Israel and Apartheid | Part 4

Restrictions on Education

Israel has denied full enjoyment of the rights of education to the Palestinian students. Education in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) is segregated as part of the larger policy of racially fragmenting the territory as discussed earlier. Access to education is restricted using numerous means; attacks on students and destruction of schools are one of the main ways. Some of these incidents include: 300 schools and 22 universities being shelled, shot or raided by Israeli forces between 2000 and 2005; in 2006 F-16s bombed the Islamic University of Gaza; in September 2004 a ten-year old girl was shot in the head at her desk; in January 2005 the Israeli army opened fire on an elementary school and killed an 11-year old; two universities were closed by military orders for 6 months in 2003 – suspending education of 6000 student; 25 schools were demolished in 2009 alone; 6000 children have been arrested and detained since September 2000.[1][2]

Checkpoints and restrictions on movement greatly hinder education as well: Berzeit University showed that 91% of students missed classes due to delay at checkpoints; since 2004, students from Gaza have been banned from studying in the West Bank; in 2007, 3700 Gazan students were prevented from continuing their studies abroad; in 2008, visas of 7 winners of US Fullbright Scholarships were revoked and they were not allowed to leave Gaza. In East Jerusalem, where Israel provides funding for education, Palestinian schools are severely underfunded, face lack of classrooms and other essentials. As a result, only 39,400 Palestinians attend school out of the 79,000 that are eligible. High school dropout rates are 50% of Palestinians compared to 7.4% for Jewish students in the same city.[3]

All the obstacles to education described above are only applicable the Palestinians in the OPT while Jewish students face no such restrictions from the Israeli army. The systematic attack on education is a strategy to stifle intellectual growth of the Palestinian people. Despite all these unimaginable restrictions, students are determined to pursue their studies. Enrollment is comparable to middle-income countries and in 2005 it was 88% for secondary education in Gaza and the West Bank; 40% for post-secondary education. When schools and universities are raided, Palestinians continue holding classes in homes, churches, mosques and community centers – they often get arrested for doing so.[4]

Demographic Engineering and Ethnic Control

One of the most alarming aspects of this conflict is the extent to which Israel has planned the systematic removal of Palestinian presence from this historic and hallowed land. Legislation that explicitly calls for stifling Arab life and administering ethnic control has been adopted by the Israeli government. The Drobles Plan, adopted by the Israeli cabinet in 1981, is one such piece of legislation.[5] It states quite explicitly:

The civilian presence of Jewish communities is vital for the security of the state…There must not be the slightest doubt regarding our intention to hold the areas of Judea and Samaria [i.e. West Bank] forever…State and uncultivated land should be seized immediately for the purpose of settlement in the areas located among and around the population centres with the aim of preventing as much as possible the establishment of another Arab state in these territories. It will be difficult for the [Arab] minority to form a regional connection and political unity when split by Jewish colonies …[6][7]

Another such piece of legislation is the Jerusalem municipal plan. The most recent plan, Jerusalem 2000, stated that “according to state decisions,” municipal planning should attempt to maintain a demographic balance of 70 percent Jews to 30 percent Arabs in the city. To ensure this, the plan proposed a number of means to “maintain a Jewish majority in the city while attending to the needs of the Arab minority,” The plan recognizes the “acute housing shortage” affecting “the Arab population,” but proposes “thickening and densification” of existing Palestinian neighborhoods as a response, and building new residential areas only for “wealthy Arab households”.[8]

Israel’s legal racism and obsession with maintaining demographic control is sickening and alarming. Three decades after the adoption of the Drobles Plan, it is quite clear that it has implemented the plan to a tee. The epitome of Israel’s hypocrisy lies in signing the Oslo Accords and committing to a two-state solution; while at the same time expanding the colonist enterprise and eating up the very land it will supposedly grant as a state to the Palestinians one day.

Conclusion

This series has barely scratched the surface of the human right abuses Palestinians suffer on a regular basis. These articles have focused mainly on the discriminatory practices in the OPT in order to highlight the apartheid nature of the 45-year-old occupation. It is common practice to dismiss the charge of apartheid against Israel as ‘sloganeering’ or ‘anti-Semitism’. With the lack of information available on this subject, an exposition on this topic was necessary. It is hoped that this series will garner public recognition of the brutality of the apartheid experienced by the Palestinian people.

