorizations for use of military force (AUMF) against terrorist groups of 2001 and against Iraq of 2002. Since their enactment, these authorizations have been used to justify several military operations. H.R. 255 has 54 cosponsors and H.R. 256 has 112 cosponsors.

On March 3, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), with 13 cosponsors, introduced S.J. Res. 10 to repeal the authorizations for use of military force in Iraq of 1991 and 2002. Repeal of these authorizations would formally end the authorizations for use of military force for the Gulf and Iraq wars.

On March 8, DeFazio, with 17 cosponsors, introduced H.J. Res. 29 “to amend the War Powers Resolution.” As DeFazio said in a press release, this legislation “clarifies under the Constitution that any president must seek congressional authorization prior to sending U.S. forces into hostilities, and sets out strict parameters for any future AUMF that Congress might consider.” The measure would provide exceptions for certain emergencies.

More problematic is H.R. 1457, introduced March 1 by Rep. James Himes (DCT) and three cosponsors. It would simply prohibit funds “for the U.S. Armed Forces to be obligated or expended for introduction of U.S. Armed Forces into hostilities.”

A NEW CONGRESS, A NEW ANTIPALESTINIAN BILL

On Jan. 11, Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL) introduced H.R. 261, the “Palestinian International Terrorism Support Prevention” bill. It would require sanctions on “each foreign person or instrumentality that knowingly assists, provides significant support or services to, or is involved in a significant transaction with a senior member” of Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and any affiliate or successor groups. It has 17 cosponsors.

Identical bills were introduced on Feb. 23, in the House and Senate, “to advance a diplomatic solution to the conflict in Libya and support the people of Libya.” H.R. 1228, introduced by Rep. Ted Deutch (DFL), has ninecosponsors, and S. 379, introduced by Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), has three cosponsors. ■

Special Report

U.S.-Iran Relations: Crafting a New Beginning

By Dr. M. Reza Behnam

tate, threaten, and assassinate leaders, bomb, invade, and destroy lives and eco-systems in a region it knows only in terms of the energy resources it provides? America’s forever-sancMedical personnel gather around a table spread of Haft-Seen for Nowruz in a COVID-19 ward in Shahr-e-Rey, PHOTO BY MORTEZA NIKOUBAZL/NURPHOTO VIA GETTY IMAGES tions-war has taken its toll on Iran, but it has not produced the changes Washington has desired. A major reason is that, unlike other countries in the Middle East, Iran is not the product of British or French colonial plans or a military coup. It is one of the world’s oldest, proudest and abiding civilizations, which has endured south of Tehran. Nowruz, the Iranian New Year, marks the first day of spring and has been celebrated in Iran since all manner of attack over the Zoroastrian era. The historical ceremony includes the Haft-Seen (seven items beginning with the letter “s” in its 7,000-year history. Farsi). Each item comes with promises for renewal, prosperity, fertility, happiness, health and joy for the new year. To remedy its foreign policy failures, WashingAT A FEB. 2021 meeting of the Munich Security Council, President ton must take account of its own history with and failed policies Joe Biden proclaimed, “America is back.” The question is: America toward Iran and reevaluate its current alliances and strategic partis back “to do what?” nerships in the Middle East.

For Iranians, the question is especially salient. “America is back” Such an accounting would reveal that U.S. interests have been should mean respect for Iran’s sovereignty and an end to the fear poorly served by U.S. animus toward Iran, and that America has mongering of past decades. Additionally, President Biden should more in common with Iran than with most countries in Southwest clearly affirm what American and Israeli intelligence agencies have Asia. Because of its regional stature, Iran could provide Washington been saying for years—that Iran has never wanted to build a bomb with the meaningful assistance it needs in tackling its difficult imand has never been a threat to the United States, Israel or its re- passes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen and in Palestine-Israel, gional neighbors. as it did by providing valuable assistance on al-Qaeda after the Sept.

