26 may 2015
South Africa used to distinguish between two types of apartheid.
The first, called “petty”apartheid, included the separation of public amenities like public benches, bathrooms and public transportation.
The second, called “grand” apartheid, included the division of territory and political rights, under which separate areas were allocated in which blacks were forced to live.
Residents of these areas were deprived of South African citizenship,with the government claiming that these territories, known as Bantustans, were essentially independent states. While it was easy to photograph petty apartheid, which had blatant expression in signs saying “For Whites Only,” the impact of grand apartheid was no less harsh.
The attempt to make the Palestinians in the territories travel on segregated buses drew such fire that the plan was criticized by the right as well as the left. Segregated buses have great symbolic power, as they remind everyone of the fight put up by Rosa Parks,the American black woman who refused to sit at the back of the bus in 1955. It’s an aspect of apartheid that photographs clearly, even though it is merely one aspect of petty apartheid; the most conspicuous aspect of the segregation that is the basis of the Israeli regime in the territories.
This regime contains components of grand apartheid as well; a regime which determines that Jews are allowed to live here, and Arabs are allowed to live there – and not on an equal footing.
It’s a regime based on separation and dispossession of land and water resources, as well as the resources of the rule of law. The law is not enforced equitably in the territories; not only are there separate legal and judicial systems for the Jewish and Arab populations, but law enforcement breaks down when it comes to attacks by Israelis on Palestinians.
Thus, by objecting to petty apartheid, right-wing politicians are persuading themselves,and some of us as well, that they are “enlightened,” while grand apartheid carries on.
Israelis and Palestinians are segregated in the territories not just in terms of residential areas and housing, but also in the realms of education, health care and welfare. Israeli law applies there to Israeli citizens and Jewish foreign nationals across the board, including a number of laws meant to apply only to residents of the state.
For the purpose of the National Health Insurance Law, for example, a Jew who lives in the territories is considered a state resident eligible for the rights that the law confers, but the same law does not apply to his Palestinian neighbor, who is dependent on a different, weaker health system.
On top of all this, just as blacks were deprived of political rights in South Africa by grand apartheid, a section hidden at the end of the Knesset Elections Law titled “Specia lInstructions” gives Israeli residents of the territories the right to vote for Knesset, an option that in principle is not available to those living outside the country’s recognized borders.
This right is not given to the local Palestinians. Thus, under the cover of the supposedly temporary character of the occupation, the segregation regime gains legitimacy.
What in a different situation would be considered apartheid is tolerated by many because it is ostensibly temporary. But the occupation has long stopped being temporary; it is indefinite in time, as the settlements themselves demonstrate.
Even after the apartheid bus plan was dropped, this fact hasn’t changed. That’s why we cannot let the debate over the buses hide the fact that grand apartheid, characterized by inherent inequality between Jews and Arabs in all areas of life in the territories, is no less serious in its dimensions, and in many ways more serious, than segregated buses.
The first, called “petty”apartheid, included the separation of public amenities like public benches, bathrooms and public transportation.
The second, called “grand” apartheid, included the division of territory and political rights, under which separate areas were allocated in which blacks were forced to live.
Residents of these areas were deprived of South African citizenship,with the government claiming that these territories, known as Bantustans, were essentially independent states. While it was easy to photograph petty apartheid, which had blatant expression in signs saying “For Whites Only,” the impact of grand apartheid was no less harsh.
The attempt to make the Palestinians in the territories travel on segregated buses drew such fire that the plan was criticized by the right as well as the left. Segregated buses have great symbolic power, as they remind everyone of the fight put up by Rosa Parks,the American black woman who refused to sit at the back of the bus in 1955. It’s an aspect of apartheid that photographs clearly, even though it is merely one aspect of petty apartheid; the most conspicuous aspect of the segregation that is the basis of the Israeli regime in the territories.
This regime contains components of grand apartheid as well; a regime which determines that Jews are allowed to live here, and Arabs are allowed to live there – and not on an equal footing.
It’s a regime based on separation and dispossession of land and water resources, as well as the resources of the rule of law. The law is not enforced equitably in the territories; not only are there separate legal and judicial systems for the Jewish and Arab populations, but law enforcement breaks down when it comes to attacks by Israelis on Palestinians.
Thus, by objecting to petty apartheid, right-wing politicians are persuading themselves,and some of us as well, that they are “enlightened,” while grand apartheid carries on.
Israelis and Palestinians are segregated in the territories not just in terms of residential areas and housing, but also in the realms of education, health care and welfare. Israeli law applies there to Israeli citizens and Jewish foreign nationals across the board, including a number of laws meant to apply only to residents of the state.
For the purpose of the National Health Insurance Law, for example, a Jew who lives in the territories is considered a state resident eligible for the rights that the law confers, but the same law does not apply to his Palestinian neighbor, who is dependent on a different, weaker health system.
On top of all this, just as blacks were deprived of political rights in South Africa by grand apartheid, a section hidden at the end of the Knesset Elections Law titled “Specia lInstructions” gives Israeli residents of the territories the right to vote for Knesset, an option that in principle is not available to those living outside the country’s recognized borders.
This right is not given to the local Palestinians. Thus, under the cover of the supposedly temporary character of the occupation, the segregation regime gains legitimacy.
What in a different situation would be considered apartheid is tolerated by many because it is ostensibly temporary. But the occupation has long stopped being temporary; it is indefinite in time, as the settlements themselves demonstrate.
Even after the apartheid bus plan was dropped, this fact hasn’t changed. That’s why we cannot let the debate over the buses hide the fact that grand apartheid, characterized by inherent inequality between Jews and Arabs in all areas of life in the territories, is no less serious in its dimensions, and in many ways more serious, than segregated buses.
Office of Christian Schools in occupied Palestine
On Wednesday, the 27th of May 2015, at 11:00 AM, an unprecedented demonstration will be held in the plaza in front of the Lev Ram building in Jerusalem (Ministry of Education headquarters) by the Christian Schools in Israel protesting on the discriminatory policy of the Ministry of Education towards their schools.