It is important to recognize that apartheid is not a mere analogy. It is defined specifically as a crime against humanity under international law. Some dismiss the charge of Israeli apartheid simply because of the differences with South African apartheid. It is important to recognize that both regimes had their unique features and both constitute apartheid independent of each other.

It is hard for us to fathom living under occupation where every single aspect of life subject to draconian laws. Everyday tasks such driving to work, going to school, picking up the groceries or visiting the doctor – all become a nightmare. The brutality of this reality is multiplied with the knowledge that this oppression exists to privilege one race over the other; to give superior treatment to one group of people who live in the same vicinity and yet face none of these restrictions. The eventual hope of this regime is make life so miserable for Palestinians that they are left with no choice but to leave their land.

As the occupation enters its 45th year and Palestinian land continues to be usurped, the urgency to highlight the brutality of Israeli apartheid is now more than ever. While pretending to be the bastion of democracy in the Middle-East, it is clear that Israel has implemented one of the most racist, brutally oppressive and inhumane occupations known in history – all with the backing of our Western governments.

Next Post: Debunking Propaganda and How you can help end Israeli Apartheid

References:

[1] Separate and Unequal: Israel’s Discriminatory Treatment of Palestinians in the OccupiedPalestinianTerritories. Human Rights Watch, New York 2010 – pg 11

[2] Occupation, Colonialism and Apartheid? Human Sciences Research Council, South Africa, 2009 – pg 232

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] Separate and Unequal: – pg 27

[6] Ibid

[7] Occupation, Colonialism and Apartheid? Human Sciences Research Council, South Africa, 2009 – pg 264

[8] Separate and Unequal: Israel’s Discriminatory Treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Human Rights Watch, New York 2010 – pg 47

 

 

Bangladesh in Turmoil | War Crimes Protests Escalate

The death toll from riots that have enraged the streets of Dhaka for over a month has risen to 61. Fresh set of protests were sparked when Delwar Hossain Sayedee, a politician and religious leader, was sentenced to death last week.  Police and protestors have clashed violently leading to these deaths; hundreds more have been injured. The police have been accused of firing openly on protesters according to witnesses on the ground.

Protests erupted over a month ago when the Bangladesh’s war crimes tribunal sentenced Abdul Qader Molla to life imprisonment. He is a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami; the nation’s largest Islamic political party and the current opposition. Government officials, members of the ruling Awami League party, and segments of the public reacted with outrage that Mollah was not sentenced to death. Large crowds assembled in the Shahbag area of Dhaka demanding the death penalty for Molla.

Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal (ICT), a domestic court, was set up in 2010 to try people suspected of crimes under international law, including genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, committed during the country’s 1971 war of independence from Pakistan. The brutal civil war led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands; estimates vary between 300,000 and 3 million. Murder, rape and bloodshed were rampant during this period. Some estimates suggest over 200,000 women were raped by militias.

The Jamaat-e-Islami party, part of the current opposition, is widely viewed in the country as a supporter of Pakistan during the war and their leaders are accused of perpetrating war crimes. However, the party contends that while some of its leaders did not want a new state, it did not commit any such atrocities.

The war crimes tribunal has been criticized as being politically motivated and out of step with international standards. All of the 10 people indicted for war crimes by the tribunal are opposition politicians, eight of them from the Jamaat-e-Islami.

Human Rights Watch has found trials conducted thus far to be replete with irregularities. The defense has alleged intimidation and harassment of their witnesses, including the November 2012 abduction of a witness from the gates of the courthouse. In December 2012 The Economist published a series of intercepted communications between the senior judge and an external adviser, suggesting close and prohibited collaboration between the judge, prosecutors, and the government.

In response to the mass protests calling for the execution of Molla, originally sentenced to life imprisonment, Bangladesh’s parliament amended a law allowing the state to appeal any verdict in war-crimes trials it deemed inadequate and not in sync with public opinion. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was reported by media as saying she would talk to the judges to convince them to take the sentiments of the protesters into account in formulating their decisions.