America’s “big stick” policies have not achieved the regime 11, 2001 attacks. change many in the Washington establishment have been hoping The ideals of Iran’s 1979 revolution have yet to be realized. The for. Unfortunately, few among them question the efficacy, let alone Islamic Republic has been under continued attack since its inception the morality, of U.S. foreign policy toward Iran. What right, for ex- and yet it has survived despite all obstacles the U.S. and its allies ample, does the United States have to overthrow governments, dic- in the region have thrown its way. After millenniaof monarchy, Iran has formed a republic with a written constitution and regularly held Dr. M. Reza Behnam is a political scientist specializing in the history, parliamentary and presidential elections. Iran’s government is unpolitics and governments of the Middle East. precedented in the Islamic world.

The Biden administration has thus far displayed the same imperial attitude and lack of historical insight that has brought about America’s disastrous history with Iran; a history that first derailed with an illfated decision in 1953, and continues to haunt both countries to this day.

With British urging, President Dwight D. Eisenhower ordered the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953. It set the stage for Washington’s future acts of trickery and malign behavior and for Iran’s continuing mistrust of the United States.

With the defeat of Mossadegh’s democratic government, CIA coup plotter, Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., reported to Washington that the shah had been “safely installed” back on the Peacock Throne. Before leaving Tehran, Roosevelt met with the shah. Raising his glass in a toast to Roosevelt, the shah remarked, “I owe my throne to God, my people, my army—and to you!”

The prime minister was arrested and hauled before a military tribunal. There he uttered the words that resonated with Iranians then and now: “I have had only one objective, and that was for the people of Iran to control their own destiny and for the fate of the nation to be determined by nothing other than the will of the people...” He continued, “I am well aware that my fate must serve as an example in the future throughout the Middle East in breaking the chains of slavery and servitude to colonial interests.”

The shah loyally executed U.S. interests until 1979 when millions of Iranians brought down “America’s shah” to, in Mossadegh’s words, control their own destiny.

The 1979 Iranian Revolution—the most consequential of the 20th century—inspired hope for political transformation and has changed the balance of power in the region.

One of Washington’s greatest fears was the power of the ideology born of the revolution, particularly through the messages of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founding father of the Islamic Republic. His calls for Shi’a-Sunni unity with entreaties such as, “The Muslims must be a united, single fist, none can rise up against them,” echoed across the Islamic world, much to the consternation of Arab dictators in Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

The political and economic power of a unified Middle East, inherent in the Ayatollah’s rhetoric, much like Mossadegh’s 26 years earlier, was not lost on the United States.

America’s intense anti-Iran policy, already on the rise after the revolution, intensified with the seizure, by Iranian students, of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the taking of 52 American hostages from November 1979 to January 1981.

The Iran-Iraq War (1980-88) further deepened Iran’s distrust of the United States. Although Iraq started the war, President Ronald Reagan decided that it would be in America’s interests to help Saddam Hussain defeat Iran. The U.S. provided financial and military assistance to the Iraqi regime, including dual-use technology that allowed Iraq to make chemical weapons.

Iraq’s use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers was met with a muted response from Washington. Although Saddam was using chemical weapons against Iranian forces and civilians, Aya-

(Advertisement)

HopeHasWings

$350 provides a beehive, equipment and training for a Palestinian farmer $100 trains a new beekeeper $35 purchases a share of a beehive

The POLLINATOR PROJECT supplies beehives for Palestinian farmers. Honeybees are the most efficient, organic method of pollination. Higher pollination means a bigger crop and a more secure livelihood.

www.landofcanaanfoundation.org

info@landofcanaanfoundation.org The Land of Canaan Foundation 19215 SE 34th Street • #106-122 • Camas, WA 98607

tollah Khomeini specifically prohibited the production or use of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

In March 1984, the U.S. State Department issued the following statement:

“While condemning Iraq’s chemical weapons use…The United States finds the present Iranian regime’s intransigent refusal to deviate from its avowed objective of eliminating the legitimate government of neighboring Iraq to be inconsistent with the accepted norms of behavior among nations… .” The statement was more condemnatory of Iran than Iraq. However, by 1991, Iraq had lost favor with Washington after Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait.

Containing Iran and Iraq became the official policy of President Bill Clinton. Using Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, Clinton’s “dual containment” policy objective was to isolate both countries politically, economically and militarily. It was a policy underwritten and supported by Israel and its lobby groups, including the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a think tank funded by AIPAC and its supporters.