Participants in the demonstration will include clergymen (Bishops, Priests, Nuns, and Pastors) in addition to parents of children in Christian schools throughout the country.
The Christian schools in Israel consist of more than 30,000 students, almost equally divided between Christians and non-Christians. Most of these schools were Palestinian, and began operating years before the establishment of Israel. They were built and developed through donations from abroad. They provided and still providing the general Arab community with quality education that has resulted in the high achievements of the Christian schools. This high quality education is displayed, among other things, in the number of Christian schools listed at the top of the Ministry of Education's published categories. While achieving high academic results, they also teach their students Christian doctrine and instruct them according to the Christian values of loving others, forgiveness and tolerance.
These schools belong to the "recognized but not public" classification of schools in the Ministry of Education and receive partial funding from the Ministry. The rest of their funding comes from fees that are collected from the parents.
For years, the Ministry of Education has been consistently cutting the budget of Christian schools (45% in the last 10 years). This has forced the Christian schools to raise the service fees that are collected from the parents to a level that has become a heavy burden on the parents, especially for parents from the Arab sector where the average family income is well known to be lower than the national average.
Last year the Ministry of Education issued new regulations that even limited the ability of Christian schools to collect fees from the parents. The combination of these two things, substantial budget cuts and limiting allowable fees, is actually viewed as a death penalty for these schools.
A committee appointed by the Office of Christian Schools in Israel held negotiations for 8 months with the Ministry of Education where the Ministry proposed that the Christian schools become public schools. This proposal was seen by the owners of the schools (churches, monasteries, etc.) as the end of the Christian, value-based educational enterprise and even a critical blow to the Christian minority in the Holy Land. In light of that, the Christian schools decided to end these negotiations.
The owners of these schools from around the world (The Vatican, Germany, England, France, Scotland, USA and others) are aware of this crisis and are watching with growing concern.
The protestors in the demonstration will be demanding that the Ministry of Education fully fund the Christian schools, just like other educational networks, and thus lift the burden from the shoulders of the parents and cancel the need for them to pay the service fees to the Christian schools.
For any further information - contact Father Abed Elmasih Fahim, head of the Christian Schools' office at 050-5376481.
On Wednesday, the 27th of May 2015, at 11:00 AM, an unprecedented demonstration will be held in the plaza in front of the Lev Ram building in Jerusalem (Ministry of Education headquarters) by the Christian Schools in Israel protesting on the discriminatory policy of the Ministry of Education towards their schools.
Participants in the demonstration will include clergymen (Bishops, Priests, Nuns, and Pastors) in addition to parents of children in Christian schools throughout the country.
The Christian schools in Israel consist of more than 30,000 students, almost equally divided between Christians and non-Christians. Most of these schools were Palestinian, and began operating years before the establishment of Israel. They were built and developed through donations from abroad. They provided and still providing the general Arab community with quality education that has resulted in the high achievements of the Christian schools. This high quality education is displayed, among other things, in the number of Christian schools listed at the top of the Ministry of Education's published categories. While achieving high academic results, they also teach their students Christian doctrine and instruct them according to the Christian values of loving others, forgiveness and tolerance.
These schools belong to the "recognized but not public" classification of schools in the Ministry of Education and receive partial funding from the Ministry. The rest of their funding comes from fees that are collected from the parents.
For years, the Ministry of Education has been consistently cutting the budget of Christian schools (45% in the last 10 years). This has forced the Christian schools to raise the service fees that are collected from the parents to a level that has become a heavy burden on the parents, especially for parents from the Arab sector where the average family income is well known to be lower than the national average.
Last year the Ministry of Education issued new regulations that even limited the ability of Christian schools to collect fees from the parents. The combination of these two things, substantial budget cuts and limiting allowable fees, is actually viewed as a death penalty for these schools.
A committee appointed by the Office of Christian Schools in Israel held negotiations for 8 months with the Ministry of Education where the Ministry proposed that the Christian schools become public schools. This proposal was seen by the owners of the schools (churches, monasteries, etc.) as the end of the Christian, value-based educational enterprise and even a critical blow to the Christian minority in the Holy Land. In light of that, the Christian schools decided to end these negotiations.
The owners of these schools from around the world (The Vatican, Germany, England, France, Scotland, USA and others) are aware of this crisis and are watching with growing concern.
The protestors in the demonstration will be demanding that the Ministry of Education fully fund the Christian schools, just like other educational networks, and thus lift the burden from the shoulders of the parents and cancel the need for them to pay the service fees to the Christian schools.
For any further information - contact Father Abed Elmasih Fahim, head of the Christian Schools' office at 050-5376481.
Gilad Erdan (front,right, light blue-shirt)
The Israeli cabinet has approved the appointment of senior Likud Party member Gilad Erdan as minister of public security, strategic affairs and public diplomacy, Israel's public radio reported yesterday.
The broadcaster said that Erdan, a former interior minister, was expected to be sworn in yesterday before the Knesset.
The radio station reported that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had agreed with Erdan that the latter would lead Israeli efforts to block Iran's nuclear programme and resist worldwide boycott campaigns against Israel following the Palestinian Authority's recent accession to several international bodies.
Erdan's delayed addition to Israel's new cabinet – which comes ten days after the new government was sworn in before the Knesset – was due to a row with Netanyahu over which cabinet portfolio the influential Likud figure would be given.
Earlier this month, Knesset members gave a vote of confidence to the new government – which is led by Netanyahu, who is also leader of the Likud party – with 61 out of 120 voting in favour of the motion.
The Israeli cabinet has approved the appointment of senior Likud Party member Gilad Erdan as minister of public security, strategic affairs and public diplomacy, Israel's public radio reported yesterday.
The broadcaster said that Erdan, a former interior minister, was expected to be sworn in yesterday before the Knesset.
The radio station reported that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had agreed with Erdan that the latter would lead Israeli efforts to block Iran's nuclear programme and resist worldwide boycott campaigns against Israel following the Palestinian Authority's recent accession to several international bodies.
