Archives: Articles

By Hadeel Al Gherbawi

“During the recent offensive on the Gaza Strip, our parishioners flocked to churches for refuge. We turned our churches into shelters. At the Holy Family Roman Catholic Latin Church, we would pray to God every day during the aggression for protection and safety,” Yousef Asaad, the assistant pastor at the Holy Family Church in Gaza, told Al-Monitor.

“Everyone was targeted in Gaza during the aggression. Israel does not differentiate between Muslims or Christians. We were all at risk. The aggression did not spare places of worship. Although deemed part of Gaza’s historical heritage and of cultural value, these premises were targeted or damaged due to the bombing of surrounding areas. Prayers and rituals were interrupted by the intensity of the strikes. Worshipers were afraid to reach the church. We moved to other facilities affiliated with the church, such as the Rosary Sisters School or even to the homes of our parishioners to hold prayers,” Asaad continued.

He said that the Rosary Sisters School was the most affected by the fighting. “The school building sustained major cracks that might mean the demolition of some of it. Also the event hall, the sound lab, computers and the solar power unit there were destroyed, in addition to cracks in the Holy Family Church.”

Asaad noted that the church is constantly working to provide support and assistance to affected and poor families in the area. “The Latin Church aims to serve the poor and needy people regardless of their religion. After the war, we started a program of entertainment and recreation for parishioners, especially children, to help them overcome fear and make them feel safe again. The program included prayers, game sessions, psychological release activities and visits to tourism sites. The Latin Patriarch in Jerusalem, Pierbattista Pizzaballa, is scheduled to visit [Gaza] from June 14 to 17. This will raise the morale of the parishioners.”

According to the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the Latin Church community numbers 130 individuals in the entire Gaza Strip, out of about 1,130 total Christians.

Several international conventions and treaties protect Palestinian cultural heritage, including the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. However, Israel repeatedly ignores international law and has been repeatedly accused of working to obliterate the features of Palestinian identity and heritage.

Not far from the Latin Church in Gaza City lies the Great Omari Mosque (also known as the Great Mosque of Gaza), the oldest mosque in the Gaza Strip and the second oldest in Palestine. The imam who leads the noon and afternoon prayers there, Nabil Berzek, said the mosque remained in operation during the latest fighting, but the number of worshipers declined dramatically.

Berzek told Al-Monitor that in the Great Omari Mosque, like in other mosques in the Gaza Strip, the Maghrib and Isha prayers were combined to allow worshipers to stay home after Maghrib to protect them from Israeli airstrikes.

Berzek added, “We made sure to perform the call to prayer and hold prayers in a message to Israel that it did not prevent us from performing our religious rituals. We even held two Friday prayers during the aggression, but our sermons were short and the number of attendees was limited. Several funeral ceremonies were held at the mosque for victims that fell during the fighting round, including 19 from the Kawlak family.”

He explained, “The Great Omari Mosque, located in the heart of the old city of Gaza, was built about 2,000 years ago as a pagan temple, but it was converted to a church in 406 AD. In the seventh century AD, Muslims turned it into a mosque after the conquest of the city. It is the second largest mosque in Palestine after the holy Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.”

A Byzantine church that was discovered in 1998 near the northern Gaza Strip town of Jabalia was one of the heritage sites recently hit by Israeli artillery. The church was partially damaged during the Israeli invasion in 2003, and was severely damaged during the 2014 war.

The nonprofit Emergency First International began to restore the church in 2018 under the supervision of the Palestinian Ministry of Culture and Antiquities, but the Israeli strikes have destroyed the work.

Director-General of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage at the Ministry of Tourism in Gaza Jamal Abu Rid denounced Israel’s direct and indirect targeting of antiquities. He described these attacks as part of Israel’s plan to blur the identity of the Palestinian land to justify the idea that Palestine is a land without people and a people without a land.