While recognizing the need to serve justice for war crimes of 1971, human rights organizations have strongly criticized Bangladesh’s government for making these legal amendments to please protestors. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) stated that that the tribunal does not adhere to international standards of a fair trial and due process. It urged the government to serve justice, instead of perpetrating vengeance.

Amnesty International has also condemned the move. Human Rights Watch stated that these amendments violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR states that “no one shall be liable to be tried or punished again for an offense for which he has already been finally convicted or acquitted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of each country.”

This episode has sharply widened the secular and religious divide in the country. Some view it as a movement for righting a historical wrong, while other considers it to be a veiled, government-sponsored attempt to curb the influence of Islam. Pro-execution supporters have been accused of blasphemy and insulting Islam using their platforms.

Protests and strikes have intensified since Delwar Hussian Sayedee was sentenced to death on March 2nd; he is vice-president of the Jamaat and a vocal Muslim orator.  Supporters of Sayedee attacked police and government offices, uprooted railroad tracks, and set fire to trains and houses belonging to government supporters. Police responded with bullets and tear gas. Violence continues in Dhaka and protestor from both sides continue rally support to advance their objectives.

Compiled from Al-Jazeera, Human Rights Watch, The Guardian and BBC

 

Jason Kenney should visit the Palestinian territories before condemning IAW

In what has become a routine exercise of obsequious bowing and servile complacence, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney yet again pays homage to the State of Israel. Similar to last year, he released a statement condemning Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW), which is currently being organized on university campuses across the globe.

Kenney likens IAW to ‘hateful and intolerant rhetoric’ and ‘anti-Semitism’. Based on the statement, it is fair to assume that the honourable Minister has never actually visited the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT); or perhaps he did, but his love for Israel might have blinded him from seeing the atrocities being committed in these lands.

If he were to visit the OPT, Minister Kenney would be able to witness the Jewish-only colonies that Israel has established there. These cantons are luxurious settlement blocks designed with the intention of ‘Judiazing’ Palestinian land. 220 settlements currently mean that 43 per cent of the West Bank is reserved for exclusive Jewish use. Palestinians can’t live there and need special permits to enter for occasional work. They are confined to their own ethnic enclaves where they live largely under sub-standard conditions, thanks to the now 46-year-old Israeli occupation.

If he were to visit, the honourable Minister would also notice the Israeli-only roads connecting Jewish colonies to each other and to Israel. While being built on occupied Palestinian land, this network of modern highways is practically inaccessible to Palestinians. A draconian regime of permits and checkpoints ensure that they use an inferior system of circuitous dirt roads, tunnels and sub-level streets to avoid the Jewish settlements. Palestinians are humiliated and delayed at these checkpoints on a daily basis; students miss class, patients aren’t able to make it to hospitals in time. At least 39 cases of deaths at check points have been documented. All the while Israeli residents in the same area have unfettered access to modern highways.

If he were to visit, Minster Kenney would also notice the dual legal systems that are implemented in the West Bank. In areas under Israeli control, Jewish settlers are subject to civilian law while Palestinians are subject to brutal military laws. This system violates the basic essence of equality before the law; especially given the vast difference in the two systems. Two sets of laws for two people; the ethnicity of the culprit determines one’s chances at a fair trail.

It is particularly ironic, and distasteful, for this statement to be coming from our Minister of Immigration. Israel openly exercises one of the world’s most blatantly racist immigration and citizenship policies. The Law of Return guarantees that Jews from anywhere in the world can immigrate to Israel or the OPT and live there. Yet, it disallows Palestinians who were expelled or fled during the 1948 and 1967 wars to return to their homes. Jews with no prior ties to Israel can immigrate to it; indigenous people of the land are barred for entering their homes – a policy in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.

Citizenship policies are also just as discriminatory. While a Jewish immigrant living in the West Bank is granted citizenship, Palestinians in the adjacent neighbourhoods are not given the same privilege. Furthermore, Palestinians are who have ‘permanent residency’ status in East Jerusalem have to continually prove their ‘center of life’ is in Jerusalem in order to hold on to this status. Jews in the same area are not subject to any of these bogus polices.