Erdan's delayed addition to Israel's new cabinet – which comes ten days after the new government was sworn in before the Knesset – was due to a row with Netanyahu over which cabinet portfolio the influential Likud figure would be given.
Earlier this month, Knesset members gave a vote of confidence to the new government – which is led by Netanyahu, who is also leader of the Likud party – with 61 out of 120 voting in favour of the motion.
Prime Minister Netanyahu meets with EU foreign policy chief Mogherini
Western diplomat says PM told EU foreign policy chief talks should define West Bank areas in which Israel can continue building; another diplomat says this is just 'illusion of progress'.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has proposed resuming peace negotiations with the Palestinians but with the initial focus on identifying those Jewish settlements that Israel would keep and be allowed to expand, an Israeli official said on Tuesday.
Peace talks collapsed in April 2014 over Israeli settlement-building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, areas Palestinians seek for a state, and after Abbas angered Israel by reaching a unity deal with the Islamist group Hamas in Gaza. Asked about Netanyahu's position, a spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said settlement activity had to stop altogether before peace talks resume and that all core issues of the conflict with Israel needed to be addressed simultaneously.
In a meeting in Jerusalem on Wednesday, Netanyahu told Federica Mogherini, the European Union's foreign policy chief, that some of the land Israel captured in the 1967 Six-Day War would remain in its hands while other parts would be left under Palestinian control, the Israeli official said. "Therefore negotiations should be resumed in order to define those areas in which we can build," the official said, quoting Netanyahu.
The remarks were first reported in the left-wing Israeli newspaper Haaretz. With the inauguration two weeks ago of his new right-wing government following March elections, Netanyahu faces US and EU calls to re-engage with the Palestinians and also the threat of stronger pressure to curb construction in settlements, which most countries regard as illegal.
Western diplomats have said Netanyahu - who raised international concern by saying on the eve of the election that no Palestinian state would be established on his watch - will now be closely scrutinized over his settlement policy. An understanding on settlements in peace talks would enable Israel to keep construction going without raising the wrath of its Western allies.
It could also appease hardliners in Netanyahu's government who want to see more construction. One Western diplomat familiar with what occurred at the meeting with Mogherini said Netanyahu's proposal showed some change in his position, but not enough to restart peace talks. "Up until now, Netanyahu has refused to put any maps on the table, so in that respect it was quite substantial. He was talking about borders in one way or another, even if it was based around the acceptance of existing settlement blocs," the official said. Another Western diplomat described Netanyahu's proposal as creating "the illusion of progress".
"Netanyahu was trying to show that he is committed to peace and ready for negotiations, but he knows the Palestinians would never agree to begin on this basis," the diplomat said.
Western diplomat says PM told EU foreign policy chief talks should define West Bank areas in which Israel can continue building; another diplomat says this is just 'illusion of progress'.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has proposed resuming peace negotiations with the Palestinians but with the initial focus on identifying those Jewish settlements that Israel would keep and be allowed to expand, an Israeli official said on Tuesday.
Peace talks collapsed in April 2014 over Israeli settlement-building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, areas Palestinians seek for a state, and after Abbas angered Israel by reaching a unity deal with the Islamist group Hamas in Gaza. Asked about Netanyahu's position, a spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said settlement activity had to stop altogether before peace talks resume and that all core issues of the conflict with Israel needed to be addressed simultaneously.
In a meeting in Jerusalem on Wednesday, Netanyahu told Federica Mogherini, the European Union's foreign policy chief, that some of the land Israel captured in the 1967 Six-Day War would remain in its hands while other parts would be left under Palestinian control, the Israeli official said. "Therefore negotiations should be resumed in order to define those areas in which we can build," the official said, quoting Netanyahu.
The remarks were first reported in the left-wing Israeli newspaper Haaretz. With the inauguration two weeks ago of his new right-wing government following March elections, Netanyahu faces US and EU calls to re-engage with the Palestinians and also the threat of stronger pressure to curb construction in settlements, which most countries regard as illegal.
Western diplomats have said Netanyahu - who raised international concern by saying on the eve of the election that no Palestinian state would be established on his watch - will now be closely scrutinized over his settlement policy. An understanding on settlements in peace talks would enable Israel to keep construction going without raising the wrath of its Western allies.
It could also appease hardliners in Netanyahu's government who want to see more construction. One Western diplomat familiar with what occurred at the meeting with Mogherini said Netanyahu's proposal showed some change in his position, but not enough to restart peace talks. "Up until now, Netanyahu has refused to put any maps on the table, so in that respect it was quite substantial. He was talking about borders in one way or another, even if it was based around the acceptance of existing settlement blocs," the official said. Another Western diplomat described Netanyahu's proposal as creating "the illusion of progress".
"Netanyahu was trying to show that he is committed to peace and ready for negotiations, but he knows the Palestinians would never agree to begin on this basis," the diplomat said.
Netanyahu made public promise to Barkat not to appoint Jerusalem affairs minister
Prime minister gives Ze'ev Elkin the Jerusalem portfolio even though he made a public promise not to appoint minister to the position after disputes between Barkat and previous minister Bennett crippled capital's development.
Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat harshly criticized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday, saying the prime minister broke his public promise not to appoint a minister to the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry.
Netanyahu appointed Immigrant Absorption Minister Ze'ev Elkin as minister of Jerusalem and Diaspora affairs on Monday night as compensation after Elkin had to give up the Strategic Affairs portfolio for Gilad Erdan.
"I regret to learn that cheap political considerations will lead to a waste of public money and unnecessary bureaucracy that will make it harder for the government and municipality to promote and develop Jerusalem," said Barkat, who is a prominent Likud member and considered close to Netanyahu.
In February, during the elections campaign, Netanyahu declared to the media while standing next to Barkat that he would not appoint a minister for Jerusalem affairs and that he would deal with the ministry's responsibilities himself.
Netanyahu worked to find a compromise between his promise to Barkat and Elkin's request until the late hours of the night Monday, with Likud officials saying the prime minister only promised not to give the portfolio to one of his coalition partners, specifically to Bayit Yehudi chairman Naftali Bennett who asked to keep it after holding it in the previous government.