Abu Rida told Al-Monitor that the Byzantine church site was severely damaged, saying, “This shows the severity of the airstrike and that Israel intended to inflict great damage to the archaeological site. The site has been undergoing restoration, maintenance and excavation since 2018, which has so far cost $2 million in external funding.”

He explained that the wall between the Katib al-Wilaya Mosque and the historic Church of Saint Porphyrius was hit in the bombing, damaging the mosque and church. Work is now underway to rebuild the wall.

The Church of Saint Porphyrius, one of the oldest churches in Gaza, is built around two huge marble columns. The church was named after St. Porphyrius, who was buried in it.

Katib al-Wilaya Mosque was built under Sultan Al-Nasir Muhammad bin Qalawun in 1432 AD. It was built in what used to be the administrative offices of St. Porphyrius Orthodox Church, which gave that space to Muslims to build a mosque adjacent to the church in a sign of coexistence and tolerance.

Al-Zawiya market is one the oldest markets in the Gaza Strip. Built during the Mamluk era, it attests to the various past civilizations that existed in Gaza throughout the ages. Its shops attract large crowds of visitors, especially on occasions and holidays, with an assortment of products like leather goods, perfumes, food supplies, sweets and gold jewelry. Economists often cite the commercial activity in the market as an economic indicator.

Gazans from all over the Strip visit the market to see its antique historical features, which include domes and arches dating back to the medieval Islamic ages.

In the middle of the month of Ramadan, the Gaza Strip relaxed the coronavirus restrictions imposed on markets. Merchants and sellers stocked up on goods in anticipation of Eid al-Fitr, but the Eid festivities were halted by the Israeli offensive. Merchants ended with heavy losses as shops were forced to close down.

Hiam Bitar, a researcher at the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities in Gaza, told Al-Monitor, “Israel is trying to destroy every ancient site it cannot control. In every aggression on Gaza, ancient sites are severely targeted. A large number of architectural monuments and sites were destroyed or damaged by Israel in the past years, such as Mahkamah Mosque and Al-Thafar Damri Mosque. This is in addition to the damage to ancient houses in the Zeitoun neighborhood, al-Balakhiya archaeological site, The Great Omari Mosque, the Tell el-Sakan archeological site, Tal Umm Amer, which contains the ruins of the St Hilarion monastery, and others. Most recently, Israel targeted the Byzantine Church in the northern Gaza Strip.”

Bitar went on, “As a result of the offensive, archaeological sites were almost completely abandoned as missions and public visits stopped,” noting that antiquities in Gaza also suffer from the Israeli siege imposed on Gaza that prevents much excavation, restoration and maintenance work.

In bombing the Gaza Strip, Israel has once again completely disregarded the international agreements and conventions that protect Palestinian antiquities and heritage sites.

Hadeel Al Gherbawi is a freelance journalist from the Gaza Strip. She has a degree in English language literature and journalism.

20 June 2021

Source: www.al-monitor.com

Several Israeli military vehicles invaded, on Monday morning, Palestinian agricultural lands, east of Khan Younis, in the southern part of the Gaza Strip.

Media sources said six armored bulldozers and two Merkava vehicles advanced dozens of meters into the Palestinian farmlands east of the al-Fakhari town, east of Khan Younis.

They added that the army bulldozed and uprooted the lands, especially the sections close to the perimeter fence, while military drones flew overhead.

The attack is part of frequent Israeli violations against the Palestinians, especially the fishermen, farmers, shepherds, and workers in the besieged and impoverished Gaza Strip, and have led to dozens of casualties, including fatalities, in addition to serious property damage and the confiscation of many boats after abducting the fishermen.

21 June 2021

Source: imemc.org

By Aaron Boxerman

A meeting between Hamas and United Nations envoy Tor Wennesland to strengthen the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel went poorly, Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas in Gaza, said on Monday.

The UN official recently arrived in the Gaza Strip in an attempt to stabilize the fragile ceasefire between Israel and Gaza-based Palestinian terror groups.

