WORLD JEWISH NEWS AGENCY.  FRONT PAGE

COLUMN OF DAVID BEDEIN: POLITICAL WISDOM

Skip to main content Access keys help
REACHING 2,250.000 READERS AROUND THE GLOBE
|

 


Special to the World Jewish News Agency by David Bedein, Bureau Chief of the Jerusalem-based Israel Resource News Agency and a fellow of the Center for Near East Policy Research.
www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com


Mounting a Citizens Challenge

American citizens often ask what they can do for Israel when they are in touch with their Congressional representatives. Perhaps the most important thing they can do is to challenge the Ten Principles of The U.S. State Department’s 2005 Middle East agenda, which includes:1-The cutting of Israel in half by advocating that the proposed PLO entity be “contiguous” ­ in the words of Secretary Condoleeza Rice ­ from Gaza to Bethlehem. 2 -Ignoring the PLO’s decision not to annul the PLO covenant, which mandates that the PLO continue its state of war against Israel. This covenant continues despite a firm American commitment not to deal with the PLO until it cancels the covenant. 3-Financing a Palestinian school system that operates the first curriculum since the Third Reich that teaches children to make war against Jews. (Review the Palestinian curriculum at www.edume.org) 4 -Allowing PLO leadership to order the murder of Palestinian dissidents. A total of 51 Arabs are currently facing death for the “crime” of cooperating with Israel. The State Department has said it will not intervene to stop this practice. 5-Vetoing Israel’s right to build homes or synagogues in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. The State Department’s answer as to whether the repair of the Hurva Synagogue in the Jewish Quarter would represent an act of “illegal settlement activity” was “yes.” 6 -Rejecting the idea that Jerusalem is even part of Israel. Most recently, President Bush, on the advice of the State Department, vetoed a bill that would require U.S. documents issued in Jerusalem to list “Jerusalem, Israel,” as their point of origin.  Currently all such documents are listed as “Jerusalem,” with no country mentioned. They include U.S. passports and birth certificates issued for American citizens who dwell or were born in the western sector Jerusalem. 7-Nurturing Muhammad Dahlan, as coordinator of PLO security forces, despite the fact that Dahlan has taken credit for planning the murders of hundreds of Jews (See Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s article in the Wall Street Journal of June 3, 2002, documenting Dahlan’s murder record and calling for his elimination). 8-Ordering renewal of CIA training for the PLO security forces, despite the fact that these same PLO forces have used the CIA training they received in the 1990’s to murder Jews since the September 2000 inception of organized terror warfare against Israel. 9-Continuing to fund the “right of return” campaign of the UNRWA
Palestinian Arab refugee camps, despite the President’s clear statement on April 14, 2004 that he opposed such policies. 10-Recognizing Palestinian Authority Chairman Abu Mazen  (a.k.a. Mahmoud Abbas) as a “moderate” force, even though he has armed and incorporated every terrorist group instead of disarming them and defining the election of Mazen as “democratic,” despite the resignation of 46 members of the PLO’s own election council on the night of the elections.



The role of the Congress to “Advise and Consent” on matters of foreign policy is defined by the U.S.  Constitution.  It is up to American citizen supporters of Israel to work with the Congress to “advise” the State Department so that they do not “consent” to its Middle East policy agenda.
 


 

 

 

ONE PLACE LEFT IN THE WORLD WHERE THERE ARE  NO HUMAN RIGHTS FOR JEWS

 

One morning last week, I came to my office at the press center in Jerusalem at 9:45am and was greeted with two new dissonant realities within minutes. An official letter from the Israel Government Lands Authority authorizing our family's purchase of a home in the city of Efrat. Efrat is 14 kilometers south of Jerusalem, a city of almost 1,800 families, set to expand to 5,000 families according to the municipal plans that were approved by the government of Israel more than a quarter-century ago. After twenty years of rental, we finally own our home. Well, there was not much time for the sentimentality of owning a home in the state of Israel.

