Category: Press Releases

Rachel Corrie trial: stopping bulldozer work not an option despite risk to protesters

11 April 2011 | Rachel Corrie Foundation

Deputy Battalion Commander says avoiding precedent influenced decision not to stop.

Two Israeli military officers who commanded troops near Rafah, Gaza on the day Rachel Corrie was killed, took the stand behind a screen in a Haifa court Wednesday, April 6, as government witnesses in the ongoing civil lawsuit Corrie vs. the State of Israel. Their testimony further underscored the failure of the Israeli military to recognize the rights, and protect the lives and property of civilians in the Rafah, Gaza region in 2003; including that of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) protesters.

Deputy Battalion Commander Sh.R, a Major responsible for overseeing 450-500 soldiers in Gaza, said he was located about 1 ½ kilometers from the scene at the army’s Liaison Unit with Foreign Forces (Yaklaz), and that although the bulldozer work was under the direct ground supervision of Captain S.R., he was in a position to influence the work and was ultimately responsible for the decisions made that day. This was significant because in the preceding hearing, Captain S.R., a Bedouin officer who testified earlier in the week, told the court he requested to halt his work because of the presence of the protesters, and potential danger to them, but received orders to continue.

Sh.R. defined the “Philidelphi Route” not just as the narrow, Israeli controlled, military road running parallel to the Gaza/Egypt border, but rather as the entire width of land between the Egypt border and the first row of Palestinian houses inside Gazan territory. He also insisted that Palestinians in these houses were those digging tunnels, snipers attacking the military, or smuggling weapons, and that clearing and destroying homes was done only after it was “beyond a reasonable doubt” that homes were empty. His description, although emblematic of the Israeli military’s position regarding the area in 2003, completely ignores the fact, and credible documentation by U.N. humanitarian agencies and human rights groups, that the land was once filled with densely populated civilian homes, the first row of which receded rapidly as the Israeli military bulldozed row upon row of houses, widening the border’s buffer zone and claiming the newly razed Palestinian territory for its own. Comparative satellite photos from a 2004 Human Rights Watch publication titled Razing Rafah: Mass Home Demolitions in the Gaza Strip document this “wholesale destruction” of Palestinian homes along Gaza’s southern border.

In e-mails to her mother, Rachel described her experience living with the Nasrallah family, whose home she was protesting in front of when she was killed: “the two front rooms of their house are unusable because gunshots have been fired through the walls, so the whole family—three kids and two parents—sleep in the parents’ bedroom. I sleep on the floor next to the youngest daughter, Iman, and we all share blankets. … Friday is the holiday, and when I woke up they were watching Gummy Bears dubbed into Arabic. So, I ate breakfast with them and sat there for a while and just enjoyed being in this big puddle of blankets with this family watching what for me seemed like Saturday morning cartoons.”

Although the house was not demolished that day, the family was forced to flee seven months later when the Israeli military cut sewer and power lines and badly damaged a structural wall. The home was fully demolished in spring 2004. It was home to five young children, four of whom were present behind their garden wall as the bulldozer unit approached and Rachel was killed.

Additional testimony of the Deputy Battalion Commander Included:

* He stated that there was a weekly work plan as well as a written “mission file” for the unit that identified the unit’s mission directive, participating forces, and instructions given to the force; including any safety instructions. However, this material was never released to Corrie family attorneys as part of discovery of the Military Police investigative file – a startling omission that calls into question the thoroughness of the government’s investigation into Rachel’s killing.

* Sh.R. identified that there was a female “scout” who recorded both video and audio files from the event, but claimed that not all the audio was recorded. Sh.R. also confirmed that cell phones, were also used, but unrecorded, to communicate orders back and forth between Captain S.R. and the Deputy Battalion Commander.

* Sh.R. stated he knew unarmed protestors were in the area, but in his opinion, stopping the work was not an option. He said the protesters were not a threat to the force, but added that if every foreigner came to raise banners, terrorists would also come and he would lose his ability to control the region. He admitted that avoiding a precedent was a consideration in the decision to continue working. He stated that in his opinion, the protesters should have been barred from entering Gaza.

* Although, he described in testimony that regulations state you don’t shoot unless there is intent and means to hurt you, a written summary of events recorded in the daily operations log on March 16, 2003, stated, “those foreigners should be handled and their entrance into the Gaza Strip should be forbidden. Additionally, the work must continue in the area in question. The firing orders state that every adult person should be shot to kill.” Within seven weeks of Rachel’s killing, award winning journalist James Miller and activist Tom Hurndall, both British citizens, were shot and killed along the same two mile stretch of the Rafah, Gaza border.