According to the Likud, Barkat was summoned to a meeting with Netanyahu, who included the mayor in the move and gave the portfolio to Elkin only after the three reached understandings on how Elkin would manage the ministry, particularly with regards to disputed issues, which will be resolved by the prime minister.
Barkat, however, presented a different story. "The decision to re-open the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry was made against my opinion and contradicts the prime minister's commitment and the government decision that was approved on Jerusalem Day, according to which the Prime Minister's Office will be in charge of the development and promotion of the city in cooperation with the mayor and municipality," he said. "Jerusalem is not a consolation prize for anyone," he added.
The battle for Jerusalem: Barkat vs. Bennett
Barkat's demand not to appoint a minister for Jerusalem affairs was the result of many disputes the mayor had with the minister in the previous term - Naftali Bennett. They had a hard time working together and many projects were stuck or delayed because of professional and political disputes between the two.
One such dispute was over the appointment of a chairman and director-general to the Jerusalem Development Authority, a body under the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry rather than the municipality, which was supposed to promote multi-annual development projects in the city. Moshe Lion served as the chairman of the Authority until the 2013 elections, and retired when he announced he was running for Jerusalem mayor.
Barkat and Bennett could not agree on the appointments for over a year, during which the Authority operated without a chairman. At the height of the dispute, Barkat decided to appoint himself as temporary director-general to the chagrin of the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry officials. Throughout Bennett's term as Minister of Jerusalem Affairs, Barkat's office viewed the ministry's operations as a hindrance rather than an aiding body, and the ministry did not fulfill its role as liaison between the municipality and the government. Another dispute between Barkat and Bennett's offices was over the use of budget funds meant for the development of Jerusalem.
For example, in December, the municipality's director-general argued with his counterpart at the ministry over the allocation of a government budget for the development of small businesses who suffered damages as a result of Operation Protective Edge. The ministry refused the demand and claimed government budgets were meant for long-term projects rather than the "daily operations of the municipality."
On the municipality's demand to transfer government budgets for the development of Jerusalem, the ministry's director-general wrote: "Your letter to me raises the concern it is another link in the continuous attempt on behalf of the Jerusalem municipality to weaken the Jerusalem Development Authority and divert its budget to the municipality's daily operations.
This move is hurtful, regretful and illustrates the municipality's inability to cooperate and work in appropriate synchronization with the Israeli government. I hope the Jerusalem municipality changes this attitude and works with greater vigor to implement a strategic policy of long-term and sustainable development of Jerusalem." The issue was resolved only after Barkat and Bennett met, and several months later the two agreed to transfer government budgets to aid small businesses.
Elkin's threats and Erdan's gains
On Monday, before being given the Jerusalem portfolio, Elkin told his close confidants that if he is not given another ministry to replace the Strategic Affairs portfolio he had to give up, he was prepared not to return to the government and remain an MK. While he did not threaten to miss important votes at the Knesset, he said that on certain issues he will "behave like a minister who has been fired."
Erdan, for whom Elkin had to give up the Strategic Affairs portfolio, gave into Netanyahu's conditions on Monday, joining the government without receiving the Interior Ministry he demanded initially. Instead, Erdan will serve as the public security minister as well as strategic affairs minister and minister for public relations (hasbara).
He will also receive an addition to the Public Security Ministry's budget worth hundreds of millions of shekels. Among his responsibilities will be representing Israel in the international arena in the fight against the Iranian nuclear program. He will also set up a public relations office, which will "operate against attempts to de-legitimize Israel in the world and the boycott against Israel." These responsibilities were meant to be part of the Foreign Ministry, which was taken apart in Netanyahu's fourth government.
Erdan explained his decision on Facebook, "When I thought I was not given the necessary conditions to promote a real change in the police and to our personal security, I preferred to give up the role... now that I've been promised the appropriate tools, I have the ability to act and lead to changes." Elkin was not the only one to suffer a blow from Erdan's appointment.
Benny Begin, who was appointed minister without portfolio, will have to resign after only 11 days to make room for Erdan - as Likud has been allocated only 12 ministers in the government. Energy and Water Minister Yuval Steinitz, meanwhile, had to give up his job as the minister in charge of the fight against the Iranian nuclear program.
Prime minister gives Ze'ev Elkin the Jerusalem portfolio even though he made a public promise not to appoint minister to the position after disputes between Barkat and previous minister Bennett crippled capital's development.
Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat harshly criticized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday, saying the prime minister broke his public promise not to appoint a minister to the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry.
Netanyahu appointed Immigrant Absorption Minister Ze'ev Elkin as minister of Jerusalem and Diaspora affairs on Monday night as compensation after Elkin had to give up the Strategic Affairs portfolio for Gilad Erdan.
"I regret to learn that cheap political considerations will lead to a waste of public money and unnecessary bureaucracy that will make it harder for the government and municipality to promote and develop Jerusalem," said Barkat, who is a prominent Likud member and considered close to Netanyahu.
In February, during the elections campaign, Netanyahu declared to the media while standing next to Barkat that he would not appoint a minister for Jerusalem affairs and that he would deal with the ministry's responsibilities himself.
Netanyahu worked to find a compromise between his promise to Barkat and Elkin's request until the late hours of the night Monday, with Likud officials saying the prime minister only promised not to give the portfolio to one of his coalition partners, specifically to Bayit Yehudi chairman Naftali Bennett who asked to keep it after holding it in the previous government.
According to the Likud, Barkat was summoned to a meeting with Netanyahu, who included the mayor in the move and gave the portfolio to Elkin only after the three reached understandings on how Elkin would manage the ministry, particularly with regards to disputed issues, which will be resolved by the prime minister.
Barkat, however, presented a different story. "The decision to re-open the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry was made against my opinion and contradicts the prime minister's commitment and the government decision that was approved on Jerusalem Day, according to which the Prime Minister's Office will be in charge of the development and promotion of the city in cooperation with the mayor and municipality," he said. "Jerusalem is not a consolation prize for anyone," he added.
