We have little patience for critics of Israel who object to security checkpoints that inconvenience those going about their peaceful business. The problem with the objection, naturally enough, is that not everyone going about their business is peaceful.
This is especially - and importantly - true of the entrances to Israel's populated areas. Places like Jerusalem, the capital.
On Jerusalem's southern edge, in the general area of suburban Gilo and Malcha and the nearby Israeli community of Har Gilo, close to Jerusalem's famous Biblical Zoo and more or less on the outer edges of Bethlehem, there's a security checkpoint we know as Ein Yael, with a gorgeous public nature reserve and ancient historical site, the Ein Haniya natural spring and a hands-on museum for children. (Haaretz wrote about developments there in the past few weeks.)
B'Tselem, a far-left Israeli group, that deals in human rights violations, publishes an on-listing ["Checkpoints in the West Bank and Gaza"] which catalogues what you would expect from the name. Here's how it describes the checkpoint:
al-Walajah / Malha / ‘Ein Yalu
Permanently staffedLast checkpoint before Israel
Located on the Green Line. Staffed around the clock by the military, Border Police, and private security companies. Closed to Palestinians, with the exception of East Jerusalem residents.
In the very early hours of this morning (Friday), a little after 1:00 am according to this Hebrew social media report, members of the Israeli Border Guard (Mishmar Hagvul - the border security branch of the national police) did exactly what security personnel are supposed to do when everything works right: they spotted what they called a "suspicious" vehicle en route to Jerusalem right at the crossing. This one had yellow Israeli license plates, and on closer inspection was found to be driven by a pair of Palestinian Arabs who we now know are residents of Hebron and nearby Beit Jala.
Security forces arrested two West Bank Palestinians who tried to enter Israel with a pipe bomb Thursday night, police said. A statement from police said the “suspicious” vehicle carrying the Palestinians was stopped at the Ein Yael checkpoint in southern Jerusalem. A search of the vehicle yielded the homemade explosive device, a knife, and tens of thousands of shekels in cash and checks, it said. An army sapper was called to the scene to defuse the pipe bomb. The suspects were detained for questioning.
"Border Police soldiers and police officers are deployed around the clock in the Jerusalem area to locate and inspect vehicles and suspects in order to protect the lives of Israeli citizens."
The suspects have now been taken for interrogation. Neither they nor their weapons of war would have been intercepted if the checkpoint were not there (and they knew it was so they took an unsuccessful calculated risk) and the security personnel were less alert.
Buried deep inside an opinion poll report just published by the Jerusalem Media and Communications Centre is a real nugget.
JMCC's website says [here] the Ramallah-based organization was
established in 1988 by a group of Palestinian journalists and researchers seeking to provide information on what was happening in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Every few months, it publishes public opinion polls. The one we are discussing in this post was released for publication four days ago, on March 1, 2017. The next most recent one came out on October 9, 2016 - five months earlier.
To understand the context of what we're about to say, consider these recent news reports:
Gaza Strip - Anger is growing among Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip as the narrow coastal enclave's electricity crisis deepens. An estimated 10,000 Palestinians flooded the streets in Jabaliya refugee camp in northern Gaza last week, after more than a week of lengthy power cuts. In many parts of Gaza, residents received only three hours of electricity at a time, punctuated by 12-hour blackouts. Protesters expressed anger at Israel's blockade, and at the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority and Hamas authorities in Gaza. Demanding a solution to the power cuts, some demonstrators clashed with security forces. Speaking to local media on Monday, Gaza's Interior Ministry spokesman Iyad al-Buzm said that protesters arrested for "creating chaos" had been released after an agreement between various political factions. Nearly two million Palestinians in Gaza have endured electricity shortages since Israel, with the help of Egypt, imposed a suffocating blockade on the territory a decade ago. The electricity crisis has been exacerbated since Israel's 51-day war on Gaza in 2014, during which the main power plant was targeted and damaged by Israeli forces... ["Protests erupt in Gaza as electricity crisis deepens", Aljazeera, January 21, 2017]