Only minutes after opening the letter, the second reality hit like a ton of bricks. The 10:00am newscast on the Voice of Israel reported that the High Court of Justice had declared that the government's Disengagement Plan, while violating human rights and civil liberties, was legal. Israeli human rights and civil liberties law simply do not apply to Israeli taxpayers and law-abiding citizens who live in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, the court said, since Israel has not yet annexed these areas. And Efrat is smack in the middle of Judea. The High Court of Justice, therefore, declared that Israeli citizens who live in
Judea and Samaria have no human rights and no civil liberties. Hence, the silence of organizations such as the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and the Anti-Defamation League.

In other words, the only place in the world where Jews have no de jure human rights and civil liberties would be in Judea, Samaria and Gaza This is not the first time that I have heard such a notion. On July 23rd, 1990, our news agency organized a dialogue between Israeli-American residents of Judea and the US Consul in Jerusalem, Mr. Phillip Wilcox. During that discussion, the guests from Judea noted the sensitivity of the US government to the human rights and civil liberties of Palestinian Arab residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. They asked the US consul about the human rights of Jews who live in the same areas - given the traditional sensitivity of the US government to human rights and civil liberties in this part of the world.

US Consul Wilcox responded quickly and straightforwardly, and with no emotion: "If you live where you live, you have no human rights and no civil liberties." The US consul invoked the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which forbids nations that conquer other lands in war to settle their citizens in those lands. Wilcox, consistent with this position, now heads the Washington-based Foundation for Middle East Peace, which has as its purpose the eradication of Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, Gaza, the Golan and even in the new neighborhoods in Jerusalem that were established by Israel since 1967. Wilcox's statement ignored the fact that the San Remo Treaty had been adopted by both the League of Nations and by the United Nations. That treaty protected the right of Jews to purchase land and to settle in the Jewish National Homeland, defined as anywhere west of the Jordan River.

Yet, 15 years later, Israeli Attorney General Menachem Mazuz adopted the precise formula that Wilcox had articulated in 1990: that Israelis have no human rights or civil liberties if they live in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, even if they are law-abiding and tax-paying Israeli citizens. Even the mainstream Israeli left-wing had never held such a dogmatic approach. That had been the position of the Israeli Communist Party and an anti-Zionist organization in Israel known as Matzpen, which had always favored unilateral retreat from all areas acquired by Israel in the defensive war of 1967.

Indeed, the man who had spearheaded the "territories for peace" ideology, the late former army intelligence chief Aharon Yariv, told me that the difference between his view, coined in 1974 as the Yariv-Shem Tov peace formula, and the attitude of the New Left today was that the Yariv-Shem Tov formula mandated "territories for peace" and not "territories before peace". And Yariv warned that ceding territory without a peace agreement would run the risk of an enemy using that territory as a forward position to attack.

How can a key PM appointee maintain a business stake in the Palestinian economy?


The Israeli official in charge of the forcible removal of Israeli Jews from Katif maintains a personal financial interest in the Palestinian development enterprises in Gaza that would replace the Jewish communities of Katif. Eival Giladi maintains a  personal business stake in the Palestinian  economy, with an obvious conflict of interest that may interfere with his  performance as an official of the office of the Prime Minister of Israel As head of the coordination and strategy team in the Prime Minister's  Office, HaArtez on June 4th, 2005 described Giladi as "one of the  architects of the disengagement plan. Giladi is the thinking man in the  Sharon administration, the behind-the-scenes advisor to the advisor and  ultimate mystery emissary, Dov Weissglass" Giladi, meanwhile, has found a way to supplement the meager income of an Israeli civil servant. Giladi has been named as the pioneer of a business venture for Palestinians in Gaza: The Portland Trust.

Giladi has been placed in charge of  the Portland Trust's $500 million business development fund , which would help Palestinians moved up to 150,000 housing units in place of the Katif homes and farms that Giladi is about to destroy. Katif farming communities produce $62 million in export of food products  for the state of Israel per annum. In other words, Giladi maintains a clear personal and financial business incentive in the decimation of the thriving Jewish communities of Katif. It will be instructive to see if the Israeli Attorney General, the Israel  State Comptroller and the Israel Civil Service Commission take any action  to question the role of Eival Giladi in the planning and the execution of  the Prime Minister's policy, which has been described as a "disengagement  plan". Israel's mainstream media outlets have publicized Giladi's direct personal  financial stake in this process. None of the media in Israel have called into question the clear conflict of interest.

How can this be allowed to happen?