Both sides have violated the truce in recent days: Palestinians have launched incendiary balloons into Israeli territory, torching swaths of open land, and Israel has responded with airstrikes against Hamas targets.

“It was a bad meeting. It was not positive at all, and we clarified to the [United Nations] delegation that we would hold a meeting of Islamic and national factions in Gaza to decide our next steps,” Sinwar told reporters following the meeting.

“It seems that the occupation did not get our people’s message,” added Sinwar, referring to Israel.

Wennesland’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Hamas has demanded that Israel lift tightened restrictions on the Gaza Strip in exchange for continued calm, as well as permit Gaza to rebuild after the 11-day battle between Israel and the terror group.

Israel has maintained tighter than usual restrictions on the coastal enclave since the end of the operation. Defense Minister Benny Gantz has said a full lifting of restrictions will not take place until two Israeli civilians that Hamas is holding, along with the bodies of two Israeli soldiers, are returned to Israel.

Sinwar said Israel is “trying to extort us, the Palestinian people, the Palestinian resistance, when it comes to lifting [the restrictions] on our people.”

During the recent round of fighting between Israel and Hamas in May, Israel shut down all the crossings with the Gaza Strip. Only a few exceptions were made for specific aid convoys to enter the coastal enclave during the fighting. Gaza-based terror groups bombarded some of the convoys, wounding one Israeli soldier, the Israeli military said.

Israel has eased a few of the restrictions since the 11 days of fighting. Gazans seeking medical care were allowed to leave the enclave for treatment in hospitals in Israel and in the West Bank.

But Israel still maintains tight control over goods that enter and leave the Strip. Defense Minister Benny Gantz has said that Israel will not permit a full reconstruction of Gaza — with the resulting influx of materials — without the return of two Israeli civilian captives and the bodies of two Israeli soldiers currently held by Hamas.

Hamas, for its part, has rejected any connection between the reconstruction of Gaza and a potential prisoner exchange with Israel.

On Monday morning, the Israeli government relaxed some of the restrictions, allowing the export of textiles and agricultural produce from the Gaza Strip to Israel and the West Bank.

But an official in the Hamas-run Gaza Crossings Authority stressed that the situation had yet to return to the pre-war status quo.

“The opening [of the crossing] is only partial,” Crossings Authority Director-General Rami Abu Rish said in a statement.

21 June 2021

Source: www.timesofisrael.com

Hamas has said that it will prioritise the release of senior Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti in any prisoner exchange deal with Israel. This was revealed after a meeting between the head of the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement’s political bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, and Fadwa Barghouti, the wife of the 62-year-old who is entering his 20th year in an Israeli prison.

Haniyeh spoke with Barghouti’s wife in the presence of several prominent leaders of the movement earlier this month in Cairo. A senior Hamas source who was present at the meeting told Al-Monitor that Haniyeh has prioritised Barghouti’s release. Fadwa Barghouti received assurances that her husband will be at the top of the list in any future prisoner exchange deal with Israel.

According to the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, Haniyeh and Egyptian officials discussed the possibility of a new deal with Israel. The Egyptian mediators believe that the time is not yet ripe to make progress in talks with the Israelis, and suggested postponing the issue until the new government gets to work.

It’s not at all clear, however, if the government led by far-right nationalist Naftali Bennett will be open to a prisoner swap. He is even more extreme than his predecessor, Benjamin Netanyahu.

“I think the new Israeli prime minister, who is known for saying that terrorists should be killed and not released, will be more cautious about concluding an exchange deal that might result in the release of prisoners who have a history of planned military operations that killed many Israelis,” said Talal Oka of Al-Ayyam newspaper.

Hamas claims that it holds four Israeli soldiers who were captured during the 2014 Israeli onslaught against the Gaza Strip during which over 2,200 Palestinians were killed, and over 17,000 were wounded. Israel, however, questions that figure. It also continues to hold 4,500 Palestinians in its prisons.