Gaza requires 450-500 MegaWatts of power a day but is receiving barely a third of that. About 30 MW produced by its own ageing power plant, 30 MW imported from Egypt and 120 MW supplied from Israel... For weeks, Gazans have been making do with less than half their usual electricity supply - barely a few hours a day - with no sign of the shortages alleviating anytime soon, fuelling distress and frustration among the population... [S]ince late last year, there have been only three or four hours of electricity a day in total. The costs of running generators have spiralled. People are trying to light and heat their homes with candles or by burning scrap wood. Families wake in the middle of the night, when the power sometimes comes on, to take showers or wash clothes. "We live like rats," said Mazen Abu Reyala, an unemployed fisherman and father of five, sitting around a primitive stove that he uses to warm his house... ["Energy crisis leaves Gaza with barely four hours of power a day", Reuters, January 12, 2017]
Now consider the results of JMCC's rather inadequately named "Poll No. 89 - February 2017 - Gender, Equality and Politics" In the full text version of its analysis, it touches on Gazan anger at those responsible for the electric power power fiasco that is making hard lives even more stressful. And it gives numbers:
Source: JMCC Poll Number 89 (published March 1, 2017) [Online here]
Interesting. Look at the "Gaza" column, which reflects the opinions of the direct victims of the Hamas regime, those closest to the problem and suffering the most. Half of them lay the blame not at the feet of the Israelis but at the doorstep of their lords, masters and oppressors, the Islamist ideologues of Hamas.
When did you ever read or hear that via conventional news channels?
Notice also that Palestinian Arabs living far from Gaza (the column headed "West Bank") and who have essentially no first-hand knowledge or experience of living under the Hamas regime are twice as sure as their Gazan brethren (who do) that Israel is to blame.
Also interesting: if you read JMCC's poll summary (as distinct from the detailed report), there's not a word in it about the electricity crisis. Check for yourself; the summary report is online here. We're certain most reporters and their editors didn't bother to delve into the details. The summary met their needs. And so they missed a serious insight. And so did the consumers of their news.
Our friends over at the excellent Israellycool noticed something else funny/outrageous about social media coverage of the Gazan electricity screw-up. In "B’Tselem Caught In Malicious (And Dumb) Lie" (February 28, 2017), Israellycool's moving spirit, Aussie Dave, published a heart-tugging photo of an attractive young "medical student in Gaza [who] studies by the light of a battery-powered lamp... How does life without electricity, 90 minutes from Tel-Aviv, look like?" The photo and the accompanying text had been published by the ever-enthusiastic campaigners at B'Tselem.
Leaving aside the clumsy English (they have higher priorities at B'Tselem), if you take a close look at the "battery-powered" lamp, you quickly notice - unless you're as obsessed with simplistic anti-Israel narratives as B'Tselem's lot are - that it's not. The lamp is plugged into a wall power socket.
(And remember this earlier Gazan attempt [here] from 2008 at pulling the shades over people's eyes? Reuters played a central role in that scam too.)
Truth is often boring and shaded in grey. But that doesn't exonerate any of us from seeking it - even in the dark and the gloom. And that's especially true of the ladies and gentlemen of the news-reporting industry.
World Vision's Middle East involvement goes
beyond mere "humanitarianism" and includes
"advocacy" with such far-left Israel-based partners
as "Breaking the Silence" and B'tselem.
Note that the word "terror" appears nowhere in its
brochure [check here]
First, what are the charges against World Vision's chief manager in Gaza, El-Halabi? NPR says they are about the charity's funds being "diverted" to these ends:
Money raised to support injured children in Gaza was diverted to the families of Hamas militants who claimed their children were wounded. Money was paid as salaries to Hamas militants who were falsely registered as World Vision employees. Costs for legitimate projects such as greenhouses were inflated, with the extra money going to Hamas. Fake charities that were actually Hamas fronts received World Vision donations. And entire lists of aid beneficiaries were fictitious, so instead of giving money to needy farmers, the money was handed out to Hamas members. Hamas spokesman Hazem Qasim told NPR that the allegations were made by "an enemy entity that has no credibility at all to us," and that "Israel is trying to make fake media wins." Pressed on whether Halaby was a member of Hamas, Qasim declined to comment... ["Israel Accuses World Vision Employee Of Embezzling Millions For Hamas", NPR, August 5, 2016]
A wide-ranging article seeking to put the current allegations, now under scrutiny in an Israeli criminal court, into a broader context has just been published today. In "World Vision’s Decades-Long Hate Campaign Against Israel" that appears online and in the December 2016 issue of The Tower Magazine, Luke Moon, deputy director at the Philos Project ("the network hub for leaders and future leaders who are committed to promoting positive Christian engagement in the Middle East") provides some background we have not seen elsewhere.
