15 june 2019
Jordan’s King Abdullah is reacting angrily to any suggestion that he might accept a US peace deal that would make his country a homeland for Palestinians.
Speaking to the armed forces, he rejected the idea of Jordan as an alternative state for Palestinians, saying: “Don’t we have a voice in the end?”
Already facing economic discontent at home, Abdullah must navigate diplomatic moves by his US allies that are upturning a regional status-quo that has underpinned Jordan’s internal politics and foreign relations for decades.
After Israel’s creation in 1948, Jordan absorbed more Palestinians than any other country, with some estimates that they now account for more than half the population.
Any changes to the international consensus on a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, and Palestinian refugees’ right of return to what is now Israel and the Palestinian territories, long buttressed by US policy, therefore reverberate harder in Jordan than anywhere else.
US President Donald Trump’s long-promised “Deal of the Century” to resolve the conflict is still a secret, though leaked details suggest it dumps the idea of a full Palestinian state in favor of limited self-rule in part of the Occupied Territories, which would undermine Palestinians’ right to return.
It envisages an expansion of Gaza into part of northern Egypt, under Egyptian control, with Palestinians also having a smaller share of the West Bank and some areas on the outskirts of Jerusalem and no control over their borders, the leaks say.
Jordanian fears about what the plan portends for the region, for their Palestinian citizens, and for the politics of their own country, have been aggravated by Trump’s readiness to upturn US policy.
American officials deny contemplating making Jordan a Palestinian homeland, pushing it to take a role in governing parts of the West Bank or challenging the right of King Abdullah’s dynasty to custodianship of Jerusalem’s holy sites.
But, Trump’s radical approach to the issue, and recent statements by his ambassador to Israel, that it had a right to annex some of the West Bank, have done little to assuage Jordanian concerns.
Few subjects in Jordan are more politically charged than the role, presence and future there of Palestinians. The issue is so sensitive that the government publishes no data on how many of its 8 million citizens are also of Palestinian descent, though a recent US congressional report put it at more than half.
Despite the US denials, Jordanians fear that Trump is returning to an old Israeli theme: that Jordan is Palestine and that is where the Palestinians of the West Bank should go.
It could not have come at a worse time for the 57-year-old Abdullah, whose country is facing economic challenges that led to protests and a change of government last year.
While many Palestinians are integrated in Jordan, and many descendants of refugees have never set foot in their original homeland, some native Jordanians have never acknowledged that they will stay permanently.
They fear Trump’s plan could alter the demography and politics of a nation shaped by the presence of Palestinians, who hold full citizenship but are marginalized and seen as a political threat by some people of Jordanian descent.
But, Abdullah’s decision that Jordan should attend an economic conference that is part of the US plan showed that despite mounting alarm at home, Amman cannot ignore pressure from richer, more powerful allies in the West and the Gulf.
Maintaining unity between citizens of Jordanian and Palestinian descent has been critical to the ruling family’s role as a unifying force in a country where tribal and clan loyalties hold sway.
The king is already facing anger from the “Herak” opposition, drawn from Jordanians of native descent, who say Trump’s plans will tear apart a state patronage system that has cemented their own loyalty to the monarchy.
Retired army officers have held small weekly protests in opposition to a deal.
“No to eroding our national identity and dismantling the state,” said Saad Alaween, a prominent Herak dissident, referring to the deal.
Some warn the monarch not to accept a plan that could give their compatriots of Palestinian origin more political rights in an electoral system tilted in favor of native Jordanians.
Rumors that the plan could lead to Jordan taking in Palestinian refugees in Lebanon and Syria, or that it would merge with a rump of Palestinian territory in bits of the West Bank, have also led to alarm.
In a sign of his concerns, the king has even met lawmakers from the once outcast hardliner movement in an attempt, say officials, to win the backing of the largest opposition grouping with support in large cities and Palestinian camps.
Abdullah also inspired a shake-up in the intelligence establishment — long seen as a guardian of Jordan’s stability — to solidify the internal front and mitigate any fallout from the deal in the months to come, insiders say.
In the army — whose loyalty to the crown is deeply meshed with Jordanian national identity — there are also signs of concern.
“Jordan is a country that has sovereignty and history, and will say its word at the right moment,” said General Mahmoud al-Friehat, the army’s chief of staff.
~Reuters/Days of Palestine
Speaking to the armed forces, he rejected the idea of Jordan as an alternative state for Palestinians, saying: “Don’t we have a voice in the end?”