* When asked if he recalled being involved in an incident of “interference” with the military police investigation, Sh.R responded, “yes” and described how his Division Commander phoned him and ordered the investigation stopped due to a dispute over authorization. Sh.R. testified that he approached the lead investigator, interrupting the questioning of the bulldozer driver already in progress, and that personal words were exchanged. He acknowledged that he instructed the investigator to stop, based on orders of the High Command. When questioned about the ethics of interfering in a military police investigation, Sh.R. stated emphatically that he was given an order and he carried it out.

Following Sh.R’s testimony, Platoon Commander, A.D. took the stand. Unlike Sh.R, who was away from the scene, witness A.D. was present and second in command within the APC. He struggled to remember specific details about the events and said that he did not see the events before, during, or after they occurred. He also did not recall any lessons learned from the incident.

Highlights of Platoon Commander A.D.’s testimony included:

* He confirmed the unit would have been given a written “task file” before setting out on the work, although he could not remember anything about the specific file that day.

* The APC had a periscope from which they could see a longer distance from the vehicle.

* Commander R.S. spoke frequently on the cell phone and, in order to use it, he had to remove his helmet. This contradicts earlier military testimonies that claimed helmets worn would never be removed and, thus, soldiers would not have heard the protesters shouting through the megaphone nearby.

* He could not recall the specific safety instructions for the D9 bulldozer, but said the unit would continue working as carefully as possible. He believed work was allowed if protesters were within 15 meters of the vehicle, but not if they were within 5 meters.

* He knew that the protesters were civilians and “Americans.”

* He said there was a first aid kit within the APC, and he believed it was likely that the radio communications person in the vehicle was also a trained medic. However, he confirmed that the medical kit was not thrown to the protesters after Rachel was hit. Testimony made clear that no serious attempt was made by the military to provide medical assistance to Rachel at the scene prior to Palestinian medics evacuating her.

Wednesday’s proceedings were attended by a representative from the American Embassy and representatives from the legal and human rights organizations; Adalah, Advocates Sans Frontièrs, Al Haq, Al Mezan, Amnesty International, Arab Association for Human Rights, the Ecumenical Accompaniment Team, and Yesh Din.

The next, and likely last, hearing is scheduled for Sunday, May 22nd from 9:00-16:00. Scheduled to testify are Colonel Pinhas (Pinky) Zuaretz and former IDF spokesperson, Brigadier General Ruth Yaron. Hearings are held before Judge Oded Gershon, 6th floor, Haifa District Court, 12 Palyam St., Haifa, Israel.

Please visit http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/trial for updates, changes to the court schedule, and related information.

For press related inquiries, please contact:
Email: press@rachelcorriefoundation.org

A new Israeli massacre in Gaza

09 April 2011 | One Democratic State Group, Palestinian Students’ Campaign for the Academic Boycott of Israel, University Teachers’ Association in Palestine, Association of Al-Quds Bank for Culture and Information

Besieged Gaza, Occupied Palestine.

The latest round of Israeli massacres committed against the people of Gaza has resulted in the brutal killings since Thursday afternoon of sixteen, including a mother and daughter, 4 children and an elderly man. Over the last 5 days, Gaza City has been bombed by Apache helicopters and F16 and E15 fighter planes. These terrible massacres come only one day after a statement issued by the disgraced Ehud Batak, the Israeli Minster of War, in which he calls upon his generals to intensify the attack against Gaza .

The slow motion genocide itself has killed more than 600 patients so far. We condemn in the strongest possible terms these heinous crimes and reiterate our call upon all civil society organizations and freedom loving people to act immediately in any possible way to put pressure on their governments to end diplomatic ties with Apartheid Israel and institute sanctions against it.

Gaza has been enduring Israeli policies of extermination and vandalism since June 2006. We equally condemn the international conspiracy of silence and impotence in the face of these continuous Israeli crimes. Not a single action against Israel has been taken by the UN. The failure of the United Nations and its numerous organizations to condemn such crimes indicates complicity. We therefore reiterate our urgent appeal, not to the United Nations and the sanctimonious international community, but rather to all civil society organizations and solidarity groups to intensify the anti-Israel sanctions campaign to compel Israel to end to its aggression against Gaza. We also reiterate our call on all Arab revolutions to compel their governments to sever their diplomatic ties with Apartheid Israel. This was the demand of thousands of Egyptian men and women who demonstrated opposite the Israeli embassy in Cairo yesterday.