He refers to the criminal charges we mentioned yesterday and to the charity's problematic reaction:
World Vision has responded by questioning the charges, claiming that the entire budget for Gaza over the last ten years is just $22.5 million. They also claim to be impartial and neutral on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, rejecting any involvement in political activities. While this claim may be true in other conflict zones where World Vision operates, it is not true in regard to Israel. Not only does World Vision have a long history of antagonism toward the Jewish state, it has done more to undermine Christian support for Israel than any other organization... [The Tower, December 2016]
How much should that worry us? A lot, we think, because
World Vision is the largest and most respected Christian humanitarian organization in the world. In homes and churches across the U.S., it is widely known for assisting children and families in need... [The Tower, December 2016]
Moon traces the changes in this important charity's orientation to the entry of a handful of named individuals. One of them, Tom Getman, became director of World Vision's Jerusalem, West Bank and Gaza (JWBG) operation in 1997.
World Vision advocates for the Palestinian Arab argument on the security barrier issue [Image Source]
Under his leadership, World Vision’s work in the Holy Land became increasingly anti-Israel. It was not uncommon for Getman to travel the world promoting World Vision, as well as the work of Sabeel, one of the most aggressive anti-Israel and anti-Zionist Palestinian Christian organization in the region. Sabeel promotes “Palestinian liberation theology,” which tends to justify Palestinian nationalism as a theological construct by regularly using themes from the New Testament to demonize Israel and Christians that support Israel... Under Getman’s leadership, World Vision also began to drift away from its evangelical roots, even as it began accepting more and more money from the U.S. government and expanded into a global organization... [The Tower, December 2016]
Moon goes on to make the case that World Vision's alleged failure to identify the lethal corruption (our term, not his) in their Gaza office
stems from three sources: Willingness to overlook terrorist atrocities, institutional antagonism toward Israel, and hostility towards Christian Zionism... [Senior management] never seemed to be overly bothered by Palestinian terrorist organizations’ role in the conflict with Israel. Mooneyham’s willingness to compare Israeli soldiers with Nazis, Getman’s friendship with Hezbollah leaders, and Snary’s repetition of Hamas talking points shows the depth of World Vision’s institutional distaste for Israel and the absence of critical voices within its leadership... [The Tower, December 2016]
Those, naturally, are not the factors that an Israeli criminal tribunal is going to examine. But they surely ought to be on the minds of charity-minded people - and certain NGOs and governments and their foreign aid programs (like the UN's World Food Programme, the UK's DFID, the EU, Australia's AusAID, the United States' USAID, Canada's CIDA and the German Humanitarian Assistance office) - before they entrust further donation funds to World Vision's Gaza program.
It's the day after Judaism's Yom Kippur. In some ways, it's a shame the Jewish practice of focusing energy and thoughts on wrong-doings on one long (very long) day once a year - no eating, no drinking - and sincerely repenting for them has not been adopted outside the Jewish world in the way that we Jews do.
Even those not very observant of Judaism's detailed code of conduct do this both as individuals and as a community. Does this make "us" holier than other people? No, of course not, though observant Jews do have a fairly concrete sense of the sacred and what holy means. and strive to bring it into our lives. And are we doing better now that the Day of Atonement is behind us? Only time will tell, but the day does end on a distinctly optimistic note.
We're thinking about this after reading a little-noticed report about a proud, eloquent Palestinian Arab with a passion for human rights and the courage (as we have seen from up close ourselves) to speak out in defence of the values in which he believes even when his audiences are not too sympathetic.
He has just been visiting New Zealand. And according to a seriously disturbing report we have just seen from there, Bassem Eid was treated despicably.
Some readers might be surprised to know that the sharpest of the disgraceful responses to which he was treated came from some of the very people who posture and trumpet themselves as respectful defenders of free, open speech.