Barghouti is seen as a natural successor to 85-year-old Mahmoud Abbas and the ideal person to unite the Palestinian political factions. According to recent polls he is the most popular Palestinian leader, which means that he would stand a good chance of winning a presidential election. That, though, could work against him. Critics argue that one of the means by which Israel can sustain its brutal occupation is to keep Palestinians divided politically and geographically.

21 June 2021

Source: middleeastmonitor.com

In a damning indictment of Israel’s genocidal policies in the occupied West Bank, two former Israeli envoys have termed the regime’s occupation as “apartheid,” drawing parallels with pre-1994 South Africa where racial segregation was legalized.

In an article published in a South African news website, former ambassadors Ilan Baruch and Alon Liel said the situation between Palestine and the Israeli regime was one of “inherent inequality.”

“For over half a century, Israel has ruled over the occupied Palestinian territories with a two-tiered legal system, in which, within the same tract of land in the West Bank, Israeli settlers live under Israeli civil law while Palestinians live under military law,” they wrote in a joint Op-Ed.

The former ambassadors said the Israeli regime has “worked to change both the geography and the demography” of the West Bank through the construction of illegal settlements.

“This has happened alongside the expropriation and takeover of massive amounts of Palestinian land, including Palestinian home evictions and demolitions. That is, settlements are built and expanded at the expense of Palestinian communities, which are forced onto smaller and smaller tracts of land,” they noted in the scathing article.

Referring to the then-minister of military affairs of the Israeli regime, Ariel Sharon, to South Africa in the early 1980s, when Sharon had “expressed great interest” in South Africa’s Bantustan project, the duo write that the map of West Bank “leaves little doubt regarding where Sharon received his inspiration.”

Illegal settlements

Pointing to illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, the duo emphasized that the regime in Tel Aviv was inspired by South Africa’s Bantustan project, which was a product of racial and class discrimination propounded by the white with contempt against the black.

“The West Bank today consists of 165 ‘enclaves’ – that is, Palestinian communities encircled by territory taken over by the settlement enterprise.”

The Bantustans of South Africa under the apartheid regime and the map of the occupied Palestinian territories today, they emphasized, are based on the same idea of “concentrating the ‘undesirable’ population in as small an area as possible, in a series of non-contiguous enclaves.”

“By gradually driving these populations from their land and concentrating them into dense and fractured pockets, both South Africa then and Israel today worked to thwart political autonomy and true democracy,” wrote the former envoys.

‘Wake up, world’

Baruch and Liel argued that their time in post-apartheid South Africa had led them to learn firsthand about the “reality of apartheid and the horrors it inflicted,” calling on the world to stand up for Palestine as they did against apartheid in South Africa in the 1990s.

“It is time for the world to recognize that what we saw in South Africa decades ago is happening in the occupied Palestinian territories too,” they wrote.

“It is time for the world to take decisive diplomatic action in our case as well and work towards building a future of equality, dignity, and security for Palestinians and Israelis alike,” they hastened to add.

They also warn that the Israeli occupation was not temporary and that the Israeli regime had “no political will to end it.”

Liel, the Israeli regime’s envoy to South Africa during the transition from apartheid from 1992 to 1994, also served as the director-general of the regime’s foreign ministry between 2000 and 2001.

Baruch served as the ambassador to South Africa from 2005 to 2008. He also served as an envoy to Namibia, Botswana, and Zimbabwe.

The damning article comes amidst the unfolding political drama in Israel with opposition political figures clubbing together to oust the sitting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Netanyahu has been under fire at home after the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas inflicted a crushing defeat on the regime during the recent 11-day war on the besieged Gaza Strip.

9 June 2021

Source: pnn.ps

By M K Bhadrakumar

The NATO brings to mind the classic paradigm of someone all dressed up and nowhere to go. It has to constantly reinvent a reason for its existence.

The NATO is a lucrative hunting ground for the American arms industry. The bigger the NATO’s threat perceptions, the greater the scope for US exports of weaponry.