To garner international support for harsher additional sanctions, the U.S. and Israel accused Tehran of sponsoring terrorism, pursuing nuclear weapons and of being a “rogue state”—a narrative that has become uncontested doctrine.

Washington’s efforts to destabilize Iran have been ongoing. The U.S. Congress authorized millions of dollars for covert operations in the Intelligence Authorization Act of 1996 and the Iran Freedom Support Act of 2006.

U.S. perfidy was clearly reflected in President George W. Bush’s 2002 State of the Union address when he included Iran among his “axis of evil” countries. The slight was particularly confounding to Iranians because they had been working with the U.S. to help establish an interim government in Afghanistan following the U.S. invasion of that country in October 2001.

In a 2003 proposal to Washington, which later came be known as the “grand bargain,” Iran offered to discuss several issues of concern to both countries, including willingness to accept full transparency of its nuclear program.

Iranians were stunned by Bush’s refusal to even reply to Tehran’s proposal. Instead, he launched an unprecedented financial war intended to drive Iran out of the global economy.

RAPPROCHEMENT MOVES

In 2015, it seemed that rapprochement was finally possible. President Barack Obama had managed to conclude a nuclear agreement despite the relentless machinations of war zealots in Congress, Israel and Saudi Arabia. Although it had no nuclear weapons, Iran agreed to the terms of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which included more restrictions and intrusive monitoring than other states with nuclear programs or weapons.

TheJCPOAwasthemostimportantpact betweentheUnitedStatesandIransince 1979.Butin2018,entrenchedU.S.anti-Iran institutionalforcesprovedmorepowerfulthan thewordofPresidentObama.Israelandits AmericansupportersapplaudedPresident DonaldTrump’sunceremoniouswithdrawal fromtheagreementandhiseffortstobring theIranianeconomytoitsknees.

For over five years, the U.S. has been punishing Iran for a nuclear weapons program that does not exist.

DespiteTrump’s1,000cripplingsanctions, Tehranabidedbythetermsoftheagreement.ThatchangedinJanuary2020when TrumporderedtheassassinationofGeneral QassemSoleimani.Whenheboastedabout hismurderandconspiredwithIsraeltoassassinateyetanothernuclearscientist, MohsenFakhrizadehinNovember2020, Iranrampedupitsuraniumenrichmentlevel to20percent,whereitwasbeforetheaccord.

Iranians believe that a double standard exists for them. The world, for example, continues to be outraged by the brutal murder, in 2018, of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on the orders of de facto Saudi ruler, Mohammad bin Salman.

The U.S. murders of Soleimani and Fakhrizadeh did not prompt the same outrage, although both were in violation of international law and could be considered an act of war.

For over 40 years, the U.S. has used Iran as a foil to maintain its primacy in the Middle East. The country has been under constant attack because of its refusal to acquiesce to U.S.-Israeli plans for the region. This, not Iran’s nuclear program, is the actual reason for America’s hostility toward Iran.

Israel has successfully hyped Iran as a nuclear danger to the Jewish state. However, if Iran were to at-tack Israel using nuclear weapons, it would not only kill Israelis but the Palestinians Iran supports. It would also obliterate Jerusalem and other sites sacred to Islam and Iran. This would be an illogical and inconceivable act by the Islamic Republic.

Like all nations, Iran has a right to defend itself. U.S. provocations and threats from regional neighbors have forced it to pursue a defensive security posture. Although Tehran has not drawn on nuclear weapons for security, it may have to decide that nuclear weapons would be a safeguard from the “axis of evil” it confronts at its doorstep—the U.S., Israel and Gulf Arab regimes. Furthermore, Iran deserves a guarantee that if it reenters the JCPOA no change of government in Washington will abrogate it.

America has spent enormous financial, political and military energy trying to eliminate the Islamic Republic, to no good end. Since it was President Trump who unilaterally withdrew from the nuclear agreement in 2018, the onus is on Washington to reenter it without preconditions. By reentering the JCPOA, President Biden could begin the process of undoing the damage that America’s adversarial policies have caused Iran over many decades.