His bio says that Bassem Eid spent the first 33 years of his life, starting from birth, in the UNRWA-run Shuafat refugee camp on the edge of Jerusalem. His formative years probably resembled those of hundreds of thousands of other Palestinian Arabs. He went on to work for B'Tselem, an Israeli NGO that claims to "document human rights violations in the occupied territories, combat denial and help to create a human rights culture in Israel". B'Tselem is one of the perennial darlings of the hypercritical "activists" who obsess over Israel's shortcomings. Then he left them to create his own human rights body to advance the interests of his people.
The article [here] by a New Zealand friend of Israel, Miriam Bell, is upfront about the challenge of bringing a man like Eid to the South Pacific. He has a history of being outspokenly critical of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) "movement" "and all that it represents". This, she says at the outset, "may have played a part in the hostility that greeted his recent visit..." The evidence suggests she's right.
The Astor Foundation, named for a prominent New Zealander whom we met in the 1970's, and focusing on human rights issues, sponsored Eid's trip to New Zealand. It's a worthy new body that seeks to promote "human dignity for people of all faiths, cultures and ethnicities", and addresses "issues that threaten the peace and harmony of New Zealand" including "extremism and ethnic and religious hate".
As frequently happens when zealots grab the steering wheel of social movements, the local NZ advocates for the Palestinian Arabs got alarmed at the idea of an independent thinker - even one raised in a Pal Arab refugee camp - and reached for the mute button. What could have worried them?
Eid's perspective on Palestinian affairs is a bit different to most Palestinian activists. He is very critical of the Palestinian leadership - citing corruption as one of the leading causes of ongoing Palestinian suffering - and believes it is wrong to focus solely on the Israeli side of the conflict. These views are not embraced by pro-Palestinian groups. One in New Zealand accused Eid of "hysterical, anti-Palestinian ranting" and of being an "asset for racist, Zionist organisations dedicated to undermining Palestinian rights." [AIJAC, September 22, 2015]
Plainly seeing themselves as the guardians of the Palestinian Arab mission in that far-off island nation, they busied themselves with undercutting, demonizing and silencing the voice of a Palestinian Arab for whom human rights is considerably more than a political slogan. And while they successfully demand for themselves and their cause the right to be heard at every possible opportunity, they had no difficulty pulling insider strings and aggressively hostile rhetoric to silence Eid's unique voice.
Bell quotes Dr. Love Chile, an associate professor of sociology at Auckland University of Technology, a graduate of Ahmadu Bello University in Nigeria, and previously a consultant to the New Zealand government's Human Rights Commission. He spoke out against Eid getting an audience because he disagreed "with Eid's philosophical/political position and was not prepared to expose his students to that sort of individual."
We think a person could write a thesis about the condescension and hypocrisy of that viewpoint.
Then, just two days before the first lecture, the Fabian Society pulled out, citing "the degree of tension in this issue and how the Palestinian view is represented." The Fabian Society's tradition is one of promoting free and open debate. Its vision is "the advancement of New Zealand Society through progressive education and debate." How its actions in this situation support these goals is a mystery. [AIJAC]
Eid's university campus lectures went ahead:
Essentially, his message was that there is absolute corruption within the Palestinian Authority and there is a need for genuine support of the Palestinians - as opposed to the sort of grand-standing and politicising that we currently see. [AIJAC]
But the speaker first had to endure a gaggle of New Zealand protestors who handed out hostile material inside the venue and accused Eid of being a "traitor" and (worse, we assume) a Zionist. Perhaps they also argued with the points he made. If so, we haven't seen those contentions reported. The impression we have is that they ignored his views, preventing them from being heard to the greatest extent possible by intimidation and demonization. Eid's human rights don't seem to be on anyone's agenda.