In the final analysis, NATO’s naming of China as a systemic challenge, for the first time in the alliance’s history, would have profound implications for international security. Prima facie, it will draw China and Russia even closer together.

***

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) summit in Brussels on June 14 Monday reminds us once again of what a hoax the United States had perpetrated on the former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 by assuring him that the western alliance would expand “not one inch eastward” once Moscow allowed German Unification and disbanded the Warsaw Pact.

Briefing Book #613 dated December 12, 2017 at the US National Security Archive located at the George Washington University in Washington, DC says as follows:

“U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

“The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991, that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels.

“The documents reinforce former CIA Director Robert Gates’s criticism of “pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.” read more

It is this cold-blooded treachery and back-stabbing by the Bill Clinton Administration that rankles most in the Russian mind today, as the NATO enters the Black Sea and slouches toward Russia’s western borders. read more…

Suffice to say, Washington’s post-Cold War diplomacy in Europe has met with astounding success.

The heart of the matter is that today the US critically depends on NATO:

• To exercise its global hegemony;
• To provide a captive market for export of hundreds of billions of dollars worth American weaponry;
• To pin down major European powers (especially Germany) to an alliance system that puts brakes on their strategic autonomy and pursuit of independent foreign policies;
• To gain “strategic depth” to undertake military operations globally as part of an alliance system rather than blatantly as an interventionist power;
• To justify the deployment of thousands of American forces and store nuclear missiles in Europe; and,
• To cement the US’ dominance of the transatlantic system.

The NATO brings to mind the classic paradigm of someone all dressed up and nowhere to go. It has to constantly reinvent a reason for its existence. Russia has been providing that reason — although, Moscow has no intentions of capturing territories beyond its borders.

Of course, there is no question of a war between the NATO and Russia, either, since the latter is a thermonuclear power that can destroy the US many times over.

The NATO summit’s final communique issued yesterday once again puts Russia on the alliance’s cross-hairs. It develops the theme in six paragraphs that are based on a self-serving narrative (Para. 9 to 15). And the alliance’s entire build up for the foreseeable future devolves upon tackling this perceived “Russian threat.”

NATO’s new narrative

Meanwhile, the Brussels communique for the first time in the alliance’s history also brings in China’s rise as posing a potential challenge.

The US has been pressing for this in the recent years and has succeeded in including some references to China in the communique. (Paras 56-57.) The communique makes the following points with regard to China:

• “China’s stated ambitions and assertive behaviour present systemic challenges to the rules-based international order and to areas relevant to Alliance security”;
• NATO is concerned over China’s “coercive policies”;
• China is “rapidly expanding” its nuclear capabilities and is developing “a larger number of sophisticated delivery systems to establish a nuclear triad”;
• China is “opaque in implementing its military modernisation and its publicly declared military-civil fusion strategy”;
• China has military cooperation with Russia and has participated in in Russian exercises in the Euro-Atlantic area; and,
• NATO is concerned with China’s “frequent lack of transparency and use of disinformation”; and, China is not upholding its international commitments and acting “responsibly in the international system, including in the space, cyber, and maritime domains, in keeping with its role as a major power.”

But, typically, the communique softens the blow by dissimulating a conciliatory attitude, saying NATO maintains “a constructive dialogue” and welcomes “opportunities to engage” with China in information exchange on respective policies and activities, to enhance awareness and discuss potential disagreements.

The communique urges China “to engage meaningfully in dialogue, confidence-building, and transparency measures regarding its nuclear capabilities and doctrine.  Reciprocal transparency and understanding would benefit both NATO and China.”

Make no mistake, this is Washington’s hand writing the NATO communique. Hence this mixed message.

The fact of the matter is that many European allies would feel uneasy. For, China poses no military threat to the western alliance.

The Europeans visualise a challenge from China largely in the economic sphere — trade, investment, technology, setting up global standards and so on.