The United States has yet to understand that if it wants to achieve any of its objectives in the region, it will need Iran as a strategic partner, not apartheid Israel or Arab strongmen. An equitable U.S.-Iran partnership could be the ballast America needs if it intends to play a more visionary role in the Middle East. ■

Exonerating the Saudis—Again

By Walter L. Hixson

NOONESHOULDBE surprisedthatthe UnitedStatesislettingSaudiArabiagetaway withmurder—again.U.S.supportforthere- So, it’s business asactionaryoil-richregimeinRiyadhisastaple ofAmerica’sconsistentlyfailedMiddleEast policy,rightuptherewithembracingIsraeli usual—that would apartheidandceaselesslydemonizingIran. AttheendofFebruary,theBidenadministrationannouncedthatSaudiArabia’sde be the oil and arms factorulerMohammadbinSalman—affectionatelyknownasMBS—wasdirectlyre- sales businesses... sponsibleforthemurderof WashingtonPost journalistJamalKhashoggiattheSaudiconsulateinIstanbulonOct.2,2018.Thatwashardlybreakingnews, astheBidenadministrationmerelymadeofficial,throughrelease ofthefindingsofanintelligencereport,whatwasalreadywell known.Moreover,theadministrationannounceditwasnotgoingto sanctionMBS—whotooktheoccasiontoagainmendaciouslydeny anyresponsibilityforthekilling—thusassuringtherewouldbeno realaccountabilityforhisactions.

So,it’sbusinessasusual—thatwouldbetheoilandarmssales businesses,tobemoreprecise.Twentyyearsago,theUnited StatesdidnotblameSaudiArabiafor9/11despitethefactthat OsamaBinLadenand15ofthe19hijackershailedfromtheultraconservativeSunnikingdom,sowhowouldexpectMBStobe blamedforthemeremurderandgrotesquedismembermentofan award-winningjournalist?

Atthetimeof9/11,theBushadministrationhurriedlyspiritedhighlevelSaudisoutofthecountrybeforetheymightbequestioned aboutanyconnectionsbetweentheregimeandthoseresponsible fortheattacks.IfSaudiArabiastoodforanythingbesidesoilsales andrepressingitsownpeople,itwasforfundingtheintolerantWahhabiIslamic“education”andsupportingreactionarymovementsat theexpenseofsecularandreformistIslamictraditions. THENIGHTMAREINNEIGHBORINGYEMEN

Khashoggi,whohadtheaudacitytocriticizehiscountryinprint,is nottheonlydeathforwhichMBSisresponsible—hehaskilledtens ofthousandsofpeoplethrougharecklessandfailedinterventionin Yemen,aconflictthathasalsoputmillionsofYemenisonthebrink offamine.Toitscredit,theBidenadministrationisatleastmaking apushtoendtheYemeniconflict,whichlonghasbeenblamedon Iraneventhoughthemostovertlyinterventionistforeignpowerin thecountryisSaudiArabia.InJanuary,theBidenadministration announcedtheywerepausingU.S.armssalestoSaudiArabia, citingtheirroleinperpetuatingtheYemencatastrophe.ReuterslaterreportedtheU.S.is consideringoutrightcancelingthesaleofall offensivearmstoRiyadhoverhumanrights concerns. Adecadeago,SaudiArabia—aswellas theUnitedStates—fearedtheriseofreform governmentsintheArabSpringmovement, whichhassincebeencrushed.IfMiddleEasterncountrieslikeYemen,whichoverthrewits longtimedictatorduringtheArabSpringuprisings,wereactuallyallowedtoreformand takecontroloftheirowndestiniesthatwould putpressureontheSaudiregime.TheKingdommightbeforcedto domorethanallowingwomentodrive.Takentothelogicalextreme, thereformmovementsmighteventoppletheSaudiregime,inwhich casetheUnitedStateswouldbedeprivedofthecheapoiltowhich ithaslongbeenaddictedandmightforcetheAmericanstoreckon withtheexistentialcrisisofclimatechange—oh,perishthethought!