The battle for Jerusalem: Barkat vs. Bennett
Barkat's demand not to appoint a minister for Jerusalem affairs was the result of many disputes the mayor had with the minister in the previous term - Naftali Bennett. They had a hard time working together and many projects were stuck or delayed because of professional and political disputes between the two.
One such dispute was over the appointment of a chairman and director-general to the Jerusalem Development Authority, a body under the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry rather than the municipality, which was supposed to promote multi-annual development projects in the city. Moshe Lion served as the chairman of the Authority until the 2013 elections, and retired when he announced he was running for Jerusalem mayor.
Barkat and Bennett could not agree on the appointments for over a year, during which the Authority operated without a chairman. At the height of the dispute, Barkat decided to appoint himself as temporary director-general to the chagrin of the Jerusalem Affairs Ministry officials. Throughout Bennett's term as Minister of Jerusalem Affairs, Barkat's office viewed the ministry's operations as a hindrance rather than an aiding body, and the ministry did not fulfill its role as liaison between the municipality and the government. Another dispute between Barkat and Bennett's offices was over the use of budget funds meant for the development of Jerusalem.
For example, in December, the municipality's director-general argued with his counterpart at the ministry over the allocation of a government budget for the development of small businesses who suffered damages as a result of Operation Protective Edge. The ministry refused the demand and claimed government budgets were meant for long-term projects rather than the "daily operations of the municipality."
On the municipality's demand to transfer government budgets for the development of Jerusalem, the ministry's director-general wrote: "Your letter to me raises the concern it is another link in the continuous attempt on behalf of the Jerusalem municipality to weaken the Jerusalem Development Authority and divert its budget to the municipality's daily operations.
This move is hurtful, regretful and illustrates the municipality's inability to cooperate and work in appropriate synchronization with the Israeli government. I hope the Jerusalem municipality changes this attitude and works with greater vigor to implement a strategic policy of long-term and sustainable development of Jerusalem." The issue was resolved only after Barkat and Bennett met, and several months later the two agreed to transfer government budgets to aid small businesses.
Elkin's threats and Erdan's gains
On Monday, before being given the Jerusalem portfolio, Elkin told his close confidants that if he is not given another ministry to replace the Strategic Affairs portfolio he had to give up, he was prepared not to return to the government and remain an MK. While he did not threaten to miss important votes at the Knesset, he said that on certain issues he will "behave like a minister who has been fired."
Erdan, for whom Elkin had to give up the Strategic Affairs portfolio, gave into Netanyahu's conditions on Monday, joining the government without receiving the Interior Ministry he demanded initially. Instead, Erdan will serve as the public security minister as well as strategic affairs minister and minister for public relations (hasbara).
He will also receive an addition to the Public Security Ministry's budget worth hundreds of millions of shekels. Among his responsibilities will be representing Israel in the international arena in the fight against the Iranian nuclear program. He will also set up a public relations office, which will "operate against attempts to de-legitimize Israel in the world and the boycott against Israel." These responsibilities were meant to be part of the Foreign Ministry, which was taken apart in Netanyahu's fourth government.
Erdan explained his decision on Facebook, "When I thought I was not given the necessary conditions to promote a real change in the police and to our personal security, I preferred to give up the role... now that I've been promised the appropriate tools, I have the ability to act and lead to changes." Elkin was not the only one to suffer a blow from Erdan's appointment.
Benny Begin, who was appointed minister without portfolio, will have to resign after only 11 days to make room for Erdan - as Likud has been allocated only 12 ministers in the government. Energy and Water Minister Yuval Steinitz, meanwhile, had to give up his job as the minister in charge of the fight against the Iranian nuclear program.
The coming period will be critical for the future of the peace process, with concerns growing about the lack of a horizon for the resumption of negotiations towards a two-state solution, according to the latest report issued by the Office of the United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process (UNSCO). The report will be presented to the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) at the twice annual meeting in Brussels on May 27, 2015.
The report warns that maintaining the current untenable status quo will "inexorably lead to the continued erosion of living conditions for Palestinians and for Israelis alike and will undermine the security and stability of all." It notes the call by UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Nickolay Mladenov during his recent briefing to the Security Council on both parties "to expend every effort to build upon existing agreements, including relevant UN Security Council resolutions, the Roadmap and the Arab Peace Initiative, to gain momentum towards a final status agreement."
The report reiterates the call on the new Government of Israel to take credible steps to reaffirm its commitment to a two-state solution, including a freeze of settlement activity, to promote a resumption of meaningful negotiations. Continued security cooperation between Palestinian and Israeli authorities also remains a cornerstone of a peaceful resolution.
The political and security situation in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, continues to deteriorate with heightened levels of violence and renewed settlement activities, the report states. On Area C, the report notes that "the United Nations continues to support local Palestinian authorities in developing adequate social infrastructure... but the programme faces challenges due to the slow pace of Israeli approvals." It also expresses concerns about recent moves to relocate Bedouin communities near Abu Nwar in the politically sensitive E1 area of the West Bank that may be linked to further settlement construction.
The report also highlights the considerable challenge in putting the Government of Palestine's finances on a stable footing. "While the recent release of outstanding tax revenues by Israel is welcome, it is essential that agreement on a sustainable solution on tax collection in line with the Paris Protocol of the Oslo Accords is reached," the report underscored.
Turning to the Gaza Strip, the report notes that the United Nations objective remains to see the lifting of all closures within the framework of Security Council resolution 1860 (2009) in a manner which addresses Israel's legitimate security concerns. In the absence of such a change, the Gaza Reconstruction Mechanism (GRM) remains the only available option to facilitate the entry of "dual use" materials necessary for reconstruction. To date, close to 85,000 of the 100,000 households in need of construction materials to repair their partially destroyed homes have received materials. The report also highlights that out of the 168 projects submitted by the private sector and the international community, 85 projects are approved and eight are ongoing.