Minister Kenny naively wonders why organizers of Israeli Apartheid Week chose to ignore other atrocities around the globe and focused on Israel. His press release is the answer to the very question: The Canadian government is complicit in whitewashing and supporting a brutally oppressive occupation regime.

By invoking the anti-Semitism card, our government has actively stifled voices of those criticizing the Israeli occupation; this gives us all the more reason to continue organizing Israeli Apartheid Week.

Our government’s scandalous and unholy love affair with Israel needs to come to an end. This blinding and decadent ordeal has lasted far too long. Passions have run high and judgments have been impaired. Cupid no doubt made a mistake, but oppression cannot justify love. Oppression must end and so must this love story.

Also published in the Silhouette

 

Israel and Apartheid | Part 3

Note: Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) refers to East Jerusalem, West Bank and the Gaza Strip which have been under Israeli occupation since 1967

Apartheid Roads and Restrictions on Freedom of Movement

Israel has created a system of extensive roads in the Palestinian territories, primarily in the West Bank, which connect Jewish colonies to each other and to Israel. These roads are largely off-limits to Palestinians even though they are built on occupied Palestinian land. Palestinians are forced to use an alternative road network of inferior and more circuitous roads that run between the Israeli road network. In effect a two-tier road system – Israeli and Palestinian – operates side-by-side[1].

The first major impact of the forbidden road regime is that it has placed severe restrictions on Palestinian freedom of movement, effectively stifling the economy. A scheme of manned checkpoints,the Separation Wall, road blocks and a permit system ensure that Palestinians use the alternate system of sub-level streets, dirt roads and tunnels to by-pass settlements [2]. While Jewish settlers can travel freely without any hindrance on roads, Palestinians are required to present permits and need to be approved by IDF soldiers[3]. They are subject to constant delays, long lines and humiliating searches at check points. Access to receiving and providing medical services is also a serious concern; at least 39 cases of Palestinians dying due to delays at check points have been documented [4].

The second impact of the apartheid roads is that it has lead to territorial fragmentation of the West Bank, as can be seen here. Each Palestinian Bantustan is surrounded by these roads and is isolated from the neighboring enclave. The occupation forces not only prevent Palestinians from using ‘settler-only’ roads, they also prevent them from simply crossing the roads[5]. As a result, they can’t just drive across a road to the neighboring Bantustan; they have to take long routes to by-pass Israel’s road regime. A 10-20 minute journey now takes 2-3 hours [6]. In addition, each road has a 50–75m buffer zone on each side, where no construction is allowed. As a result, for each 100 km of road about 2,500 acres of West Bank land is confiscated [7].

Israel defends this road regime on security grounds. However, the security pretext is a racist one as it assumes that all Palestinians are a security risk; indigenous people have to prove their innocence to receive a permit – something rarely granted. Critics have objected to the roads being called ‘Jewish-only’ as they are accessible to anyone with Israeli citizenship. However, the roads are meant to service the settlements which are for exclusive Jewish use. This system resembles the “pass laws” of apartheid South Africa, which required black South Africans to demonstrate permission to travel or reside anywhere in South Africa [8].

Home Demolitions and Discriminatory Legal Enforcement

In areas of the OPT under its absolute authority(East Jerusalem and 60% of West Bank), Israel exercises complete control over any construction activity that takes place. Any Palestinian construction needs approval from Israeli authorities; else it is deemed ‘illegal’ and is subject to demolition. Thus, when Palestinians construct, repair or renovate homes, schools and hospitals without Israeli permission, they are at the risk of being bulldozed. [9] [10]

Despite the need to accommodate population growth and rebuild ageing infrastructure, this approval is rarely granted and Palestinians are forced to either renovate without permission or abandon their breaking homes. 94% of permit requests were rejected between 2000 and 2007; over 1600 buildings were bulldozed in this period – effectively displacing thousands of people. The UN reported that Israel demolished at least 25 schools in 2009 alone which served 6000 students [11].