Already facing economic discontent at home, Abdullah must navigate diplomatic moves by his US allies that are upturning a regional status-quo that has underpinned Jordan’s internal politics and foreign relations for decades.
After Israel’s creation in 1948, Jordan absorbed more Palestinians than any other country, with some estimates that they now account for more than half the population.
Any changes to the international consensus on a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, and Palestinian refugees’ right of return to what is now Israel and the Palestinian territories, long buttressed by US policy, therefore reverberate harder in Jordan than anywhere else.
US President Donald Trump’s long-promised “Deal of the Century” to resolve the conflict is still a secret, though leaked details suggest it dumps the idea of a full Palestinian state in favor of limited self-rule in part of the Occupied Territories, which would undermine Palestinians’ right to return.
It envisages an expansion of Gaza into part of northern Egypt, under Egyptian control, with Palestinians also having a smaller share of the West Bank and some areas on the outskirts of Jerusalem and no control over their borders, the leaks say.
Jordanian fears about what the plan portends for the region, for their Palestinian citizens, and for the politics of their own country, have been aggravated by Trump’s readiness to upturn US policy.
American officials deny contemplating making Jordan a Palestinian homeland, pushing it to take a role in governing parts of the West Bank or challenging the right of King Abdullah’s dynasty to custodianship of Jerusalem’s holy sites.
But, Trump’s radical approach to the issue, and recent statements by his ambassador to Israel, that it had a right to annex some of the West Bank, have done little to assuage Jordanian concerns.
Few subjects in Jordan are more politically charged than the role, presence and future there of Palestinians. The issue is so sensitive that the government publishes no data on how many of its 8 million citizens are also of Palestinian descent, though a recent US congressional report put it at more than half.
Despite the US denials, Jordanians fear that Trump is returning to an old Israeli theme: that Jordan is Palestine and that is where the Palestinians of the West Bank should go.
It could not have come at a worse time for the 57-year-old Abdullah, whose country is facing economic challenges that led to protests and a change of government last year.
While many Palestinians are integrated in Jordan, and many descendants of refugees have never set foot in their original homeland, some native Jordanians have never acknowledged that they will stay permanently.
They fear Trump’s plan could alter the demography and politics of a nation shaped by the presence of Palestinians, who hold full citizenship but are marginalized and seen as a political threat by some people of Jordanian descent.
But, Abdullah’s decision that Jordan should attend an economic conference that is part of the US plan showed that despite mounting alarm at home, Amman cannot ignore pressure from richer, more powerful allies in the West and the Gulf.
Maintaining unity between citizens of Jordanian and Palestinian descent has been critical to the ruling family’s role as a unifying force in a country where tribal and clan loyalties hold sway.
The king is already facing anger from the “Herak” opposition, drawn from Jordanians of native descent, who say Trump’s plans will tear apart a state patronage system that has cemented their own loyalty to the monarchy.
Retired army officers have held small weekly protests in opposition to a deal.
“No to eroding our national identity and dismantling the state,” said Saad Alaween, a prominent Herak dissident, referring to the deal.
Some warn the monarch not to accept a plan that could give their compatriots of Palestinian origin more political rights in an electoral system tilted in favor of native Jordanians.
Rumors that the plan could lead to Jordan taking in Palestinian refugees in Lebanon and Syria, or that it would merge with a rump of Palestinian territory in bits of the West Bank, have also led to alarm.
In a sign of his concerns, the king has even met lawmakers from the once outcast hardliner movement in an attempt, say officials, to win the backing of the largest opposition grouping with support in large cities and Palestinian camps.
Abdullah also inspired a shake-up in the intelligence establishment — long seen as a guardian of Jordan’s stability — to solidify the internal front and mitigate any fallout from the deal in the months to come, insiders say.
In the army — whose loyalty to the crown is deeply meshed with Jordanian national identity — there are also signs of concern.
“Jordan is a country that has sovereignty and history, and will say its word at the right moment,” said General Mahmoud al-Friehat, the army’s chief of staff.
~Reuters/Days of Palestine
14 june 2019
Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit warned on Thursday against any peace plan that ignores a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Addressing the UN Security Council, Aboul Gheit also warned against any proposal that creates an alternative economic track that perpetuates Israel's “occupation” of lands the Palestinians want for their independent state.
Aboul Gheit did not specifically mention the US administration in his comments, but his message appeared aimed at the US deal of the century and the upcoming Bahrain economic conference.
He strongly denounced "the attempt to resolve the Palestinian question outside the framework of international law and ignore the established final status issues that are based on the two-state solution.