China appears to have anticipated the US’ shenanigans. China’s mission to the EU promptly reacted with facts and figures, pointing out that in 2021, Beijing’s military spending stood at $209 billion in comparison with the alliance’s $1.17 trillion, which is over half of the entire global military expenditure and 5.6 times that of China.

The statement said, “We will unswervingly defend our sovereignty and development interests, and keep a close eye on NATO’s strategic adjustments and policies toward China.”

An editorial in the Global Times said, “This NATO summit can be seen as a key point in the US and Europe’s attitude toward China in the security arena. Washington has raised the curtain for a political mobilisation campaign to use the NATO bloc to carry out strategic competition with China.

“The US wants to create a narrative that equates its own hegemony to the collective strategic advantage of the West and form a consensus among 30 countries. As long as NATO countries are bound by a common hatred for China, the interest links between Western countries and China will lose its moral basis and the US could force small European countries to serve its China strategy, politically exploiting them for US interests.” 

QUAD is a shaggy-dog story

Beijing’s diplomatic countermove will be to strengthen China-European Union cooperation. It works to China’s advantage that the US does not have the sort of clout to dictate policies to the EU as it has on the NATO platform. (German Chancellor Angela Merkel has already counselled caution about NATO closing the door on China.)

What is Washington’s strategy in creating a China vector for NATO, which was in the first instance formed for the security of the Euro-Atlantic space?

Here the parallels are striking with the mid-1990s when the US turned its back on the assurances given to Gorbachev and proceeded with the NATO expansion in anticipation of a Russian resurgence in a conceivable future.

The US anticipates that within the coming decade, China must be stopped from overtaking it as the number one global power. The US needs an alliance system to cope with China’s emergence. The QUAD is a shaggy-dog story, in reality.

Second, to assuage the Russian apprehensions regarding the NATO’s eastward expansion, Bill Clinton administration had offered to Boris Yeltsin that Moscow would be consulted on the NATO plans. Thus was born the NATO-Russia Council. But it was an empty gesture as the US anyway went ahead and did whatever it wanted with NATO expansion.

Similarly, the NATO claim that it has a “constructive dialogue” with China is sheer sophistry. The NATO will go through the charade of a dialogue for a while to calm Chinese nerves before taking the gloves off within 2-3 years at the most.

Third, NATO’s expansion in the 1990s was helpful for Washington to create a window to forge a unified strategic posturing with European allies vis-a-vis Russia. Similarly, the US has begun working hard for the past year or two to get the European allies on board its strategy toward China. The NATO becomes the hub where this work in progress is best handled.

Fourth, the NATO expansion in the 1990s inevitably complicated Russia’s aspirations to become part of a new common security space between Vancouver and Vladivostok. On the contrary, the US secured a say in Russia’s bilateral relations with the NATO countries.

Similar US strategy is at work here to complicate China’s relations with its European partners. Already, the US could block its major NATO allies from partnering with China in 5G technology. The US aims to vanquish China’s BRI projects in Europe on security grounds.

Equally, per NATO guidelines, China can be eventually denied access to western technologies altogether. The point is, while the 30 heads of state and government have expressed concern over China’s “coercive policies”, “opaque ways”, its “use of disinformation” and have upfront called on Beijing to “uphold its international commitments and to act responsibly in the international system.”

Whither ‘Asian Century’?

Finally, as in the case with Russia, the US is pushing China toward an infructuous arms race. Of course, this creates the rationale for increased defence spending by NATO countries, which would in turn promote exports of US military technology to Europe. 

Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II are expected to sell in the hundreds, if not thousands, to the US’ allies through 2035. Already, the planned initial buyers include Japan (147 aircraft), South Korea (80) and Australia (upto 100).

The NATO is a lucrative hunting ground for the American arms industry. The bigger the NATO’s threat perceptions, the greater the scope for US exports of weaponry.

In the final analysis, NATO’s naming of China as a systemic challenge would have profound implications for international security. Prima facie, it will draw China and Russia even closer together.