On the other hand, Jewish colonizers have built buildings, roads – even entire settlement outposts – without Israeli authorization and they have not been demolished [12]. Unauthorized ‘outpost’ settlements are illegal even by Israeli law, yet they are not bulldozed (all settlements are illegal under international law). A few outposts which were demolished were rebuilt and the same number remains today. Settlement infrastructure continues to expand and the permit regime poses no obstacles to it. While settlers have moved to the Palestinian territories from abroad, Palestinians have no choice but to build illegally if they wish to remain in their native land [13].

Discriminatory Distribution of Resources (Farming and Water)

Israel has placed severe restrictions on agricultural resources available to Palestinians. By the creation of the illegal Separation Wall, Israel has isolated some of the richest and most productive farmland from the West Bank. Despite this ‘seam-zone’ area lying within the OPT, Palestinians farmers require permits to access their own land in the area. Requirements to obtain a permit are extremely stringent; only 40% of farmers were given access in 2006 [14].  Even when access is granted, it is for a very limited time with the gates often closing sporadically – they aren’t allowed to stay overnight. This regime prevents the ploughing, pruning, spraying and weeding required throughout the year that is necessary or optimum yields [15]. Farmers live in constant fear of being totally dispossessed of their land if the restrictions are increased. By contrast, Israelis and Jewish settlers face no such restrictions and do not require any sort of permits. [16]

Restrictions on farming and fishing are even more severe and brutal in the Gaza Strip, which has been subject to the US-backed Israeli siege. Israel has declared a buffer zone that extends for 1,500 meters into Gaza from the border fence (17% of the Strip); fishing has been restricted to three nautical miles from the shoreline [17]. The buffer zone has taken away 35% of the agricultural land available in Gaza. Farmers, fishermen and even children are shot at if they dare cross into this ‘buffer zone’ – despite this area being within the Palestinian territories. Since March 2010, the IDF has shot 17 children while they collected building gravel in this area [18]. In addition to these extra judicial killings, the Israeli military routinely levels agricultural produce in this area using tanks, bulldozers and fires in order to terrorize farmers and squash any hope they have left [19].

Discriminatory distribution of water to Jews and Palestinians is one of the most inhuman, yet hidden, policies of this regime. The Mountain Aquifer serves as the sole water source for Palestinians; Israel allocates just 20% of its water for them [20]. As a result, Palestinian per capita water consumption barely reaches 70 liters/ day – this is well below the recommended daily minimum of 100 liters per day set by the World Health Organization  (WHO). By contrast, Israeli daily consumption (including settlements) is 4 times that. In some parts of the West Bank, Jewish settlers use 20 times the water consumed by neighboring Palestinians, who survive on 20 liters of water per capita a day. This is the emergency amount set by the WHO in cases of disasters for ‘short-term relief’ in cases such as Darfur and the Haiti earthquake. In the Gaza Strip, 90% of the water is contaminated and unfit for human consumption [20] [21].

While settlements enjoy well-watered lawns, swimming pools and large irrigated farms, Palestinians down the road barely have enough water to suit domestic needs. They often have to rely on buying water from portable water tanks which can cost them 1/6 of their income. Like other oppressive policies, Israel also uses water restriction as a means of expulsion. The IDF has attacked and confiscated water tankers and transport equipment from villagers; offering to return them in return for leaving the land. Palestinians, being the resilient people that they are, continue to rebuild their homes and live in dire conditions- refusing to abandon the land which is rightfully theirs. [22] [23]

Next Post: More Policies and Conclusion 

References

_________________________________________________________

[1] The Humanitarian Impact on Palestinians of Israeli Settlements and other infrastructure in the West Bank.  UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 2007, pg 68

[2] Ibid , pg 58

 [3] Separate and Unequal: Israel’s Discriminatory Treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Human Rights Watch, New York 2010 – pg 15,16

 [4] Forbidden Roads: Israel’s Discriminatory Road Regime in the West Bank, B’Tselem. August 2004. pg 19

 [5] Ibid , pg 70

 [6] United Nations Human Rights, Report of the Special Rapporteur, John Duggard. ID: A/62/275, August 2007 – pg 16

 [7] Apartheid Roads: Promoting Settlements, Punishing Palestinians. Ma’an Development Center, Ramallah. December 2008 – pg 3