Aboul Gheit’s comments come ahead of the intended publication of the economic provisions of the US peace plan (the deal of the century) at a workshop in Bahrain to be held on June 25-26.
Little is known about the political components of the peace plan, but president Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, one of the authors of the plan, affirmed in April that the plan would not focus on the two-state solution.
"If people focus on the old traditional talking points we will never make progress," Kushner said at the time, adding, "What we will put out is different.”
The PA already announced it would boycott the Bahrain economic conference, warning it is part of the US deal of the century, which aims to liquidate the Palestinian cause.
Addressing the UN Security Council, Aboul Gheit also warned against any proposal that creates an alternative economic track that perpetuates Israel's “occupation” of lands the Palestinians want for their independent state.
Aboul Gheit did not specifically mention the US administration in his comments, but his message appeared aimed at the US deal of the century and the upcoming Bahrain economic conference.
He strongly denounced "the attempt to resolve the Palestinian question outside the framework of international law and ignore the established final status issues that are based on the two-state solution.
Aboul Gheit’s comments come ahead of the intended publication of the economic provisions of the US peace plan (the deal of the century) at a workshop in Bahrain to be held on June 25-26.
Little is known about the political components of the peace plan, but president Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, one of the authors of the plan, affirmed in April that the plan would not focus on the two-state solution.
"If people focus on the old traditional talking points we will never make progress," Kushner said at the time, adding, "What we will put out is different.”
The PA already announced it would boycott the Bahrain economic conference, warning it is part of the US deal of the century, which aims to liquidate the Palestinian cause.
Lebanese Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil says his country is boycotting the forthcoming US-led conference in Bahrain, in support of President Donald Trump’s controversial proposal for “peace” between the Israeli regime and Palestinians, dubbed “The Deal of the Century,” because Palestinians are not taking part in the event.
“We will not participate in the Bahrain conference, [scheduled for June 25-26], because the Palestinians are not participating and we prefer to have a clear idea about the proposed plan for peace. We were not consulted regarding [the plan],” Bassil said on Tuesday.
The statement came after an unnamed senior White House official said that Jordan, Egypt and Morocco had informed the administration they would send representatives to Manama.
But, according to the PNN, the Moroccan foreign minister denied that his country would participate in the economic workshop in the Kingdom of Bahrain.
“We will not participate in the Bahrain conference, [scheduled for June 25-26], because the Palestinians are not participating and we prefer to have a clear idea about the proposed plan for peace. We were not consulted regarding [the plan],” Bassil said on Tuesday.
The statement came after an unnamed senior White House official said that Jordan, Egypt and Morocco had informed the administration they would send representatives to Manama.
But, according to the PNN, the Moroccan foreign minister denied that his country would participate in the economic workshop in the Kingdom of Bahrain.
13 june 2019
|
|
By Ramzy Baroud
In a TV interview on June 2, on the news docuseries “Axios” on the HBO channel, Jared Kushner opened up regarding many issues, in which his ‘Deal of the Century’ was a prime focus. The major revelation made by Kushner, President Donald Trump’s adviser and son-in-law, was least surprising. Kushner believes that Palestinians are not capable of governing themselves. Not surprising, because Kushner thinks he is capable of arranging the future of the Palestinian people without the inclusion of the Palestinian leadership. |
He has been pushing his so-called ‘Deal of the Century’ relentlessly while including in his various meets and conferences countries such as Poland, Brazil, and Croatia, but not Palestine.
Indeed, this is what transpired at the Warsaw conference on ‘peace and security’ in the Middle East. The same charade, also led by Kushner, is expected to be rebooted in Bahrain on June 25.
Much has been said about the subtle racism in Kushner’s words, reeking with the stench of old colonial discourses where the natives were seen as lesser, incapable of rational thinking beings who needed the civilized ‘whites’ of the western hemisphere to help them cope with their backwardness and inherent incompetence.
Kushner, whose credentials are merely based on his familial connections to Trump and family friendship with Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is now poised to be the colonial administrator of old, making and enforcing the law while the hapless natives have no other option but to either accommodate or receive their due punishment.
This is not an exaggeration. In fact, according to leaked information concerning Kushner’s ‘Deal of the Century,’ and published in the Israeli daily newspaper, ‘Israel Hayom’, if Palestinian groups refuse to accept the US-Israeli diktats, “the US will cancel all financial support to the Palestinians and ensure that no country transfers funds to them.”