New Zealand's mainstream media were scarcely more open. An article about the Eid visit, by Sheree Trotter, a Māori New Zealander and advocate for Israel, gives the context:
It is perhaps not surprising that Eid’s visit was largely ignored by the New Zealand media. His message to the international community goes against the grain of the dominant narrative on the Israel/Palestinian conflict. Eid is quick to point out uncomfortable realities, such as the role of UN funded groups in perpetuating the misery of the Palestinians whilst gaining power and money on the backs of their suffering; the bias of a media which has lost its way and become politically motivated; the apartheid lie which can only be explained as yet another manifestation of antisemitism. Bassem Eid identifies proudly as Palestinian. From his perspective identity is not the primary concern for most Palestinians. They know who they are. At the core of Eid’s message is his concern for the future well-being of his own: “We are people who want to survive. We are people who are looking for a better level of life. We are a people that want to ensure the future of our children. ["A Palestinian voice of realism", September 8, 2015, Times of Israel]
I’ve argued with racists and Putinists in my time and – to put it as mildly as I can – these little bastions of academia were up there with them in their contempt for basic freedoms. Contempt is perhaps not quite the right word. Most simply did not understand what freedom was, and could not grasp the need for universal human rights. They could not see themselves as others saw them, or understand that by giving up on basic principles, because they are difficult to live with, they had left themselves naked before their enemies... ["Britain's hypocritical universities are naked before their enemies", The Spectator, April 21, 2015"]
It's a growing problem, in case anyone's not noticing.
But all is not lost, as we reminded ourselves this morning. That's when we learned about a YouTube video, originating in Egypt, that has restored some of our faith in the ability of determined individuals, willing to risk what it takes in the pursuit of truth and freedom to speak out and say what they believe to be true.
It's ten and a half minutes long, almost entirely spoken in Arabic, and entitled Why do you hate Israel? But the clip maker, Sherif Gaber Abdelzim Bakr, just 22 years old, provides almost-English subtitles. And for his guts and clear thinking alone, he deserves a wide audience. As we write this, the clip has had 58,000 views since it went up three days ago.
Support probably means something to him since he's currently in hiding after being convicted seven months ago by an Egyptian court on multiple charges that include contempt of religion, spreading immoral values, and abnormal thoughts that provoke and disturb the public peace and the national security of Egypt. (The background is here.)
Bassem Eid is not in hiding, and not in danger of going to jail, at least not in Israel. But (and we have not heard this from him), it might be some time before he willingly exposes himself again to Western (or at least South Pacific) academics or audiences with some specific sub-set of human-rights on their minds, or self-proclaimed advocates of free speech. At a certain point, a person just gets sick of the empty slogans and pines for a world where values and opinions can count on getting a certain degree of respect and exposure.
Ah, you're asking about that optimistic note we mentioned that marks the end of Yom Kippur? Right. The very last words of the day-long prayers are Leshana Haba Biyerushalayim. Next year in Jerusalem. It's not paradise here, but when someone we don't agree with gets up and wants to speak, Israel's very robust democratic spirit pretty much ensures his or her voice will be heard. Anything less would be a sin.
From 2012 Palestinian Prisoners' Day: The prisoner in the poster on the
right is Abdullah Barghouti. See background here
and here about the man and his monstrous crimes [Image Source]
Yesterday was Palestinian Prisoners' Day:
Palestinians across the territories attended marches and rallies Wednesday as a show of solidarity with prisoners from the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza held in Israeli facilities. Some 3,000 Palestinians in Israeli jails on Wednesday refused breakfast as part of a one-day hunger strike to mark Prisoners' Day, an Israeli prison official said. [Al Akhbar English, Beirut]
The number of Palestinian Arab prisoners in Israeli jails is estimated by the ultra-left Israeli political pressure group B’Tselem at 4,713. It's a number widely quoted in the media today. So too are the public events that were held to draw attention to the day.
Speaking of prisoner numbers, a different news report also from yesterday describes the close ties that bind prisoners from Fatah, Islamic Jihad, Hamas and other splinter factions inside Israeli jails. Outside prison, they murder each other, but their shared hatred for everything Israeli ensures that they find a modus vivendi while serving their time.
The article mentions in passing that out of the total population of incarcerated Palestinian Arab prisoners, no fewer than 2,325 have “blood on their hands” or were involved in acts of violence against Israeli soldiers. 550 of them are serving life terms; this is not for parking offences.
