Author: ISM Media Group

The Independent: Fury over British embassy link to Jewish settlement-builder

By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem

To view original article, published by The Independent on the 20th September, click here

The British Government’s plan to rent new premises in a Tel Aviv skyscraper hasrun into trouble after a wave of protests that their prospective landlord is a major participant in Jewish settlement-building in the occupied West Bank.

The British embassy has been in negotiations to lease three floors in Kirya Tower from Africa Israel Investments, a company controlled by Lev Leviev, a London-based property and diamonds billionaire with substantial business interests in Israel.

Pro-Palestinian organisations are urging the Foreign Office to cancel the plans, arguing that one of the company’s subsidiaries is prominent in settlement building and that Mr Leviev is a big contributor to the Land Redemption fund, which acquires Palestinian land for Jewish settlements.

Daniel Machover, of the UK-based Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights, says in a letter to The Independent that renting space from Mr Leviev is “tantamount to HM Government condoning Israel’s settlement building, supporting clear violations of international law, which in some cases [amounts] to grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention, and hindering the possibility of peace in the Middle East”. Most Western governments – including Britain’s – regard settlements as illegal under international law.

Mr Machover points out that Gordon Brown strongly criticised continued settlement expansion on his visit to the Middle East this year. And he says that the advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice in 2004 reminded third party states that they “are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction”.

Danya Cebus, a construction subsidiary of Africa Israel, has been accused by human rights activists of building homes in a number of West Bank settlements including the ultra- Orthodox settlement Modiin Illit, close to the Palestinian village of Bil’in.

In June, the United Nations Children’s Fund, Unicef, announced, in response to lobbying by the United States-based Arab rights group Adalah NY, that it would no longer enter into partnerships or accept contributions from Mr Leviev because of his suspected involvement in settlement building. Mr Leviev had been a contributor to Unicef as well as a sponsor for at least one fund-raising event.

The embassy is understood to be looking into the allegations that Mr Leviev is also a contributor to the National Redemption Fund, which has been criticised for the some of the methods it uses to purchase land in the West Bank.

The embassy’s plans came to light when the Israeli business newspaper Globes reported that the British embassy was intending to move from its valuable decades-old premises in the city’s coastal Hayarkon Street to rent space in the 42-storey tower, more than half of which is occupied by Israeli government offices.

Globes says the annual cost of renting the 6,000 square metres of office space in the building, which has a helipad on the roof, would be $162,000 a year, or £88,698 at yesterday’s exchange rate.

Earlier this year the Tory MP Crispin Blunt protested after it emerged that as a result of an internal mix-up three members of the Yesha Council, the umbrella organisation representing West Bank settlers, had been invited to the annual Queen’s Birthday Party given by the embassy.

The Foreign Office minister Kim Howells subsequently said the settlers’ presence was “not helpful” and pledged that no further such invitations would be issued.

The British embassy said yesterday that an “internal process” was looking at a “number of options” for relocating, but that no decisions had been taken. It added: “The Government has made its position on settlements very clear; we believe that settlements contravene international law and are a significant impediment to progress on the peace process. Should we decide to relocate the embassy, we will make clear the intended location once a decision has been reached.”

Africa Israel was not available for comment yesterday because of the weekly Sabbath holiday.

Harassment of Palestinian woman by Israeli soldiers goes unpunished

On Tuesday 16th September, two Israeli soldiers insulted a Palestinian woman in Susiya. The insult, of a sexual nature, is incredibly offensive in Palestinian culture. When confronted with their acts, the soldiers refused to apologize and called their supervising officer to attend. The officer denied any wrong doing of his subordinates. Instead he accused the Palestinian woman of provoking his soldiers. Soldiers are permanently stationed on a hill overlooking Susiya.

This is yet another example of the structural harassment of Palestinians by Israeli soldiers and settlers that continuously goes unpunished.

The Palestinian refugee community in Susiya has endured many hardships since the flight from their homes during the Nakba in 1948. Orginally fleeing from the violence of the 1948 war, they took refuge in caves located just a few miles from their homes. Since then, they’ve been denied their inalienable Right of Return by Israel.

With Israel blocking their way home, the community attempted to reconstruct their lives in the historic site of Susiya. Ousted from their new homes as well, the community was yet again forced to relocate their lives. Attempting to continue their lives they’ve been refused a permit to build a house. As a result, they’ve resided in tents, denied basic facilities such as electricity, running water and roof over their heads.