In the HBO interview, Kushner offered the Palestinians a lifeline. They could be considered capable of governing themselves should they manage to achieve the following: “a fair judicial system … freedom of the press, freedom of expression, tolerance for all religions.”
The fact that Palestine is an occupied country, subject in every possible way to Israel’s military law, and that Israel has never been held accountable for its 52-year occupation seems to be of no relevance whatsoever, as far as Kushner is concerned.
On the contrary, the subtext in all of what Kushner has said in the interview is that Israel is the antithesis to the unquestionable Palestinian failure. Unlike Palestine, Israel needs to do little to demonstrate its ability to be a worthy peace partner.
While the term ‘US bias towards Israel’ is as old as the state of Israel itself, what is hardly discussed is the specific of that bias, the decidedly condescending, patronizing and, often, racist view that US political classes have of Palestinians – and all Arabs and Muslims, for that matter; and the utter infatuation with Israel, which is often cited as a model for democracy, judicial transparency and successful ‘anti-terror’ tactics.
According to Kushner a ‘fair judicial system’ is a conditio sine qua non to determine a country’s ability to govern itself. But is Israeli judicial system “fair” and “democratic”?
Israel does not have a single judicial system, but two. This duality has, in fact, defined Israeli courts from the very inception of Israel in 1948. This de facto apartheid system openly differentiates between Jews and Arabs, a fact that is true in both civil and criminal law.
“Criminal law is applied separately and unequally in the West Bank, based on nationality alone (Israeli versus Palestinian), inventively weaving its way around the contours of international law in order to preserve and develop its ‘(illegal Jewish) settlement enterprise’,” Israeli scholar, Emily Omer-Man, explained in her essay ‘Separate and Unequal’.
In practice, Palestinians and Israelis who commit the exact same crime will be judged according to two different systems, with two different procedures: “The settler will be processed according to the Israeli Penal Code (while) the Palestinian will be processed according to a military order.”
This unfairness is constituent of a massively unjust judicial apparatus that has defined the Israeli legal system from the onset. Take the measure of administrative detention as an example. Palestinians can be held without trial and without any stated legal justification. Tens of thousands of Palestinians have been subjected to this undemocratic ‘law’ and hundreds of them are currently held in Israeli jails.
It is ironic that Kushner raised the issue of freedom of the press, in particular, as Israel is being derided for its dismal record in that regard. Israel has reportedly committed 811 violations against Palestinian journalists since the start of the ‘March of Return’ in Gaza in March 2018. Two journalists – Yaser Murtaja and Ahmed Abu Hussein – were killed and 155 were wounded by Israeli snipers.
Like the imbalanced Israeli judicial system, targeting the press is also a part of a protracted pattern. According to a press release issued by the Palestinian Journalists Union last May, Israel has killed 102 Palestinian journalists since 1972.
The fact that Palestinian intellectuals, poets and activists have been imprisoned for Facebook and other social media posts should tell us volumes about the limits of Israel’s freedom of press and expression.
It is also worth mentioning that in June 2018, the Israeli Knesset voted for a bill that prohibits the filming of Israeli soldiers as a way to mask their crimes and shelter them from any future legal accountability.
As for freedom of religion, despite its many shortcomings, the Palestinian Authority hardly discriminates against religious minorities. The same cannot be said about Israel.
Although discrimination against non-Jews in Israel has been the raison d’être of the very idea of Israel, the Nation-State Law of July 2018 further cemented the superiority of the Jews and the inferior status of everyone else.
According to the new Basic Law, Israel is “the national home of the Jewish people” only and “the right to exercise national self-determination is unique to the Jewish people.”
Palestinians do not need to be lectured on how to meet Israeli and American expectations, nor should they ever aspire to imitate the undemocratic Israeli model. What they urgently need, instead, is international solidarity to help them win the fight against Israeli occupation, racism, and apartheid.
– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of Palestine Chronicle. His last book is ‘The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story’ (Pluto Press, London). Baroud has a Ph.D. in Palestine Studies from the University of Exeter and was a Non-Resident Scholar at Orfalea Center for Global and International Studies, University of California Santa Barbara. His website is www.ramzybaroud.net
Indeed, this is what transpired at the Warsaw conference on ‘peace and security’ in the Middle East. The same charade, also led by Kushner, is expected to be rebooted in Bahrain on June 25.
Much has been said about the subtle racism in Kushner’s words, reeking with the stench of old colonial discourses where the natives were seen as lesser, incapable of rational thinking beings who needed the civilized ‘whites’ of the western hemisphere to help them cope with their backwardness and inherent incompetence.