The Al Akhbar English report we quoted includes a snippet of an interview with Abdallah Abu Rahmeh. He's described as spokesman for the Popular Struggle Coordination Committee:
Activists reached the Ofer prison perimeter on Wednesday morning, and tore down 50 meters of the prison fence, mounting a Palestinian flag on prison grounds. “After around four minutes of being at the fence, Israeli soldiers showed up. They fired tear gas, rubber bullets, and sound bombs at the protesters... It is necessary to pressure Israel to release the Palestinian prisoners and hunger strikers,” he added.
So allow us to ask: why is it necessary for Israel to release the Palestinian Arab prisoners, thousands of whom are behind bars?
Most are there, as we just noted, because they were convicted of offences including murder, attempted murder, possession of lethal weapons and ammunition, and other acts of terrorism directed at defenceless and innocent civilians. Whose interests does it serve to set them free?
A different news report - also from yesterday - might suggest an answer:
Security forces arrested a Palestinian man from Nablus on suspicion of plotting to carry out a terrorist attack, the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) announced in a statement on Wednesday. The suspect, 24-year-old Amir Brakhat, had made the Umrah pilgrimage to Mecca, where he met and was recruited by Amir Dukan, a convicted terrorist from Nablus whom Israel released to the Gaza Strip as part of the 2011 Schalit prisoner exchange. Dukan offered Brakhat $60,000 to open fire at Israeli traffic near Nablus or hurl a grenade at the IDF checkpoint located in Hawara, the investigation revealed...“This investigation again illustrates the attempts by terrorist organizations to promote their activity in the West Bank through the increased use of ex-prisoners released in the Schalit deal,” the [Shin Bet] security agency continued. “In this context, the Umrah is exploited for meetings on Saudi territory, for the passing of messages, ideas and plans to carry out acts of terrorism.”
The Shin Bet has observed an increase in the number of terrorist plots involving ex-security prisoners who were among the 1,200 [sic] prisoners released by Israel in 2011 in exchange for the return of IDF soldier Gilad Schalit, who was held captive in Gaza for over five years by Hamas.
The security agency also announced on Wednesday that it arrested two men on suspicion of attempting to smuggle Hamas money earmarked for terrorism from Jordan to the West Bank. Moreover, the money was traced back to the very same Amir Dukan at the center of the first investigation, the agency noted.
So here are some thoughts based on what we have learned about the 1,027 Palestinian Arab terrorists released from prison in 2011 in the notorious Gilad Shalit Deal. The goal of Palestinian Arab Prisoners' Day is to release more of them. Does this make sense? Why?
It's certain to set back the cause of peaceful relations and resolution of the armed conflict between the Arabs and Israel. It inspires would-be terrorists because there's a good chance they will be back on the streets and alleys quite soon if their plans get thwarted. That's good if you want the armed conflict to go on and on.
It will produce more injuries and deaths among Israelis, most of them (by far) civilians since that's what terrorists always seek to do. Terrorists thrive on adulation and public protests, and will rise to the occasion if the focus (cameras, reports, speeches) is on them. That's great if you're a terrorist or one of their supporters.
Most of the terrorists inside Israeli prisons today hurt, wanted to hurt, or failed trying to hurt, ordinary Israelis (their efforts rarely target soldiers). By hurt, we also mean kill. The victims, and we include ourselves in the category, know that a democratic society has processes that enshrine justice as a supreme value. It puts offenders on trial as part of a social contract in which it protects the citizenry (of course) and pursues and restrains the malefactors. Once the latter are convicted, their punishment will be calibrated to meet society's expectations. So... if you release them well before the terms meted by your courts, you are showing your justice system to be unreliable, capricious, inconsistent and susceptible to political pressures. That's not just good; it's excellent if you are an enemy of the system and seek to undermine it and the victims.
Innumerable international organizations and NGO's one way or another sit in judgment on Israel. It's exceptionally rare for any of them to admit to shortcomings. Such a pigs-do-fly moment came this week via the current chairperson of the UN Human Rights Council, Doru Costea.
His council has failed to handle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a balanced fashion, he said in the French daily Le Temps. It concentrates too much on abuses by Israel and he's dissatisfied. "The council has failed... The council must remain simple, and concentrate on the human rights dimension, but it must look at the stance of all sides, not only one country." The fact that a majority of the Council's 47 seats are held by Asian and African countries "gives a certain power, but that does not mean that this power is always used wisely" said the man who ought to know, with straight-faced understatement.