We ask, how many more dead corpses of Palestinian children and women does the international community need to see in order to act? What more do Arab governments need to see to translate their words of support into action? What would convince the UN and its Security Council that Palestinians are also human beings?

One Democratic State Group
Palestinian Students’ Campaign for the Academic Boycott of Israel
University Teachers’ Association in Palestine
Association of Al-Quds Bank for Culture and Information

Ireland PSC: Goldstone’s ‘reconsideration’ does not invalidate UN report on Israeli crimes in Gaza

06 April 2011 | Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Israeli diplomats and pro-Israel lobbyists in the West have seized eagerly upon an article published in the Washington Post on April 1st by Richard Goldstone, the South African judge who chaired the UN Fact-Finding Mission that investigated the Israeli military offensive in Gaza two years ago, codenamed ‘Operation Cast Lead’. Israeli prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu has claimed that “everything we said has been proven true, Israel did not intentionally harm civilians, its investigating bodies are worthy and the fact that Goldstone has retracted should bring the report to be shelved once and for all”, while the Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman maintained that “the truth has come to light”.

These comments are a transparently dishonest spin on the part of the Israeli government. In fact, nothing that has been said by Richard Goldstone constitutes a “retraction” of the fact-finding mission’s report, or brings into question its conclusions that Israeli forces were responsible for major crimes against the civilian population of Gaza. Those crimes are likely to be repeated if the Israeli spin machine is allowed to whitewash the record of “Operation Cast Lead”.

1) No individual can “retract” the findings of the report

Although Richard Goldstone was the chair of the UN’s fact-finding mission, he was part of a team of four international experts (among them Ireland’s Col Desmond Travers). The report was subsequently endorsed by an overwhelming majority of states – including Ireland – at the UN General Assembly. It is not within the authority of any individual member of the fact-finding mission to “retract” its findings. A brief opinion article in the Washington Post certainly cannot be considered an adequate rebuttal of a five-hundred page report that was exhaustively documented by the UN mission.

2) Richard Goldstone has not retracted any of the central findings contained in the report

In his Washington Post article, Richard Goldstone wrote that “investigations published by the Israeli military … have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy”.

Yet the original report did not claim that civilians were “intentionally targeted as a matter of policy”. Rather, it described a “repeated failure to distinguish between combatants and civilians [which] appears to the Mission to have been the result of deliberate guidance issued to soldiers, as described by some of them, and not the result of occasional lapses”, and noted that “the instructions given to the Israeli armed forces moving into Gaza provided for a low threshold for the use of lethal fire against the civilian population”. A callous disregard for civilian life is not the same as a policy of “intentionally” killing civilians. It remains a war crime nonetheless. Nothing that was said by Goldstone’s newspaper article brings this finding into question.

This was not the only crime documented by the report. It also described “ a deliberate and systematic policy on the part of the Israeli armed forces to target industrial sites and water installations”, and found evidence that “Israeli troops used Palestinian men as human shields whilst conducting house searches”. It also drew attention to the broader context, describing the illegal occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as “the fundamental factor underlying violations of international humanitarian and human rights law against the protected population and undermining prospects for development and peace”. Goldstone’s article does not challenge any of these conclusions.

Cedric Sapey, a spokesperson for the UN Human Rights Council (the body that commissioned the report) gave the UN’s official view: “The UN will not revoke a report on the basis of an article in a newspaper. The views Mr Goldstone expressed are his own personal views.” Similarly, Ireland’s Col. Desmond Travers, an expert on international criminal investigations and member of the investigative team continues to endorse the findings saying “the tenor of the report in its entirety, in my opinion, stands”. Hina Jilani, another member of the team, has also said that “ultimately, the UN Report would not have been any different to what it was … no process or acceptable procedure would invalidate the UN Report; if it does happen, it would be seen as a suspect move … The UN cannot allow impunity to remain, and will have to act if it wants to remain a credible international governing body”.