 [8] United Nations Human Rights, Report of the Special Rapporteur, John Duggard. ID: A/HRC/7/17, January 2008 – pg 16

 [9]  Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions. FAQs

 [10] Separate and Unequal: Israel’s Discriminatory Treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Human Rights Watch, New York 2010 – pg 11, 40, 43

 [11] Ibid

 [12] Ibid

 [13] Ibid

 [14] The Humanitarian Impact on Palestinians of Israeli Settlements and other infrastructure in the West Bank.  UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 2007, pg 110, 111

 [15] Ibid

 [16] Separate and Unequal: Israel’s Discriminatory Treatment of Palestinians in theOccupiedPalestinianTerritories. Human Rights Watch, New York 2010 – pg 15,16

 [17] Between Fence and a Hard Place  - UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

 [18] United Nations Human Rights, Report of the Special Rapporteur, Richard Falk . ID: A/HRC/16/72, 2010 – pg 15

 [19] Between Fence and a Hard Place  - UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

 [20]  Taking Control of Water Resources – B’Tselem, May 2011

 [21] Thirsting For Justice, Amnesty International, 2009

 [22] Ibid – pg 5

 [23] Separate and Unequal: – pg 19

 

Political Bickering and Chemical Weapons | Syrian Civil War

First published at MuslimMatters on Dec 13th, 2012 

Amidst the Presidential elections, Operation Pillar of Cloud, Palestinian bid at the UN, unrest in Egypt and a host of other issues, the Syrian conflict has been relegated to the back pages of our papers. Despite all this, the brutality of the situation on the ground continues to deteriorate.

The death toll of this murderous rampage has now exceeded 40,000. That’s right; over 40,000 Syrians have died since this started almost two years ago. In addition, over 440,000 people have fled the region and are registered as refugees; many more probably out there unregistered. 1.2 million people have been displaced internally; nearly half of them are children.

Despite the conflict turning into a long bloody episode which has thrown the whole region into turmoil, Bashar Assad is still determined to fight to the end. He has vowed that he won’t leave Syria and will die if he has to; despite talk of him being allowed safe passage if he ends the civil war. “I am not a puppet, I was not made by the West for me to go to the West or any other country…I am made in Syria, and I will live and die in Syria”, he declared.

The latest round of diplomatic bickering between Syria and the West has been on the issue of Patriot Missiles and chemical weapons. Turkey demanded NATO to provide it with the system to deploy along the Syrian border for defense against cross-border firing. NATO has approved this request only on grounds that the Patriot system be used for defense. This also means that hundreds of American and European troops will be deployed to the frontier for the first time; the closest form of intervention to date. Britain has also stated that it will supply rebels with training and equipment. A no-fly-zone, similar to the one in Libya, is still out of the question in this conflict.

The second issue that is dominating the discourse is the use of chemical weapons. Reports have emerged that point to the possibility of the Syrian regime deploying chemical weapons on it’s on people. Unnamed US intelligence officials have said that poison gas might be used by the government. America has warned Syria that such action would cross a ‘red line’ and will necessitate retaliatory action.

However, the veracity of reports about these Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) continues to be questioned. Syria has accused the West of forging this intelligence to serve as pretext to invade the country; its Deputy Foreign Minister stated, “Syria stresses again, for the tenth, the hundredth time, that if we had such weapons, they would not be used against its people. We would not commit suicide”. Is the US trying to pull-off-an-Iraq?

Robert Fisk seems to agree with this assertion. He points out that stories of Hafez-al-Assad employing chemical weapons 30 years ago are nothing but fairytales. As a journalist covering the conflict, he distinctly remembers never coming across any evidence of their use – despite the bloody massacre that happened then, chemicals were not employed. And they won’t be employed this time either; in his estimation that is.

As one journalist rightly asked US government officials, why do these chemical serve as the ‘red line’ to finally take some kind of action? Is the death of 40,000 people not enough? Why does it matter what means is deployed to kill innocent civilians? The moral ‘red line’ has long passed – talk about these superficial limits and threats of retaliation appear to be nothing but a game of diplomatic ping-pong. Everyone is dancing around the issue, trying to buy time, hoping that the conflict takes care of itself.