Candor of this sort is not so common. How have other NGO's been dealing with the extremely hostile stands of some of their office-holders, constituents and members in relation to Israel and the Jews? It's a bleak picture. Look at how Israel's decision this past Wednesday to impose further economic sanctions on the Gaza Strip was treated.
The Israeli government's security cabinet sat down last week to formulate a response to the steadily increasing scale of acts of terror directed at Israel from Gaza. Its well-publicized decision raised for the first time the explicit possibility of cutting off electricity to Gaza's inhabitants. The decision defines Gaza as "hostile territory"and says that if more Qassam rockets are launched from Hamas-controlled territory, there will be possible fuel and power cut-offs down the road.
A word of background. In 2005, Israel under prime minister Ariel Sharon unilaterally pulled its forces out of Gaza and uprooted all the thriving Israeli towns that had been created in the area. The entire Gaza Strip was now in Palestinian hands. (The entry and exits remain under Israeli and Egyptian control.) The stated expectation was that this would end terrorism from the area. The result of course was the opposite: a violent, jihadist Hamas regime took over, and rocket attacks on Israel have consistently increased.
The decision last week is a carrot and stick strategy where the ass is the Hamas regime which until now has shown zero responsiveness to logic, political good sense or humane behaviour. In practice, nothing has changed yet while Israel sits and waits to see whether - against all the odds - some rare good sense prevails in Gaza's halls of power. But as the authoritative NGO Monitor points out, the practical and legal ramifications of Israel's new stand are unclear. No action has yet been taken. This is about future cut-offs of Israel-originating electricity; future cut-offs of Israel-originating fuel; future firings of Gaza-originating Qassams.
But even though Israel has done nothing so far to give effect to the threat of sanctions, let's pay a moment's attention to the mature and sober judgments of the international community.
Oxfam: Jeremy Hobbs, executive director - Israel's actions are "immoral and contrary to the Geneva Conventions."
Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) calls for one-sided international action to "prevent the starvation siege Israel plans to impose on Gaza." Note: ICAHD is funded by the EU under its “partnership for peace” budget.
Human Rights Watch (which NGO Monitor observes has a history of instant condemnations before the facts are known) says "Israel’s threat to impose additional sanctions on the Gaza Strip would constitute unlawful collective punishment of Gaza’s civilian population... Israel has the responsibility to protect its citizens, but not by collectively punishing the people of Gaza, which seriously violates the laws of war."
Israeli NGO B'Tselem: "Cutting off electricity to a civilian population is collective punishment and a violation of international law… It doesn't really make a difference whether it's cutting off the supply from Israel or bombing the power station."
The list goes on.
NGO Monitor observes that all of these statements ignore the context of terrorism and downplay Israel's legitimate right to self-defense. The orgs and their spokespeople have little apparent interest in the rocket attacks and in the waves of terrorism emanating from Gaza. Instead they focus narrowly on Israel’s efforts to find a means of deterring these attacks, and that's the problem.
The reaction of Hamas is no surprise. Israel's threat is “a declaration of war against the Palestinian people, an attempt to target resistance forces and to undermine Hamas politically”. Hamas asserts that Israel "must supply humanitarian needs" and the security cabinet's decision “shows that Israel is not ready for political compromise with the Palestinians” in peace talks.
Putting this in some context, Gaza needs about 200 megawatts of electricity. It gets 80 Mw from Egypt, and almost all the rest (except for some minor supply from a Gazan plant) from Israel. A full shutdown of the Israeli supply would leave Gaza with adequate energy for its hospitals, government offices and other vital services. Its 1.5 million inhabitants would inevitably suffer periodic blackouts; these would be more severe if a fuel cut-off were also implemented. Life would be uncomfortable but not threatened.
Israel, which has always had the power to do so, says it will implement this plan if Palestinian terrorists continue to fire rockets into Israel. The overwhelming sentiment among Israelis is: why hasn't such a step been threatened before? Where else, other than in Chelm, would a government provide its enemy with enough power to allow business as usual?
And where else, other than in the context of the well-orchestrated, relentless Arab-driven campaign of delegitimization of Israel and its actions, would so many otherwise sober organizations make such jackasses of themselves?