Struggling to survive, the shepherd community relies on their livestock to support their families. However, with six illegal settlements surrounding them, the Palestinians have been denied access to their land, needed for grazing. Moreover, settlers have attacked the shepherds, even on the few places the shepherds are still allowed on by the army.

Although several of the attacks have been captured on video – and featured on the local, national and international news – none of the settlers have faced legal consequences. This has resulted in a perceived immunity for settlers, who are continuing their harassment without fear of prosecution.

With flying checkpoints regularly positioned nearby, 5 am raids of their village and other forms of harassment, the Israeli army has taken on an active duty of increasing the Palestinians hardship. This harassment by both soldiers and settlers is yet another contribution by Israel in making the lives of the Palestinians impossible.

The Wall Street Journal: Israel and Palestine can still achieve peace

By Mahmoud Abbas

September 19, 2008 – Published by The Wall Street Journal

This month marks 15 painful years since the Arafat-Rabin handshake on the White House lawn. Palestinian children who started school when the Oslo Agreement was signed in 1993 are now young adults. They have not known a day of true freedom or genuine security in their lives.

Oslo offered peace on a timetable, freedom doled out in stages. Its promise was derailed by increased Israeli settlement construction, restrictions on Palestinian movement and, correspondingly, by violent resistance to occupation from some Palestinians. The process begun by President George Bush in Annapolis last year offers another opportunity to reach a lasting peace. History will judge none of us kindly if we squander this opportunity.

I continue to believe that we can achieve a lasting peace, with the Israeli and Palestinian peoples living as neighbors in two independent states. But if we do not succeed, and succeed soon, the parameters of the debate are apt to shift dramatically. Israel’s continued settlement expansion and land confiscation in the West Bank makes physical separation of our two peoples increasingly impossible. The number of Israeli settlers in the Palestinian West Bank grew by approximately 85% after the Oslo accords were signed.

We are impatient for our freedom. Yet partial peace, as proposed again by my current interlocutors, is not the way forward. Partial freedom is a contradiction in terms. Either a Palestinian lives free or continues to live under the yoke of Israeli military occupation.

We want our children to live with hope and the opportunity to realize their potential. Yet our daily reality worsens. We are walled into shrinking pockets of land, reminiscent of the Bantustans of South Africa. Increasingly, Israel confines us to separate and inferior roads.

Israeli leaders insist that Jerusalem not be physically divided. I agree. Although Jerusalem’s sovereignty must be divided, the city itself can be shared as the capital of two states — east for Palestine and west for Israel. While claiming to abhor dividing the city in half, Israel nonetheless splits the city through its complex of walls, tunnels and laws that segregate and discriminate between Muslim and Christian Palestinians and Israeli Jews. Israel continues to encircle the holy city with exclusively Jewish settlements that sever it from the rest of the occupied West Bank.

We acknowledge the hardships faced by our Israeli neighbors. No Israeli child should go to sleep at night in fear. The irony is that although Israel possesses the strongest military in the region, its might cannot guarantee security for its people. The lesson of the last 15 years is that only a just peace can bring true security to Israel and Palestine.

I have long believed that we must resolve our differences at the negotiating table rather than on the battlefield. But the goal of these negotiations must be a fair, comprehensive and clear agreement. The negotiations cannot be a cover allowing the stronger party to continue imposing its will.

Rather than a partial outcome, we seek an agreement resulting in two viable and sovereign states based on 1967 borders, including a Jerusalem that is the capital of two states and a just resolution that honors the rights of the Palestinian refugees.

What is often overlooked is the enormous historic compromise we already made in accepting the two-state solution and the creation of our state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip on only 22% of our historic homeland. No responsible leader could agree to a peace that further erodes this tiny territory and strips away even more of its natural resources, historic sites and beautiful landscapes. And no responsible leader will accept a “peace plan” that repackages the occupation and makes it permanent.

Israel says its goal is two states, coexisting in peace. Again, I agree. But those states must be real states — sovereign, independent and viable. I cannot subject my people to an Israeli state and a Palestinian canton. Israel cannot have both control and peace. It cannot perpetually and illegally build settlements in the West Bank, particularly in East Jerusalem, and then argue it must keep that territory because of the existing facts on the ground.

During her most recent visit to the Holy Land, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice rightly noted that Israeli settlement activity is not helpful to the peace process. Israel itself recognized this by agreeing to implement Phase I of its Roadmap obligations at Annapolis — in other words, a settlement freeze. Yet since Annapolis, the pace of Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank has nearly doubled.