TheUnitedStates,SaudiArabiaandtheiralliedregimesinthe Gulfprefertosupportright-wingreactionariesevenatthecostof turningcountrieslikeSyriaandYemenintovisionsrightoutof Dante’sInferno.TheyonlywishtheycoulddothesametopredominatelyShi’iIran,whichsupportstheHouthisinYemen,Hezbollah inLebanon,andBasharal-AssadinSyria,butwhichisabsurdly chargedbytheSaudis—andtheirnew-foundfriendsinIsrael—with tryingtodominatetheentireMiddleEast.

MBShadasoulmateinPresidentDonaldTrump,whobacked hisplayinYemenandyawnedoverthemurderofKhashoggi.MBS andTrumpgotonsowellbecausebothwereborntomassive wealth,havingearnednothingontheirown,andwereaccustomed totakingnoresponsibilityfortheirarrogance,ignoranceandwanton destructiveness.Bidencouldhavesignaledthatanewdaywas comingbuthechosethetried-and-truepathofappeasingthe Saudis.

Youknow,becauseithasworkedsowellinthepast. ■

History’s Shadows, a regular column by contributing editor Walter L. Hixson, seeks to place various aspects of Middle East politics and diplomacy in historical perspective. Hixson is the author of Architects of Repression: How Israel and Its Lobby Put Racism, Violence and Injustice at the Center of US Middle East Policy and Israel’s Armor: The Israel Lobby and the First Generation of the Palestine Conflict (available from Middle East Books and More), along with several other books and journal articles. He has been a professor of history for 36 years, achieving the rank of distinguished professor.

Special Report

Why is Russia Involved in Yemen, Again?

By Dr. Mohammad Salami

Fishermen sit in their boat at a harbor in the southern city of Aden, situated at the mouth of the Red Sea, on Nov. 30, 2010.

IN RECENT MONTHS,the visit of officials from the Southern Transitional Council (STC) to Moscow shows the group’s growing ties with Russia. Moscow’s goal, from the beginning of these relations, is to secure its geopolitical interests and, of course, pursue economic and political goals.

Russia seeks to achieve these goals through close cooperation with the Transitional Council while trying to maintain its extensive relations with all parties involved in Yemen. Moscow’s policy is not to side with any particular party in the Yemeni political-military scene. It legitimizes the Abd-Rabbu Mansour al-Hadi administration, maintains ties with the Houthis, and respects the power-seeking attitudes of the southern movements. However, Russia’s main goal in southern Yemen is to gain military bases in the strategic Bab el-Mandeb Strait, which connects the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden.

Russia’s relations with Yemen are not new but began during 1960 civil war in Yemen, which ended with the formation of South Yemen—officially the “People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen.” The Soviet Union immediately recognized the country and South Yemen became the first country in the region to officially use communist ideas in governing, and maintained its extensive relations with the Soviet Union between 1967 and 1990. In 1990, South Yemen united with North Yemen and the Republic of Yemen was established. The relations between the two countries changed.

Mohammad Salami has a Ph.D. in International Relations. He writes as an analyst and columnist in various media outlets. His area of expertise is Middle East issues, especially Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and the GCC countries. This article was published by the Middle East Center for Reporting and Analysis <www. mideastcenter.org> on March 11. Reprinted with permission. RUSSIA’S GEOPOLITICAL GOALS IN SOUTHERN YEMEN

During the Cold War, Yemen was one of Moscow’s main priorities in the Middle East. Beginning in 1962, at an invitation from Egypt, which supported the Republicans in Yemen, the Soviet Union sent military “advisers” and equipment to Yemen. This presence was expanded after 1968, when Russia had a presence in the south

of the country. Moscow was allowed to specifically establish a naval base on Socotra. The base received 120 Soviet ships during its duration. The base, in the Gulf of Aden, enabled the Soviet Union to conduct continuous operations in the Indian Ocean until 1985.

Moreover, during the period 1968-1991, at least 5,245 Soviet military specialists served in Yemen. With the unification of Yemen in 1990, Russia lost the base and the equation changed in favor of the United States. But Russia is still dreaming of reestablishing a base on the island of Socotra, a strategic location at the entrance to the Gulf of Aden. Shipping traffic, on the way to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait and the Suez Canal, passes next to it.