Kushner, whose credentials are merely based on his familial connections to Trump and family friendship with Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is now poised to be the colonial administrator of old, making and enforcing the law while the hapless natives have no other option but to either accommodate or receive their due punishment.
This is not an exaggeration. In fact, according to leaked information concerning Kushner’s ‘Deal of the Century,’ and published in the Israeli daily newspaper, ‘Israel Hayom’, if Palestinian groups refuse to accept the US-Israeli diktats, “the US will cancel all financial support to the Palestinians and ensure that no country transfers funds to them.”
In the HBO interview, Kushner offered the Palestinians a lifeline. They could be considered capable of governing themselves should they manage to achieve the following: “a fair judicial system … freedom of the press, freedom of expression, tolerance for all religions.”
The fact that Palestine is an occupied country, subject in every possible way to Israel’s military law, and that Israel has never been held accountable for its 52-year occupation seems to be of no relevance whatsoever, as far as Kushner is concerned.
On the contrary, the subtext in all of what Kushner has said in the interview is that Israel is the antithesis to the unquestionable Palestinian failure. Unlike Palestine, Israel needs to do little to demonstrate its ability to be a worthy peace partner.
While the term ‘US bias towards Israel’ is as old as the state of Israel itself, what is hardly discussed is the specific of that bias, the decidedly condescending, patronizing and, often, racist view that US political classes have of Palestinians – and all Arabs and Muslims, for that matter; and the utter infatuation with Israel, which is often cited as a model for democracy, judicial transparency and successful ‘anti-terror’ tactics.
According to Kushner a ‘fair judicial system’ is a conditio sine qua non to determine a country’s ability to govern itself. But is Israeli judicial system “fair” and “democratic”?
Israel does not have a single judicial system, but two. This duality has, in fact, defined Israeli courts from the very inception of Israel in 1948. This de facto apartheid system openly differentiates between Jews and Arabs, a fact that is true in both civil and criminal law.
“Criminal law is applied separately and unequally in the West Bank, based on nationality alone (Israeli versus Palestinian), inventively weaving its way around the contours of international law in order to preserve and develop its ‘(illegal Jewish) settlement enterprise’,” Israeli scholar, Emily Omer-Man, explained in her essay ‘Separate and Unequal’.
In practice, Palestinians and Israelis who commit the exact same crime will be judged according to two different systems, with two different procedures: “The settler will be processed according to the Israeli Penal Code (while) the Palestinian will be processed according to a military order.”
This unfairness is constituent of a massively unjust judicial apparatus that has defined the Israeli legal system from the onset. Take the measure of administrative detention as an example. Palestinians can be held without trial and without any stated legal justification. Tens of thousands of Palestinians have been subjected to this undemocratic ‘law’ and hundreds of them are currently held in Israeli jails.
It is ironic that Kushner raised the issue of freedom of the press, in particular, as Israel is being derided for its dismal record in that regard. Israel has reportedly committed 811 violations against Palestinian journalists since the start of the ‘March of Return’ in Gaza in March 2018. Two journalists – Yaser Murtaja and Ahmed Abu Hussein – were killed and 155 were wounded by Israeli snipers.
Like the imbalanced Israeli judicial system, targeting the press is also a part of a protracted pattern. According to a press release issued by the Palestinian Journalists Union last May, Israel has killed 102 Palestinian journalists since 1972.
The fact that Palestinian intellectuals, poets and activists have been imprisoned for Facebook and other social media posts should tell us volumes about the limits of Israel’s freedom of press and expression.
It is also worth mentioning that in June 2018, the Israeli Knesset voted for a bill that prohibits the filming of Israeli soldiers as a way to mask their crimes and shelter them from any future legal accountability.
As for freedom of religion, despite its many shortcomings, the Palestinian Authority hardly discriminates against religious minorities. The same cannot be said about Israel.
Although discrimination against non-Jews in Israel has been the raison d’être of the very idea of Israel, the Nation-State Law of July 2018 further cemented the superiority of the Jews and the inferior status of everyone else.
According to the new Basic Law, Israel is “the national home of the Jewish people” only and “the right to exercise national self-determination is unique to the Jewish people.”
Palestinians do not need to be lectured on how to meet Israeli and American expectations, nor should they ever aspire to imitate the undemocratic Israeli model. What they urgently need, instead, is international solidarity to help them win the fight against Israeli occupation, racism, and apartheid.
– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of Palestine Chronicle. His last book is ‘The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story’ (Pluto Press, London). Baroud has a Ph.D. in Palestine Studies from the University of Exeter and was a Non-Resident Scholar at Orfalea Center for Global and International Studies, University of California Santa Barbara. His website is www.ramzybaroud.net
70 civil society organizations held a press conference in front of the United Nations Office in Gaza City, on Tuesday.
They sent a written message to the UN expressing their rejection of the so-called American “peace plan,” which is meant to help Israel consolidate its control over all Palestinian territories, and prevent the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.
The letter pointed out that the American peace plan, known as the “Deal of the Century,” does not constitute an initiative or a political project for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict or for peace in the Middle East. Rather, it’s intended to support Israel and impose its control over the Palestinian territories, depriving Palestinians of all their legitimate rights guaranteed by international law and resolutions of international legitimacy, foremost among them the right to establish an independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital.
The conference called on international bodies in general, and the United Nations in particular, to reject the American plan and to continue to support Palestinian rights, in accordance with the resolutions of international legitimacy and international law, and the agreements signed by the international community, Days of Palestine reports.
They sent a written message to the UN expressing their rejection of the so-called American “peace plan,” which is meant to help Israel consolidate its control over all Palestinian territories, and prevent the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.
The letter pointed out that the American peace plan, known as the “Deal of the Century,” does not constitute an initiative or a political project for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict or for peace in the Middle East. Rather, it’s intended to support Israel and impose its control over the Palestinian territories, depriving Palestinians of all their legitimate rights guaranteed by international law and resolutions of international legitimacy, foremost among them the right to establish an independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital.
The conference called on international bodies in general, and the United Nations in particular, to reject the American plan and to continue to support Palestinian rights, in accordance with the resolutions of international legitimacy and international law, and the agreements signed by the international community, Days of Palestine reports.
Palestinian Government Spokesman, Ibrahim Melhem said that the attack on the Palestinian Preventive Security headquarters, in the city of Nablus, represents a dangerous escalation aimed at undermining the most important pillars of the establishment of a Palestinian state, and endangering internal security.
PNN reports that Melhem, in a statement on Tuesday, said the seriousness of this attack is doubled as it comes after the invitation the US Ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, said that Israel should “at least” annex parts of the West Bank to it.
“The government strongly condemns this attack and commends the courage of security members of the Preventive Security Forces in their response to the attack,” Melhem added.
For its part, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates said that the provocative assault was an extension of the open war launched by the Israeli occupation authorities, against the Palestinian people, cities, villages, towns and camps with the aim of perpetuating the occupation and settlements. It also considered the attack as a way to create a state of chaos in order to pass the so-called “Deal of the Century.”
On Tuesday, early morning, a group of Israeli soldiers surrounded the building and blockaded it while opening fire from three sides before they withdrew from the area. In the overnight attack, one Palestinian security guard was wounded in the hand.
“This is not the first time and will not be the last that the occupation army harms our people, but the dangerous part in this incident is that a Palestinian military headquarters was targeted,” Governor of Nablus Ibrahim Ramadan said.
The Israeli military, on the other hand, claimed that the overnight attack was a case of apparent mistaken identity, and Israeli media has reported on the incident as being a “firefight” despite Palestinian sources saying there was no retaliatory fire exchanged.
PNN reports that Melhem, in a statement on Tuesday, said the seriousness of this attack is doubled as it comes after the invitation the US Ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, said that Israel should “at least” annex parts of the West Bank to it.
“The government strongly condemns this attack and commends the courage of security members of the Preventive Security Forces in their response to the attack,” Melhem added.
For its part, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates said that the provocative assault was an extension of the open war launched by the Israeli occupation authorities, against the Palestinian people, cities, villages, towns and camps with the aim of perpetuating the occupation and settlements. It also considered the attack as a way to create a state of chaos in order to pass the so-called “Deal of the Century.”
On Tuesday, early morning, a group of Israeli soldiers surrounded the building and blockaded it while opening fire from three sides before they withdrew from the area. In the overnight attack, one Palestinian security guard was wounded in the hand.
“This is not the first time and will not be the last that the occupation army harms our people, but the dangerous part in this incident is that a Palestinian military headquarters was targeted,” Governor of Nablus Ibrahim Ramadan said.
The Israeli military, on the other hand, claimed that the overnight attack was a case of apparent mistaken identity, and Israeli media has reported on the incident as being a “firefight” despite Palestinian sources saying there was no retaliatory fire exchanged.