Israel’s occupation mindset must be exchanged for partnership and peace. And Hamas must come to the table, willing to discuss a true national dialogue based on the PLO political program. Palestinian national consensus and unity is a pressing need for our people who are thirsty for liberation. A critical Fatah conference should be held soon to allow a new generation to take charge of the Palestinian national movement.

I pledge my full cooperation in the days and months ahead. I am thankful for the efforts of the Bush administration to assist in brokering peace. I again extend my hand to the Israeli people, and I urge them and their leaders to make a choice that ensures a secure and prosperous future for both our peoples.

Mr. Abbas is chairman of the executive committee of the PLO and president of the Palestinian National Authority.

Teargas injures dozens at weekly Bil’in Protest

Report from Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall

Friday, September 19, 2008 – The residents of Bilin joined by international and Israeli peace activists gathered to demonstrate against the Wall and settlement building. Today is the 26th anniversary of Sabra and Shatel massacre. The protesters raised the Palestinian flag and condemned the massacres against the Palestinian people.

The demo left after the Friday prayer and called for an end to the Israeli racist policy and settlement building, closures, kidnappings, and the siege on cities and villages. The protesters marched towards the wall to reach the confiscated land behind it. As a usual procedure, the gate was closed and Israeli soldiers standing behind concrete blocks. When protesters tried to get closer to the gate, the army fired sound grenades and teargas canisters which caused dozens to suffer teargas inhalation. The Israeli army sprayed blue water mixed with teargas resulting in skin absorption of teargas thus increasing the painful effects of the teargas.

Yesterday, the Israeli army presented the first new suggested plan to change the path of the wall in Bilin according to what so called “the Israeli high court” which stated one year ago to remove the wall and change its path. Two months ago, the Israeli army submitted a plan for changing the route of the wall, this plan was to return only 120 dunums to the farmers. It was rejected from village and the Israeli court. Two days ago, The Israeli army submitted again another plan but it’s still doesn’t comply with the decision from the court and wasn’t accepted by the residents of Bil’in. The Popular Committee Against The Wall requested their lawyer refuse the new plan at the court.

Gulf News: Embassy in Tel Aviv sparks protest

To view original article, published by Gulf News on the 19th September, click here

Tel Aviv: The chosen location for the new UK embassy in Tel Aviv has proven controversial, with human rights activists arguing that it contravenes the country’s policy towards Jewish colonies on Palestinian land.

Palestinian rights activists in the UK, Israel and beyond have been pressuring the British Foreign Office to revoke its decision to rent the embassy venue from diamond mogul and notorious Jewish colony builder Lev Leviev.

Abe Hayeem, founder of the UK-based Architects & Planners for Justice in Palestine, wrote in The Guardian earlier this month that renting from a Leviev owned company sends Israel “the wrong message”.

“Rewarding Leviev with the contract for our new embassy shows that Her Majesty’s government is not serious about stopping Israeli settlements. Rather than mouthing admirable but empty platitudes about freezing settlements, for the sake of all Israelis and Palestinians, let us apply serious sanctions to stop Israel expanding illegal colonies and the Wall, and take our business elsewhere,” he wrote.

Protest campaign

News of the new UK embassy location was followed by a letter writing campaign to the Foreign Office by eight advocacy groups and prominent opponents of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories, according to New York based Adalah.

Ex-BBC Middle East Correspondent Tim Llewelyn wrote to the Foreign Office that, “If this goes ahead it makes a nonsense of Gordon Brown’s pledges to Palestinian prime minister Abu Mazen.”

Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights, chaired by Daniel Machover, warned that renting space from Leviev’s company, “would be tantamount to condoning Israel’s colony building, supporting clear violations of international law, in some cases amounting to grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention” and “in violation of third party obligations”.

US academic Norman Finkelstein said that, “It would be regrettable if the British government elects to collaborate with someone involved in on-going war crimes.”

Boycott

The Foreign Office has responded with an email saying that “no decision on a site has been taken and no leases have been signed,” and that “colonies contravene international law,” according to advocacy groups, but activists said the statement was not enough and the office should explicitly state not to rent from Leviev.

British charity organisation Oxfam and the UN Children’s Fund Unicef have both recently stated that they will not accept donations from Leviev due to his companies’ construction of Israeli colonies. The Arab League told Gulf News earlier that it will consider placing Leviev and his companies on the body’s boycott list.