In this regard, the former commander-inchief of the Russian navy, Feliks Gromov, and academics at Moscow’s Institute of Oriental Studies advised Russian authorities to regain former Soviet influence in Yemen. That is why Russia held the first talks with former president Ali Abdullah Saleh in order to have a base in the Red Sea. Saleh said, in an interview with Russia 2 TV, “In the fight against terrorism we reach out and offer all facilities. Our airports, our ports...We are ready to provide this to the Russian Federation.”

The Bab el-Mandeb Strait is strategically important to Russia and is Russia’s entry point into the Horn of Africa. The Horn is a trade and investment gateway to a continent brimming with economic potential that has drawn the attention of traditional partners and new entrants. Putin wants extensive ties with the Horn of Africa and has begun extensive economic and political relations with Kenya, Ethiopia and Eritrea. The long-term goal of Moscow’s foreign policy in the Horn of Africa is to establish military bases and increase trade with the region. To this end, Moscow seeks to establish a logistics center in Eritrea to increase trade with the country.

Russia also is exploring the possibility of creating a naval base in Somaliland, which would increase Moscow’s access to the Port of Berbera, co-owned by Somaliland, Ethiopia and a UAE company. In light of these projects, Russia prizes a military base in southern Yemen, as it would link these installations to the Arabian Peninsula.

POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC GOALS OF RUSSIA’S PRESENCE IN SOUTHERN YEMEN

One of Russia’s political goals in Yemen and, more broadly, the Middle East is to reduce U.S. influence in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf. After the two countries of North and South Yemen united, the role of the Soviet Union and later Russia in Yemen and the Persian Gulf diminished, and the U.S. replaced Russia in the Persian Gulf region and the Arabian Peninsula. Russia is now seeking to revive its traditional influence in the Persian Gulf, particularly Yemen, with the “Persian Gulf Peace” plan.

Russia thinks it can compete with the U.S. in Yemen because it can act as a mediator between different groups in Yemen, something the U.S. cannot do. This approach was actively implemented by a former head of the Russian government, Yevgeny Primakov, who, in his political activities, tried not to take the side of any of the participants in regional conflicts, preferring to be a friend to everyone. This allowed Moscow, through its intermediary role, to promote its own interests.

China also supports Russia’s peace plan in the Persian Gulf. It seems that the Arabs of the region are confused and in a dilemma over U.S.-Iranian relations in light of the JCPOA nuclear agreement and current U.S.-Iranian tensions. They seem ready to welcome a third party in the Persian Gulf.

One of Russia’s economic goals, with its growing presence in southern Yemen, is to increase its bargaining power in the oil conflict with Saudi Arabia. In March 2020, the two countries started an economic conflict over oil prices, and the world saw a 65 percent drop in oil prices. In this struggle, Russia, which had less oil reserves, suffered significant losses and its economy suffered. Russia’s goal now is to use the Bab el-Mandeb Strait to put pressure on Saudi Arabia’s oil economy, as 4.8 million barrels of oil pass through the Strait daily, and the Saudi oil industry is dependent on the Strait.

The key to Russia’s recent active role in Yemen is in its strategic neutrality. Russia acts as a mediator between the various groups involved in Yemen and has friendly relations with all the powers involved in the country, including the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Iran. It seems that Russia is pursuing geopolitical interests and an official military presence in Yemen, specifically the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, and this presence takes precedence over other Russian political and economic interests in Yemen.

Moscow is well aware that the United States has nearly 50,000 troops at 29 military bases in the Persian Gulf. Washington has more than 300 warplanes and hundreds of billions of dollars in arms sales in the region. The key to resolving the balance of power on the Arabian Peninsula in Moscow’s favor, it believes, is to have a physical presence in one of the world’s most geostrategic regions. ■

(Advertisement)

Coffee from Yemen men

Enjoy Al Mok Yha’s Yemeni c emeni co ee, available online and in-sto ore www.MiddleEastBooks.c com

eet NW1902 18th Str W, DC 20009 , DC 20009 0009

Talking Turkey

Erdogan, Turkey and the Rhetoric of “Reform” By Jonathan Gorvett

A protester argues with a Turkish policeman during a demonstration against Turkey's withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention, an international accord designed to protect women, in Istanbul, on March 20, 2021. Thousands protested in Turkey calling for President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to reverse his decision to withdraw from the world’s first binding treaty to prevent and combat violence against women.