Turning to the challenges of intra-Palestinian reconciliation and unity, the report welcomes Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah's efforts towards finding a solution for public sector employees in Gaza and encourages all factions to support his initiative. "The United Nations also stands ready to work with all stakeholders and support the Government's efforts. A comprehensive reconciliation must include the GNC resuming control over the crossings into Israel and Egypt. The responsibility for addressing these issues lies first and foremost with the Palestinian authorities," the report adds.
The Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) serves as the principal policy-level coordination mechanism for development assistance to the oPt. The AHLC is chaired by Norway and co-sponsored by the EU and the US. In addition, the United Nations participates together with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The AHLC seeks to promote dialogue between donors, the Palestinian Authority and the Government of Israel. The full report to the AHLC prepared by the Office of the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process is attached to this release and includes an executive summary of its main conclusions.
The report warns that maintaining the current untenable status quo will "inexorably lead to the continued erosion of living conditions for Palestinians and for Israelis alike and will undermine the security and stability of all." It notes the call by UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Nickolay Mladenov during his recent briefing to the Security Council on both parties "to expend every effort to build upon existing agreements, including relevant UN Security Council resolutions, the Roadmap and the Arab Peace Initiative, to gain momentum towards a final status agreement."
The report reiterates the call on the new Government of Israel to take credible steps to reaffirm its commitment to a two-state solution, including a freeze of settlement activity, to promote a resumption of meaningful negotiations. Continued security cooperation between Palestinian and Israeli authorities also remains a cornerstone of a peaceful resolution.
The political and security situation in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, continues to deteriorate with heightened levels of violence and renewed settlement activities, the report states. On Area C, the report notes that "the United Nations continues to support local Palestinian authorities in developing adequate social infrastructure... but the programme faces challenges due to the slow pace of Israeli approvals." It also expresses concerns about recent moves to relocate Bedouin communities near Abu Nwar in the politically sensitive E1 area of the West Bank that may be linked to further settlement construction.
The report also highlights the considerable challenge in putting the Government of Palestine's finances on a stable footing. "While the recent release of outstanding tax revenues by Israel is welcome, it is essential that agreement on a sustainable solution on tax collection in line with the Paris Protocol of the Oslo Accords is reached," the report underscored.
Turning to the Gaza Strip, the report notes that the United Nations objective remains to see the lifting of all closures within the framework of Security Council resolution 1860 (2009) in a manner which addresses Israel's legitimate security concerns. In the absence of such a change, the Gaza Reconstruction Mechanism (GRM) remains the only available option to facilitate the entry of "dual use" materials necessary for reconstruction. To date, close to 85,000 of the 100,000 households in need of construction materials to repair their partially destroyed homes have received materials. The report also highlights that out of the 168 projects submitted by the private sector and the international community, 85 projects are approved and eight are ongoing.
Turning to the challenges of intra-Palestinian reconciliation and unity, the report welcomes Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah's efforts towards finding a solution for public sector employees in Gaza and encourages all factions to support his initiative. "The United Nations also stands ready to work with all stakeholders and support the Government's efforts. A comprehensive reconciliation must include the GNC resuming control over the crossings into Israel and Egypt. The responsibility for addressing these issues lies first and foremost with the Palestinian authorities," the report adds.
The Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) serves as the principal policy-level coordination mechanism for development assistance to the oPt. The AHLC is chaired by Norway and co-sponsored by the EU and the US. In addition, the United Nations participates together with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The AHLC seeks to promote dialogue between donors, the Palestinian Authority and the Government of Israel. The full report to the AHLC prepared by the Office of the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process is attached to this release and includes an executive summary of its main conclusions.
25 may 2015
Report in London-based publication details series of political challenges before Netanyahu, says PM leaning further right.
The influential magazine The Economist, claimed in an article published Sunday that the guidelines of the new Israeli government further undermine the already fragile relations between Jerusalem and the world.
The article analyzes the sensitive situation of Israel's foreign relations, detailing a list of difficulties with which Netanyahu is dealing with these days, starting with the French initiative to recognize a Palestinian state, then the possible European Union boycott of products made in the settlements, and concluding with the demand to suspend Israeli football from international play.
Referring to Barack Obama's interview with the Atlantic in which he admitted his administration's failure to solve the Israel-Palestine conflict, the article said that, "despite Mr. Obama’s apparent acceptance of defeat, he is quietly talking to European governments about their plans to squeeze Israel harder.
François Hollande, France’s president, wants a UN Security Council resolution to set a clear timetable for negotiations leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state. Mr. Obama has asked France not to pursue its initiative until a deal is signed with Iran curbing its nuclear program, which he hopes will be by the end of June. But he is not insisting that it be abandoned."
The article goes on to say that, "the American administration lacks the stomach for more than one diplomatic crisis with Israel at a time. An accord with Iran will be followed by a showdown in Congress, where Israel’s many supporters will try to scupper the deal. In the meantime, the French are gathering support from Arab and European governments.
The resolution is expected to call, among other things, for Jerusalem to serve as the capital of both Israel and Palestine." Although in the past the US has vetoed UN resolutions calling for a joint capital, Israel now fears that Obama is considering changing that practice and may in the future abstain on such votes.
Other threats to Netanyahu's government discussed in the article are the possibility of EU labeling products made in the West Bank, potential EU limits on EU financing of joint research, the Palestinians threatening to indict Israel for war crimes at the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the recent call of Jibril Rajoub, head of the Palestinian Football Association, to suspend Israel from participating in international football tournaments.
The article sums up by stating that, "some outsiders hope that a bit of pressure will spur Mr. Netanyahu to adjust his right-wing coalition, bringing Labor into the government with Mr. Herzog as foreign minister. But from the tone of his government’s first week, Mr. Netanyahu is currently facing in the opposite direction."
The influential magazine The Economist, claimed in an article published Sunday that the guidelines of the new Israeli government further undermine the already fragile relations between Jerusalem and the world.
The article analyzes the sensitive situation of Israel's foreign relations, detailing a list of difficulties with which Netanyahu is dealing with these days, starting with the French initiative to recognize a Palestinian state, then the possible European Union boycott of products made in the settlements, and concluding with the demand to suspend Israeli football from international play.