Signs are starting to emerge that perhaps, God-willing, an end to this bloodshed might be approaching. Syrian rebels are approaching Damascus as government forces weaken with continued defections. There is growing talk of a looming battle-to-the-death in the streets of Damascus. Fighting around the capital and airport has intensified, forcing the latter to be shut down twice this week – the airport has been declared a ‘legitimate target’ by rebel forces. Rebels have also made strategic gains such as capturing military bases, disrupting supply routes and seizing weaponry.

As we sit in our homes, helplessly reading these stories in horror, prayer is the strongest weapon we have in our hands. Scholars advice increasing our acts of worship, our dua and recitation of Quran. Prayers such as Dua al-Nasiri have specially been written for times like these. Please keep the people of Syria in your prayers.

 

Palestine, I am Sorry

Palestine, I am sorry. I am sorry on behalf our thick headed Harper government that opposed your bid to become an Observer State at the UN. I am sorry that Harper is oblivious to the suffering you’ve endured over the past 45 years. I am sorry, that our Foreign Minister, John Baird, is a dogmatic ideologue who defends Israel – your occupier- in the same way overzealous clerics preach from the pulpit.

I know, I know. Baird flew all the way to the UN to scold everyone about how silly it is for you to proceed unilaterally without Israel’s consent. It’s regrettable that he made a laughing stock of himself in front of the whole world. If only he, like the rest of us, could see the foolishness of his argument: Baird doesn’t want you to advance unilaterally for statehood. Yet, he doesn’t have a problem with Israel’s 45 year-old unilateral occupation and the continued unilateral colonization of your land. Shame on him.

See, the thing is, we weren’t always this idiotic. Our country has generally played an even hand in conflicts around the globe. You might find it hard to believe, but we were actually one of the founders of modern-day peacekeeping. Lester Pearson, our former PM, actually won the Nobel Peace Prize for tackling the Suez Crises. This episode is probably the second time he turned over in his grave. The first one was when they gave Obama the Peace Prize.

So, casting the ‘No’ vote now makes us a part of the Notorious Nine; the nine disgraceful governments who refused to acknowledge your Statehood – while they hypocritically carry the banner of the two-state solution. Well, at least, the rest of the world is smart enough to recognize that Israel has constantly jeopardized the two-state solution by continuing the settlement enterprise.

Everyone knows that negations have taken you nowhere over the past 20 years; you’ve only lost more land – its understandable you had to take such drastic measures. We applaud you for overcoming threats from bullies like our own government, and for being bold enough to march ahead.

Now, I want you to forget about the Notorious Nine for a while. I know they’ve threatened to cut your funding, but the money will come. It always does. Look at the bright side: you can now negotiate with Israel on higher diplomatic terms. You can take them to the International Criminal Court for perpetrating heinous crimes against you. You can actually hold your oppressor legally accountable. We all know that’s the main thing they were afraid of: you gaining more power and winning popular support of the public.

You might be wondering what has caused Canada, the peace loving nation of maple syrup and hockey, to delve into the realm of diplomatic absurdity. Well, it’s mainly the Harper government. They tricked us into voting for them – I know, it’s silly. We promise never to do it again. But we’ve also become complacent because of our glorious past as a bastion of human rights. For example, when the UN tried to warn us about our shortcomings in fulfilling food requirements for the needy, we told them to go ‘f*** off’ and lecture some third-world country. Know what I am sayin?

So, in conclusion, I want to apologize again for the lunacy and shortsightedness of our government. Canadians are a good people; we’ve always stood by the side of the oppressed. It is unfortunate that our country voted to be on the wrong side of history; we will regret that in the centuries to come. However, as history has also indicated, justice will triumph and you will eventually have your freedom. And when that happens, I hope our government will smarten up and issue you an official apology. Good luck in the fight ahead!

 

Examining Israel’s ‘Right to Defend Itself’

Barack Obama, when commenting about the recent warfare in Gaza, stated that he supports Israel’s right to defend itself from Gazan rocket attacks. He declared, almost chided, ‘Israel has every right to expect that it does not have missiles fired into its territory’. Canadian Foreign Minister, John Baird, also sang the same tune and reiterated the identical position.