Jonathan Gorvett is a free-lance writer specializing on European and Middle Eastern affairs.

WITH A GOOD DEAL of fanfare, March 2 saw Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan take the stage in Ankara to announce a brand new “Human Rights Action Plan” for the country.

Kicking off the launch by saying he was “for justice, no matter who is for or against it”—a quote from Malcolm X—the Turkish leader then said that the 11-point plan aimed “to further strengthen the rule of law, based on human rights.”

The presumption of innocence, freedom of expression, unfettered access to legal remedies, human dignity, equality before the law and more were stressed in the plan, which contains nine main aims, 50 targets and 393 actions.

Yet, no sooner had the announcement been made, than reasons for calling into doubt its sincerity began to emerge. Indeed, that very day, the deputy parliamentary chair of Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), Cahit Ozkan, called for the banning of the country’s second largest opposition grouping, the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP). On March 18, the chief prosecutor duly opened a case with the country’s top court to ban the grouping.

Erdogan had earlier seemed to suggest the same fate for Turkey’s largest opposition grouping, the Republican People’s Party (CHP). “We see that there is no place for a party called CHP in Turkey’s future,” he said on March 4, at an online meeting of AKP provincial heads.

Banning the opposition is by no means an untypical view in the Turkish government these days, while the practice of human rights can also be hard to spot. Currently, there are 37 journalists in prison in the country—the highest total in the world, after China.

Press censorship is also widespread. An example of this occurred just the day before the action plan was launched. The Turkish Radio and TV Supreme Council—the government-appointed broadcast sector’s regulatory body—issued a record-breaking fine to indepen-

dent TV channel Haberturk.

The fine was imposed over the failure of one of its presenters to “strongly object” to an opposition deputy’s on-air criticism of the government.

Elsewhere, a few days following the plan’s announcement, 18 women were detained, after attending an International Women’s Day demonstration in Istanbul.

The women were charged with “insulting” Erdogan by chanting, “Tayyip run, women are coming!” and “Jump, jump! Whoever doesn’t jump is Tayyip!” during the march. That chant was repeated on March 20 around the country, too, at demonstrations called after Erdogan issued a decree the night before, withdrawing Turkey from the Istanbul Convention, an international treaty on women’s rights.

“You have a situation in which the law is not functioning properly in Turkey,” Erdem Aydin, Turkey expert and director of consultancy at RDM Advisory, told the Washington Report.

The “Human Rights Action Plan” is unlikely to fix that. Instead, it may have more to do with the AKP’s shrinking popularity and Turkey’s increasing diplomatic and political isolation.

POWER AND POPULARITY

The most recent opinion polls show a steady decline in support for the AKP, along with its main partner in the ruling People’s Alliance (PA) coalition, the farright Nationalist Action Party (MHP).

Polling data from Istanbul Economics institute shows the PA hit a high of 48 percent support in April 2020, with this falling to 36.7 percent in February 2021. Within that, the AKP accounts for around 29 points and the MHP the remaining seven. At the last general election, in 2018, the AKP scored 42.56 percent, while the MHP scored 11.1 percent.

Turkey’s current election rules impose a 10 percent threshold on a party gaining representation in parliament. If an election were held today, the MHP would very likely fail to qualify to enter parliament.

Under constitutional changes pushed through by Erdogan back in 2017, a presidential system is currently operating. In this, the president is elected directly under a “50 percent + 1” rule, meaning the winner needs a majority of the total vote, rather than just being the most popular candidate.

Given current opinion polls, that may well not be Erdogan.

Indeed, a February poll by Avrasya Arastirma put the CHP mayor of Ankara, Mansur Yavas, and the CHP mayor of Istanbul, Ekrem Imamoglu, both ahead of Erdogan by a margin of 5-6 percentage points.

As a result, “Wrapped up in the package of human rights reforms,” says Ozgur Unluhisarcikli, the German Marshall Fund’s Ankara Director, “is a new election law that increases the chances of the ruling alliance maintaining power.”