3) Richard Goldstone has been the victim of a hate campaign without parallel

A person reading Richard Goldstone’s article without having read the initial report of the fact-finding mission would still gather the impression that his remarks constitute a significant change of heart: “ If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.” What has changed since the original report was published? Goldstone refers to internal inquiries carried out by the Israeli army. Common sense and experience in every corner of the globe dictate that no army should be given carte blanche to investigate allegations against itself – unless its investigative procedures have been given a clean bill of health by independent authorities.

Has any such authority endorsed the judicial practices of the Israeli army? Goldstone refers to another UN report chaired by retired US judge Mary McGowan Davis, noting its conclusion that “ Israel has dedicated significant resources to investigate over 400 allegations of operational misconduct in Gaza”. Yet the same report goes on to state that “there is no indication that Israel has opened investigations into the actions of those who designed, planned, ordered and oversaw Operation Cast Lead”. The conclusions of the fact-finding mission did not relate solely to the conduct of individual soldiers on the battlefield: they addressed matters of policy decided at the highest levels of political and military command. Any investigation which neglects those who “designed, planned, ordered and oversaw Operation Cast Lead” is clearly incapable of refuting the allegations made by the UN report. It is impossible to believe that such investigations can have prompted any change of heart by Richard Goldstone.

The real cause of his apparent volte-face must be sought elsewhere. Since the fact-finding mission report was published, Richard Goldstone has been targeted by a campaign of vilification that no person should have to endure. He has been described as an “evil man”, a “despicable human being”, a “traitor to the Jewish people”, and compared to Joseph Mengele – the infamous Nazi doctor who conducted experiments on live human beings at Auschwitz. As can be inferred from such remarks, Goldstone is a South African Jew and has been singled out precisely for that reason. Although the other members of the fact-finding mission have also been attacked, none has been subjected to the same kind of vilification that Goldstone has experienced. It reached a peak in 2010 when the South African Zionist Federation threatened to “demonstrate” against Goldstone’s presence at the Sandton Synagogue if he dared to attend his grandson’s bar-mitzvah.

The thinking behind this campaign was overtly anti-Semitic – even though many of its agents consider themselves to be proud Jews. It was based on the premise that any Jew, anywhere in the world, is obliged to give uncritical support to the Israeli state, no matter what it does. This nonsensical doctrine simply turns the old fantasies of European anti-Semitism on its head. The anti-Semitic gangsters and demagogues of twentieth-century Europe claimed that every Jewish person, whatever their nationality, social class or political outlook, was part of a monstrous conspiracy. The modern-day Israel lobby tries to erase the individuality of Jews and force them to adopt a monolithic position of support for “ Israel, right or wrong”. In each case, we find a style of politics that believes ethnicity must dictate behaviour – “we are what we were born to be”. No wonder so many Jewish people have found the pro-Israel lobby repulsive and denied its claim to speak on their behalf.

Richard Goldstone’s Washington Post article is surely best seen as an attempt to protect himself and his family from the unconscionable abuse they have suffered over the past two years. It should not cause us to direct our attention for one second from the crimes committed by the Israeli army against the Palestinian people. The assault on Gaza in January 2009 was merely one episode in a litany of atrocities that spans several decades. If those atrocities are not to continue indefinitely, it is imperative that we study the findings of the UN fact-finding mission – and other sources such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and B’Tselem – and act to protect the victims of wanton violence.

Mourning Juliano Mer-Khamis

Jeff Halper | Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions

The ICAHD family mourns the tragic slaying of Juliano Mer-Khamis

The ICAHD family mourns the tragic slaying by masked gunmen of our friend and comrade Juliano Mer-Khamis in Jenin. Juliano was a major figure in the struggle for a just peace and the forging of a new multi-cultural society in Palestine/Israel based on human rights, freedom, equality and, not least, creative, critical expression.

Juliano, filmmaker, actor, and the co-founder and director of the Freedom Theatre in Jenin, supported the work of ICAHD and frequently attended our summer rebuilding camp in the West Bank, showing his films to our activists and sharing his thoughts and vision. That vision was of a bi-national society, although Juliano was far too critical to confine himself to “Jewish-Israeli-Palestinian” dichotomies. As a man of the theatre as well as a political figure driven to forge a better society against sectarian forces who sought only to divide and dominate, he opened issues of equality, gender, religion, and individual expression, bringing young people – his “actors” – into experiential encounters with them. This may have cost him his life; in both the societies in which he lived, Israeli and Palestinian, the conflict has not only suffocated equal rights and individualism by group-think sectarianism, but has legitimized the use of violence against anyone envisioning unfettered pluralism. Juliano did not allow fear or pressures to shut him up, but it is having its effects on all of us. Liberals and even those of the critical left are hunkering down; many of Israel and Palestine’s brightest young people are fleeing.