This has been the standard position of our governments; it is no different than what it was during Israel’s Operation Cast Lead in 2008, which claimed the lives of over 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis. It seems like a reasonable position too; which explains our blind acceptance of it. If someone was launching rockets at our country, would we not fight back?

What has been conveniently omitted by our politicians and our media is one crucial piece of information: the Gaza Strip has been subject to a brutal military occupation by Israel for 45 years now. The international community, including US and Canada, recognize this occupation to be illegal. In addition, since 2006, Gaza has been under a severe economic siege which has made the dignified existence of Palestinians impossible.

Although Israel evacuated the Gaza Strip in 2005, it now maintains and controls the occupation from the outside; entering whenever it feels appropriate. On his recent visit to the area, Noam Chomsky described Gaza as the “world’s largest open-air prison”. The idea of the Gazan siege, in the words of Israeli official Dov Weisglass, “is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.”

Israel strictly controls air, land and sea access to Gaza. It has defined ‘buffer zones’ along Gaza’s agriculturally rich border where Palestinians are prohibited to enter; they are shot at if they try to walk on their own land. Fishermen too are fired at by mighty Israeli ships if they dare go 3 miles pass the shoreline. Israel strictly controls all imports into Gaza and exports are almost non-existent. Construction projects to rebuild vital infrastructure can’t be carried out, forcing the UN to declare the Strip ‘unlivable’ by 2020. Drones and F-16s whiz through the sky so often that their constant thundering has become background noise.

Israel regularly conducts military operations inside Gaza; frequently targeting civilians. Western media started reporting about Operation Pillar of Cloud as a response to Hamas’ rocket fire on November 14; as if the occupation forces had been patiently standing by the border since January 2009. What is unknown to us is the recent escalation started on November 5th when a Palestinian man was killed for simply being in the ‘buffer zone’. Then again, on November 8th, a 13-year old boy was killed while playing soccer by machine gunfire. Each death resulted in retaliation from Palestinian fighters and loss of more Palestinians lives; finally leading up the November 14th episode.

Subject to never ending humiliation, degradation and impoverishment, some Gazans end up joining Hamas’ military ranks or groups like Islamic Jihad. This small percentage of the population is driven to desperation and decides to resist the occupation violently.

Even though Hamas was elected by Gazans in 2006 to administer their internal affairs, it has been shunned as a terrorist organization. Hamas’ terrorism is akin to the terrorism of Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC), which employed violence to resist the Western-backed South African apartheid regime. Mandela and the ANC were also officially declared to be notorious terrorists at the time. When Hamas directly targets Israeli citizens, it is no doubt condemnable. However, this needs to be met by equal condemnation of Israel for attacking civilians; something our governments refuse to do.

Gilad Sharon, son of former PM Sharon, bluntly describes the pretext under which the military operation and siege on Gaza is justified in Israeli circles: “The residents of Gaza are not innocent, they elected Hamas. The Gazans aren’t hostages; they chose this freely, and must live with the consequences”. Even if one were to assume Hamas’ militant activities serve no purpose but to provoke Israel, is it still justified to collectively punish 1.6 million Gazans for voting the ‘wrong way’?

Instead of shelling Gaza, Israel can employ peaceful means to end the rocket fire into its own territory. Hamas’ leader, Khaled Meshal, describes it quite simply, “If occupation ends, resistance ends. If Israel stops firing, we stop firing”. While Hamas has accepted a two-state solution, the Israeli leadership under Netanyahu has demonstrated no interest in pursuing it; jeopardizing any attempt for it to be executed and pinning the blame on the opposing party. However, if Hamas really was the problem, why then was no deal reached before 2006, when they weren’t even a part of the equation?

Although a cease-fire has been brokered, it is likely to be broken again. Talk of Israel ‘defending itself’ will resume in the next round of escalation. And when that happens, I want you to consider this: Is it really possible for a regime guilty of occupation to be defending itself from those it oppresses?  To Obama and governments that unequivocally support Israel: Don’t the Palestinians have every right to not be occupied by Israel? Do they not have the right to defend themselves against an illegal occupation and an unjust siege?