This change would lower the 10 percent election threshold to 7 percent. It also introduces a “narrowed regional system” for constituencies, which will have the effect of adding deputies to AKP strongholds.

The AKP’s longer game plan is to also make changes to the presidential system.

“The Human Rights Action Plan is a precursor to constitutional change,” says Aydin, “because, while the 2017 changes gave more power to the president, even that doesn’t seem to be enough for Erdogan.”

A new constitution would likely ditch the “50 percent + 1” rule while also further centralizing power in the hands of the Presidential Palace.

ENTER BIDEN

The other driving force for the action plan is external pressure.

With the election of President Joe Biden, Erdogan lost the support he had in Washington from former President Donald Trump. Biden has been much more hostile —at time of writing, he had still not even called Erdogan, two months after the inauguration. The call seemed even more unlikely to come after Erdogan condemned Biden for calling Russian President Vladimir Putin a “killer” in an interview that aired on March 17.

“Erdogan knows Biden has more regard for democratic rights, so he is trying to preempt him by announcing this package,” says Unluhisarcikli.

The Turkish leader is also likely trying to pre-empt the European Union, which met on March 25-26 to decide whether to impose further sanctions on Turkey, following its disputes in the Eastern Mediterranean with Greece and Cyprus. Turkey’s poor human rights record is also a concern in Brussels.

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES

Few in Turkey would dispute that the country needs reforms in human rights and the rule of law.

“If judges and prosecutors give decisions the president doesn’t like, they get fired, one court refuses to obey another, people end up detained for years on ridiculous charges,” says Aydin. “More and more decisions are also centralized at the Palace, too, right down to what happens in a provincial town in Anatolia.”

Yet, the human rights package does little to address any of these concerns or bring justice to those still suffering under existing draconian laws.

“It’s window dressing,” says Aydin. “Democratization, reversing encroachment on judicial independence—none of these issues are addressed.”

Bad news for businessman and philanthropist Osman Kavala, in jail for the last three years, and for the former co-leader of the HDP, Selahattin Demirtas, in prison since 2016.

“Look around,” says Unluhisarcikli. “I don’t see any expansion of human rights, here.” ■

GIFT A BOOK OR A ONE-YEAR SUBSCRIPTION

Let Middle East Books and More and the Washington Report help you complete your holiday shopping! Visit MiddleEastBooks.com and wrmea.org/subscribe.

The Middle East in the Far East

Myanmar Coup: Former Israeli Secret Agent Ben-Menashe To the Rescue By John Gee

Posters featuring Senior General Min Aung Hlaing are placed on the road during a demonstration against the military coup in Yangon, Myanmar on March 9, 2021.

THE MILITARY JUNTA, established by the coup in Myanmar on February 1, found itself facing massive popular opposition and widespread international condemnation. Health workers and lawyers took to the streets to protest and trade unions struck. Young people were at the forefront of peaceful protests against the coup, staging demonstrations day after day, despite the arrest of more than 2,000 people, including elected representatives, human rights advocates and protesters, as well as beatings and killings by state forces that had claimed the lives of over 261 people by March 22.

Protesters came from almost all strata of society and different ethnic groups, including Muslims who had kept their heads down since the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine state in 2017.

Countries with democratically elected governments were overwhelmingly condemnatory of the coup. Sanctions against military leaders were introduced or reinforced by the U.S., and some companies with Myanmar interests pulled out or suspended operations. Even China and Russia, arms-supplying states that have had a strong relationship with Myanmar’s military, seemed embarrassed by the evident unpopularity of the coup and the isolation of the junta. They adopted a pose of neutrality in the conflict between the army leadership and the people, while managing to water down a U.N. Security Council resolution so that it condemned violent repression of protesters but avoided calling the military take over a “coup” or calling for meaningful action to restore the elected authorities.

Soon after the coup, 137 non-governmental organizations from 31 countries called upon the United Nations Security Council to impose a worldwide arms embargo on Myanmar. They called on governments that allow arms exports to Myanmar to stop the supply of weapons, ammunition and military equipment immediately.

John Gee is a free-lance journalist based in Singapore and the author of Unequal Conflict: The Palestinians and Israel.