Overblog Suivre ce blog
Editer l'article Administration Créer mon blog
5 octobre 2014 7 05 /10 /octobre /2014 10:13
"Processus de paix"

- The Peace Camp’s Recycled Outrage, Eugene Kontorovich (professor at Northwestern University School of Law, and expert on constitutional and international law) - "Now, lacking new activity to decry, the peace camp seizes on old projects, planned by prior governments, and passes them off as new".
   "Defining “settlements” has always been difficult. The relevant international law instruments speak only of people being “transferred or deported” by an occupying power. However, most Jews in the West Bank have not been moved there by the Israeli government (that is why they are called settlers, not transferees and deportees).
    But recent months have seen an unprecedented broadening of the concept of settlement activity to include things that do not involve Jews moving and, in this week’s dust-up, things that have already happened. The peace camp has been defining settlements down.
    The Israeli government has not issued new authorizations for the building of new homes in the “settlements” since before the collapse of negotiations with Mahmoud Abbas. Even Peace Now grudgingly concedes a “semi-freeze.” Yet the absence of new tenders creates a problem for peace processors: they traditionally blame any foot-dragging by Abbas on these tenders, and insist that if Israel desisted, the primary obstacles to fruitful negotiations would be removed.
    Yet as the moratorium grows longer, Abbas has, contrary to peace-process predictions, only moved farther away from negotiations. Indeed, he has fully adopted a new strategy of using international pressure to give him his demands without the trouble of having to make compromises.
    Unable to blame “new settlement activity,” the peace camp, uncritically parroted by the media, has defined settlements down. Anything is now called “new” settlement activity. Last month, Peace Now treated a surveying decision that certain lands were not owned by private parties–Jewish or Arab–as a massive outrage, though the technical and administrative action would not result in a single hut being built for a single Jew.
    Now, lacking new activity to decry, the peace camp seizes on old projects, planned by prior governments, and passes them off as new. This is the story behind this week’s outrage over the Givat Hamatos neighborhood in Jerusalem. The area is one where Jews already live, and immediately abuts the huge neighborhood of Gilo. It is “over” the Green Line by a few meters. However, this project received final approval in 2012. This week’s outrage is literally a rewarming of the statements from two years ago.
    Daniel Seidemann is an influential European-funded activist focusing on keeping Jews out of parts of Jerusalem formerly occupied by Jordan. His NGO said this when the plan was adopted back then: "Givat Hamatos is happening NOW, and approval of just the first part of the plan – Givat Hamatos A – suffices in having the full detrimental impact of the scheme… Construction of Givat Hamatos, whether private or public. (sic) can take place within a few short months, since building permits may be issued at any time."
    Perhaps the action two years ago was not final? No, the NGO reported back then that it was indeed “final.” So by definition no new decision of substance has been taken since–but that has not stopped Peace Now and Seidemann from recycling the outrage, which resulted in raining the ire of the U.S. down on Israel, or as they see it, on Netanyahu.
    Part of the problem is the permanent industry of European-funded settlement snoops. They count every new shack and every new permit (whereas ironically the EU has a limited grasp on how many Turkish settlers are on its own territory). They will not be silent simply for lack of what to report. One wonders if they will be even silent if all their political demands were realized, or whether they would, as has happened in Gaza, define occupation down."