Referring to Barack Obama's interview with the Atlantic in which he admitted his administration's failure to solve the Israel-Palestine conflict, the article said that, "despite Mr. Obama’s apparent acceptance of defeat, he is quietly talking to European governments about their plans to squeeze Israel harder.
François Hollande, France’s president, wants a UN Security Council resolution to set a clear timetable for negotiations leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state. Mr. Obama has asked France not to pursue its initiative until a deal is signed with Iran curbing its nuclear program, which he hopes will be by the end of June. But he is not insisting that it be abandoned."
The article goes on to say that, "the American administration lacks the stomach for more than one diplomatic crisis with Israel at a time. An accord with Iran will be followed by a showdown in Congress, where Israel’s many supporters will try to scupper the deal. In the meantime, the French are gathering support from Arab and European governments.
The resolution is expected to call, among other things, for Jerusalem to serve as the capital of both Israel and Palestine." Although in the past the US has vetoed UN resolutions calling for a joint capital, Israel now fears that Obama is considering changing that practice and may in the future abstain on such votes.
Other threats to Netanyahu's government discussed in the article are the possibility of EU labeling products made in the West Bank, potential EU limits on EU financing of joint research, the Palestinians threatening to indict Israel for war crimes at the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the recent call of Jibril Rajoub, head of the Palestinian Football Association, to suspend Israel from participating in international football tournaments.
The article sums up by stating that, "some outsiders hope that a bit of pressure will spur Mr. Netanyahu to adjust his right-wing coalition, bringing Labor into the government with Mr. Herzog as foreign minister. But from the tone of his government’s first week, Mr. Netanyahu is currently facing in the opposite direction."
24 may 2015
The former foreign minister has a clear idea of how to resolve the unrest in the Mideast, and that includes what he believes is the enemy within.
There are many things one could say about MK Avigdor Lieberman (Yisrael Beiteinu), but there's one thing that has to be said to his credit: He is the only Israeli parliamentarian who willingly joined the opposition. The Knesset has yet to internalize the change. Until he is assigned a permanent office as a rank-and-file MK, Lieberman will continue to use the foreign minister's Knesset chambers – right next door to the prime minister.
My colleague Shimon Shiffer and I met with Lieberman this week.
"One of the ministers spoke with me on the phone yesterday," Lieberman told us. "He asked me to explain how I can speak about the death penalty for terrorists and a peace settlement in the same breath.
"People don't get me – and that's part of the issue. You see that picture hanging on the wall, right? (Ze'ev) Jabotinsky. We need to be both cruel and generous, Jabotinsky used to say. I'm willing to be generous only if I'm cruel too. We aren't Luxembourg. We have to be cruel. Why is it that a jury in Boston – Boston, not Alabama – can sentence a terrorist to death but we can't? We do the exact opposite. We're not willing to give and we're not willing to kill."
We understand what you mean in terms of being cruel, we said to him; but what are you willing to offer in terms of generosity?
Lieberman responded by talking about the war the Kurds are waging in Iraq and Syria. "This is a classic example," he said. "We don’t know how to be generous. We used to control the entire Middle East. Today, it's like we don't even exist. Everyone is too scared of commissions of inquiry. Everything's too square and rigid." "I tried to explain to foreign ministers around the world that the best thing they could do to promote a peace settlement in the Middle East is to forget about us. All of their proposals and ideas and parameters have brought nothing but destruction. Don't interfere. We can work against Iran along with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Gulf States; we can work together to develop the region. Together, we can change the world."
You held a series of secret meetings in Europe with officials from the Gulf States. What did you learn?
"When you sit down with them behind closed doors, they talk just like us. When they met with (US President Barack) Obama this week, they spoke about Iran in the same terms we do – only in much harsher words. At present, there are zero gaps between us and them."
That's not what they are saying.
"Because they have yet to cross Rubicon. That's all that remains for them to do – to cross the Rubicon, to go from secret talks to open relations. There's still a way to go before they cross the Rubicon, but I'm not discounting the achievements we've already made.
"It'll take a little time. But they'll get there in the end. Not because of us, but because of their own interests. They see what's happening in Libya, Syria and Yemen. There's a knife at their throats. They also see how they are treated by the United States. Washington betrays its allies, and we do the same.
"If the moderate states in the Arab world wish to survive, they have to fight. Airstrikes are not enough. They need to fight on the ground too."
Lieberman firmly believes that the US administration will be in no hurry to resume its involvement in the peace process with the Palestinians. "For the past year, the Americans have been passive – even (Secretary of State John) Kerry, who has enough on his plate elsewhere," said the former foreign minister. "Look how often he visited here at the start of his term in office as opposed to how often he is visiting now. He realizes he won't be able to achieve everything." Lieberman hasn't toned down his views on Israel's Arab population and its political leaders since making the move to the ranks of the opposition.
The very opposite, in fact, may be true. "I don’t have a problem with Arabs," he said. "I have a problem with state's attitude towards them. I believe that (Joint Arab List leader) Ayman Odeh is a threat to our existence. Odeh and Mohammed Barakeh speak in different tones in Hebrew, but they are one and the same. They are like (Hassan) Rouhani and (Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad. "If the head of Odeh's public relations team says that Islamic State and Zionism are the same, and Odeh isn't willing to denounce such a statement, that's all that needs to be said.
He isn't willing to condemn Haneen Zoabi either. And he refused to sign a surplus vote deal with Meretz because it is a Zionist party. When speaking in Arabic, he incites against any Arab who is willing to volunteer for national service. We ignore the things he says in Arabic. "There are many among the Arabs in Israel who think differently.
They are afraid to speak out because they believe that the Jews can't be trusted, that we'll leave them in the lurch in the end. That's how things go in the Middle East. The only time I felt ashamed to be a Jew was when I sat down for a long talk with Antoine Lahad, the commander of the South Lebanon Army. He told me how Israel had played him."
As for his criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu, we left that for another time. He's spoken about that a fair deal already over the past few weeks.