The ones that envision and work for a just society are decreasing among us. The loss of one of the bravest, one of the most energetic, articulate, and creative among us, the symbol of what might be, is a cruel blow, not only to his family, to whom our condolences go, but to the rest of us who must struggle on without him. No, not “without him,” since Juliano will always inspire and guide us. Someone of his presence, like Rachel Corrie, cannot be easily removed from the scene. Juliano, we will miss you but we will continue your struggle.

Corrie trial resumes in Haifa court with testimony of bulldozer unit commander

29 March 2010 | Rachel Corrie Foundation

After a five month recess, the Haifa District Court will resume hearings Sunday, April 3, in the civil lawsuit filed by Rachel Corrie’s family against the State of Israel for her unlawful killing in Rafah, Gaza on March 16, 2003. Rachel was an American student activist and human rights defender who was crushed by a Caterpillar D9R bulldozer while nonviolently protesting the demolition of Palestinian homes.

The commander of the unit that killed Rachel is scheduled to testify. Known to the court as S.R., he oversaw the bulldozer work from an armored personnel carrier at the scene. While numerous military witnesses in the case have been permitted to testify behind a screen to protect their identity – a highly unusual security measure – S.R. is expected to do so in the open because his identity is already known to the public.

The civil trial began over a year ago in March 2010 with testimony from four of Rachel’s colleagues from the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), who witnessed her killing. In a second phase that began on September 5, the government presented nine witnesses who included the lead military police investigator in the case and the driver and commander of the bulldozer that struck and killed Rachel.

Trial Judge Oded Gershon granted the government’s motion to shield the identities of several witnesses, allowing them to testify behind a screen. The Corrie family argued that the highly unusual protective measures infringe upon their right to an open, fair and transparent trial, but their appeal to the Israeli Supreme Court has been denied.

“As we now witness young people in the Middle East protesting non-violently and struggling for their freedoms and human rights, this trial seems ever more relevant,” said Rachel’s mother, Cindy Corrie. “While our family continues to seek accountability from the Israeli Government for their response to Rachel’s nonviolent action, we insist that all governments and militaries respect the right of people to peaceably assemble and protest, that they respond nonviolently to such protests, and that they be accountable for their actions.”

The lawsuit charges that Rachel’s killing was intentional or, alternately, that the Israeli government was negligent for allowing Israeli soldiers and military commanders to act recklessly using an armored military bulldozer without due regard for the presence of unarmed, nonviolent civilians in Rafah. It also alleges that the Israeli military failed to take appropriate and necessary measures to protect Rachel’s life, in violation of obligations under Israeli and international law.

The government of Israel argues that Rachel’s killing took place in the course of armed conflict in a closed military zone and should be considered an “Act of War,” and “Act of State,” absolving the government and military of any responsibility.

On November 4, the final court date before a lengthy recess, the commander of the bulldozer that struck Rachel testified about the location of her body immediately following the incident. His version dramatically contradicted earlier testimony from the bulldozer driver, who sat next to him in the cab. The commander, who is charged with being a second set of eyes and directs the movement of the bulldozer, testified that Rachel’s body was beyond a large mound of earth. The D-9R driver testified that Rachel’s body was between the bulldozer and the mound of earth (corroborating testimony of Rachel’s ISM colleagues and, also, photographic evidence). When presented with the discrepancies between their statements, both soldiers stuck to their version of events. “He’s saying what he saw. I’m saying what I saw,” the bulldozer commander said.

“I find it beyond incompetence that the Military Advocate General closed this case with no further investigation,” said Craig Corrie, Rachel’s father, after the last session in November. “Did the investigators even try to reconcile conflicting testimony between their own soldiers? Stunning contradictions and revelations support the U.S. Government view and ours that there was no credible investigation in this case.”

The proceedings have been attended by representatives of the US Embassy and numerous local and international human rights organizations.

Trial hearings are currently scheduled for April 3 and 6 between the hours of 9:00-16:00 before Judge Oded Gershon at the Haifa, District Court, 12 Palyam St., Haifa, Israel. One or more additional trial sessions are anticipated.

Please visit the Trial Update page of the Rachel Corrie Foundation website for updates, changes to the court schedule, and related information.