- Jew-Free Jerusalem Neighborhoods Won’t Bring Peace, Jonathan S. Tobin (Commentary) - "there is no chance that the political culture of the Palestinians will one day make it possible for compromise over the land until the West stops giving moral support to demands for Jew-free zones".
   "[...] the arguments raised yesterday by the administration about new Jewish homes in Jerusalem—which echoed widespread condemnation of these projects by most of the international community—is troubling for more than just the usual reasons. If President Obama and his State Department truly believe that the presence of Jews in some neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem is an obstacle to peace that must be removed in order for an accord to be reached, then what they are doing is tacitly endorsing an Arab demand for Jew-free zones in the ancient capital as well as a Judenrein Palestine.
    As Netanyahu pointed out, the notion that it is immoral for Jews to buy property or build homes in parts of the city but that there is nothing wrong with Arabs doing the same in neighborhoods that are predominantly Jewish is inherently prejudicial. The double standard here is appalling. Arabs build (often illegally) throughout the Arab majority neighborhoods of the city and no one thinks twice about it even though, if we were to use the same standard by which Israel is judged, that, too, could be construed as an obstacle to peace.
    But the real problem is that treating Jewish building in the territories and especially in Jerusalem as offensive almost by definition confirms the Arab belief that there is something inherently illegitimate about the Jewish presence in the country. It is that concept and not Israeli actions that still constitutes the primary obstacle to peace.
    After all, if the Palestinians’ main priority was in establishing an independent state alongside Israel they could have accepted peace offers from Israel that would have given them almost all of the West Bank, Gaza, and a large share of Jerusalem. But they turned those offers down in 2000, 2001, and 2008 and refused to negotiate seriously with Israel again this year even though Netanyahu had already signaled a willingness to compromise on territory. It wasn’t settlements that stopped them from grabbing independence but the fact that recognizing the legitimacy of a Jewish no matter where its borders are drawn was still anathema in their political culture. Indeed, when Hamas, which commands the support of the majority of Palestinians and far more than the Palestinian Authority and Mahmoud Abbas, speaks of the “occupation,” they are not referring to the West Bank but to all of pre-1967 Israel.
    While the majority of Israelis have drawn the appropriate conclusions from Palestinian rejectionism and understand that peace is nowhere in sight, most still hope that someday this will change. But there is no chance that the political culture of the Palestinians will one day make it possible for compromise over the land until the West stops giving moral support to demands for Jew-free zones.
    Netanyahu does well to ignore these latest complaints just as he has done in the past, to the applause of the vast majority of Israelis, when the U.S. attacked the right of Jews to live in Jerusalem. If the Palestinians someday make peace and Jerusalem is split, does President Obama really think it can be done on the basis that both Jews and Arabs would populate the Israeli parts but that the Palestinian areas will be ethnically cleansed of all Jews? If so, then their bitter criticism of Jews moving into Silwan or the mixed neighborhood of Givat Hamatos makes sense. But if the goal is to have an open city in which coexistence prevails, then these arguments are counter-productive.
    There are reasons why Israelis are wary about the idea of leaving behind Jews in areas that will, at least in theory, become a Palestinian state. Most revolve around the fact that such holdouts will become immediate targets for terrorist murderers. But if the Palestinians are told by the United States that it is perfectly OK for them to demand that no Jew is allowed to live in areas that they might control, including in Jerusalem, then there is no incentive for them to make peace on any terms."

Gaza & Hamas

- Leading American Journalist Slams AP Claim That ‘Vast Majority’ of Gazan Dead Were Civilians (Algemeiner)
   "A leading American investigative journalist and political commentator is going on the offensive against the widespread claim that the vast majority of the casualties in Gaza during the summer conflict between Israel and Hamas were civilians. Forbes contributor Richard Behar is taking the Associated Press (AP) to task for its repeated assertion that the overwhelming proportion of Palestinian deaths during the conflict were civilian. “They report it without any caveats, or any skepticism, or any competing sources of data,” Behar said in a post yesterday on his Facebook page.
    In an interview with The Algemeiner, Behar – whose August 21 column entitled “The Media Intifada” offered trenchant criticisms of American media coverage of the Gaza war – expressed grave concern about the AP’s reporting of the conflict. “AP has enormous power and influence in the media world, especially with the big media outlets who pick up their material all the time,” Behar said. “As long as they keep shooting this stuff out, they are doing damage. They should not be saying in their stories that the vast majority of casualties are civilians. They could at least mention that there are other sources reaching different conclusions.” [...]
    Detailed research by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, an Israeli think-tank, reaches very different conclusions based on the same lists of names collated by the Gaza Health Ministry. The Center has now issued five reports examining the names of the Palestinians killed in Operation Protective Edge, arguing that “the findings of our investigation so far (based on approximately 40% of the names of the dead) suggest that terrorist operatives constitute about 49 percent of the fatalities who have been identified, while non-involved civilians constitute approximately 51 percent.”
    Such findings, Richard Behar said, should persuade media outlets like the AP that unambiguous references to civilians as the “vast majority” of the dead does a serious disservice to accurate reporting. “Do journalism,” Behar urged. “That’s what AP customers pay for”."