There are many things one could say about MK Avigdor Lieberman (Yisrael Beiteinu), but there's one thing that has to be said to his credit: He is the only Israeli parliamentarian who willingly joined the opposition. The Knesset has yet to internalize the change. Until he is assigned a permanent office as a rank-and-file MK, Lieberman will continue to use the foreign minister's Knesset chambers – right next door to the prime minister.
My colleague Shimon Shiffer and I met with Lieberman this week.
"One of the ministers spoke with me on the phone yesterday," Lieberman told us. "He asked me to explain how I can speak about the death penalty for terrorists and a peace settlement in the same breath.
"People don't get me – and that's part of the issue. You see that picture hanging on the wall, right? (Ze'ev) Jabotinsky. We need to be both cruel and generous, Jabotinsky used to say. I'm willing to be generous only if I'm cruel too. We aren't Luxembourg. We have to be cruel. Why is it that a jury in Boston – Boston, not Alabama – can sentence a terrorist to death but we can't? We do the exact opposite. We're not willing to give and we're not willing to kill."
We understand what you mean in terms of being cruel, we said to him; but what are you willing to offer in terms of generosity?
Lieberman responded by talking about the war the Kurds are waging in Iraq and Syria. "This is a classic example," he said. "We don’t know how to be generous. We used to control the entire Middle East. Today, it's like we don't even exist. Everyone is too scared of commissions of inquiry. Everything's too square and rigid." "I tried to explain to foreign ministers around the world that the best thing they could do to promote a peace settlement in the Middle East is to forget about us. All of their proposals and ideas and parameters have brought nothing but destruction. Don't interfere. We can work against Iran along with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Gulf States; we can work together to develop the region. Together, we can change the world."
You held a series of secret meetings in Europe with officials from the Gulf States. What did you learn?
"When you sit down with them behind closed doors, they talk just like us. When they met with (US President Barack) Obama this week, they spoke about Iran in the same terms we do – only in much harsher words. At present, there are zero gaps between us and them."
That's not what they are saying.
"Because they have yet to cross Rubicon. That's all that remains for them to do – to cross the Rubicon, to go from secret talks to open relations. There's still a way to go before they cross the Rubicon, but I'm not discounting the achievements we've already made.
"It'll take a little time. But they'll get there in the end. Not because of us, but because of their own interests. They see what's happening in Libya, Syria and Yemen. There's a knife at their throats. They also see how they are treated by the United States. Washington betrays its allies, and we do the same.
"If the moderate states in the Arab world wish to survive, they have to fight. Airstrikes are not enough. They need to fight on the ground too."
Lieberman firmly believes that the US administration will be in no hurry to resume its involvement in the peace process with the Palestinians. "For the past year, the Americans have been passive – even (Secretary of State John) Kerry, who has enough on his plate elsewhere," said the former foreign minister. "Look how often he visited here at the start of his term in office as opposed to how often he is visiting now. He realizes he won't be able to achieve everything." Lieberman hasn't toned down his views on Israel's Arab population and its political leaders since making the move to the ranks of the opposition.
The very opposite, in fact, may be true. "I don’t have a problem with Arabs," he said. "I have a problem with state's attitude towards them. I believe that (Joint Arab List leader) Ayman Odeh is a threat to our existence. Odeh and Mohammed Barakeh speak in different tones in Hebrew, but they are one and the same. They are like (Hassan) Rouhani and (Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad. "If the head of Odeh's public relations team says that Islamic State and Zionism are the same, and Odeh isn't willing to denounce such a statement, that's all that needs to be said.
He isn't willing to condemn Haneen Zoabi either. And he refused to sign a surplus vote deal with Meretz because it is a Zionist party. When speaking in Arabic, he incites against any Arab who is willing to volunteer for national service. We ignore the things he says in Arabic. "There are many among the Arabs in Israel who think differently.
They are afraid to speak out because they believe that the Jews can't be trusted, that we'll leave them in the lurch in the end. That's how things go in the Middle East. The only time I felt ashamed to be a Jew was when I sat down for a long talk with Antoine Lahad, the commander of the South Lebanon Army. He told me how Israel had played him."
As for his criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu, we left that for another time. He's spoken about that a fair deal already over the past few weeks.
A former Israeli high-ranking officer in the Shin Bet intelligence service committed suicide on Saturday, at his home in the 1948 Occupied territories, after a Facebook post accusing him of racism became popular and was shared thousands of times, Maariv reported Sunday.
Shortly before taking his own life the man wrote in a Facebook post that he had been wronged by the masses, told his side of the story and urged people to consider the effects of their actions and words on social media.
In a post that gained popularity last week, social-media users pointed the finger at the officer for showing racism towards a black Ethiopian Jewish lady.
In his post to Facebook on Saturday, shortly before his suicide, the former high-ranking official in the Shin Bet intelligence devices wrote that the accusations of racism had injured him deeply.
Shin Bet ex-chief Yuval Diskin meanwhile grieved over the officer’s death, claiming he knew him well and that nothing could be more hurtful to him then accusations of racism as he had always espoused treating all people equally and is, therefore, entirely the wrong target for such an attack in the media.
Observers said the suicide incident is the straw that broke the camel’s back, pointing out the inherently fragile and susceptible psyche of Israel’s stakeholders.
Shortly before taking his own life the man wrote in a Facebook post that he had been wronged by the masses, told his side of the story and urged people to consider the effects of their actions and words on social media.
In a post that gained popularity last week, social-media users pointed the finger at the officer for showing racism towards a black Ethiopian Jewish lady.
In his post to Facebook on Saturday, shortly before his suicide, the former high-ranking official in the Shin Bet intelligence devices wrote that the accusations of racism had injured him deeply.
Shin Bet ex-chief Yuval Diskin meanwhile grieved over the officer’s death, claiming he knew him well and that nothing could be more hurtful to him then accusations of racism as he had always espoused treating all people equally and is, therefore, entirely the wrong target for such an attack in the media.
Observers said the suicide incident is the straw that broke the camel’s back, pointing out the inherently fragile and susceptible psyche of Israel’s stakeholders.