- La Suède va reconnaître l'Etat de Palestine (AFP) - "Si le gouvernement suédois parvient à ses fins, la Suède sera le premier pays à reconnaître un Etat palestinien en étant membre de l'Union européenne".
   "Le nouveau gouvernement suédois de centre gauche va reconnaître un Etat de Palestine, a annoncé vendredi le Premier ministre Stefan Lofven. [...]
    Cette annonce, de la part d'un Etat réputé pour être un intermédiaire fiable dans les affaires internationales, ne manquera pas de susciter l'attention des autres Etats membres de l'UE, mais risque aussi d'attirer des critiques de la part d'Israël, ainsi que des Etats-Unis et de l'UE, qui affirment qu'un Etat palestinien indépendant ne peut émerger que via un processus de paix négocié. Au sein de l'UE, quelques pays, comme la Hongrie, la Pologne et la Slovaquie, ont reconnu l'existence d'un Etat palestinien mais ils l'avaient fait avant d'adhérer à l'UE. Si le gouvernement suédois parvient à ses fins, la Suède sera le premier pays à reconnaître un Etat palestinien en étant membre de l'Union européenne. [...]"
- Proche-Orient : la Suède va reconnaître l'"État de Palestine" (AFP) - "Le nouveau gouvernement suédois formé vendredi, qui allie sociaux-démocrates et Verts, est plus favorable à la cause palestinienne que le précédent".
   "[...] Le nouveau gouvernement suédois formé vendredi, qui allie sociaux-démocrates et Verts, est plus favorable à la cause palestinienne que le précédent, qui suivait la ligne des grands pays d'Europe de l'Ouest sur la question. La reconnaissance de l?État palestinien et le soutien "actif au travail de réconciliation" sont cités dans le programme de gouvernement du parti social-démocrate, qui souhaite également que "les crimes de guerre d'Israël soient examinés et l'occupation de Gaza levée". Le Premier ministre n'a pas précisé si la reconnaissance par Stockholm de l'État palestinien serait soumise au vote du Parlement, où le gouvernement est minoritaire. [...]"

- La reconnaissance internationale d'un État palestinien est "prématurée", selon Washington (AFP)
   "Les États-Unis ont prévenu vendredi que toute "reconnaissance internationale d'un État palestinien" était "prématurée", après que la Suède eut annoncé qu'elle reconnaîtrait un "État de Palestine". La porte-parole du département d'État Jennifer Psaki a réaffirmé le "soutien" de Washington au principe d'un "État palestinien", mais par le biais d'un processus de paix, d'une "solution négociée" et de "reconnaissance mutuelle" entre Palestiniens et Israéliens. Les États-Unis et leur secrétaire d'État John Kerry, artisans entre juillet 2013 et avril dernier de la reprise du dialogue direct entre les deux camps, ont toujours milité pour une "solution à deux États vivant côte à côte", a rappelé Jennifer Psaki. Mais "ce sont les parties qui doivent vouloir et pouvoir aller de l'avant", a plaidé la porte-parole. [...]"
- Etat palestinien : Liberman critique la décision de la Suède (AFP) - « Le Premier ministre Löfven doit comprendre qu’aucune déclaration ou action par une partie externe ne peut se substituer à des négociations directes entre les deux parties ».

- Ukraine : 2 enfants tués par un obus (AFP) - "Deux enfants ont été tués et cinq autres blessés en déplaçant un obus non explosé dans une zone séparatiste de l'est de l'Ukraine".

Partager cet article

Repost 0
Published by Occam
commenter cet article



  • : La Boucle d'Occam
  • La Boucle d'Occam
  • : Chaque jour, une Boucle reprend l'actualité de France et du Moyen-Orient autour des thèmes d'Israël et de l'antisémitisme.
  • Contact