As the US strategic containment of China intensifies, Beijing will come under pressure to boost its deterrence and rapidly increase the number of commissioned nuclear warheads and the DF-41s,  the strategic missiles that are capable of long-range strikes and have high-survivability.

China will be on guard as regards its sovereignty and will prepare for an intense showdown. Hu Xijin, the editor-in-chief of Global Times, wrote recently, “In this scenario, a large number of Dongfeng-41, and JL-2 and JL-3 (both intercontinental-range submarine-launched ballistic missile) will form the pillar of our strategic will. The number of China’s nuclear warheads must reach the quantity that makes US elites shiver should they entertain the idea of engaging in a military confrontation with China.”

There is an African proverb, ‘When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.’ To be sure, the Asian region is becoming the theatre where the US-China tensions will play out.

Inevitably, this would cast shadows on the region’s extraordinary prospects for growth and development. The prospects for the ‘Asian Century’ may diminish. And that can only work splendidly for the US, but Asian countries themselves will be the poorer for it.

***

Posted in his blog, indianpunchline, June 16, 2021, by the author.

Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar served the Indian Foreign Service for more than 29 years.

18 June 2021

Source: countercurrents.org

By Jim Miles

On June 13, 2021, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau put out a statement welcoming the new Israeli government and outlining Canada’s support for all things Israeli.

The full statement is available on the government website [https://pm.gc.ca/en/news/statements/2021/06/13/statement-prime-minister-formation-new-government-israel] and contains many simplistic platitudes that conceal too many ugly realities. Without deconstructing all of it there are some salient points that do stand out.

The first is that “Canada and Israel are close friends bound together by shared democratic values”, in actuality a true statement, as neither country is truly democratic.

Both are colonial settler establishments

Both are apartheid societies

Both use militarized force to maintain control of indigenous populations.

Both are members/participants in the U.S. empire, although for Israel it is more of a manipulated convenience, and for Canada it is simple sycophancy and a pretence at global greatness.

Both attempt to overthrow other legally established governments, with Canada doing so more expansively around the empire (Venezuela, Haiti, Ukraine, Libya, Syria et al) while Israel stays with neighbouring states (sort of – to wit Iran).

Both kill Arabs: Israel quite directly with Naftali Bennett bragging about it, while Canada does it more discreetly through military trade with Saudi Arabia and support of the U.S. empire in general.

Neither country has a truly democratic electoral system, with the power residing in the corporations and political managers rather than the demos, the people.
Both take indigenous children from their families: Canada formerly through the churches and school system, now through the foster care system; Israel does it through militarized abductions, imprisonment, and torture (which is sort of like Canada’s church schools were like, with the verified dimension of murder).

Chances are I could go on, but the significant lack of truly “democratic” actions is obvious and common to both countries.

Trudeau goes on to say Canada has joined efforts in “combatting anti-semitism in all its forms”. Well and good but that includes support for the vaguely worded and poor exemplar of what antisemitism actually is within the IHRA definition (and it is not criticism of actions against international law and humanitarian law as practiced by Israel). Canada has a formal policy statement – though not a law – supporting the IHRA definition in the House of Commons. What Canada’s politicians ignore comes from recent polls showing that a large majority of Canadian citizens do not support Israeli actions and do not support the government’s positions on Israel/Palestine. Canada’s government also opposes the BDS movement, a peaceful resistance idea that acknowledges the apartheid nature of the state. Ironically, Canada is all for BDS when it comes to its U.S. partner’s great dislikes.

Next, “Canada remains steadfast in its commitment to a two-state solution, with Israelis and Palestinians living in peace, security, and dignity”. Sounds great, but it is an impossibility and Trudeau and his cohorts wilful ignorance on this topic simply demonstrates how little he cares for Palestine and peace, security, and dignity. The Oslo Accords, the Roadmap to Peace, the two state solution is dead.

Israel is quite happy to play along as it has given and will give them plenty of time to build and expand settlements that already prevent any contiguous viable Palestinian state. Trudeau is not alone in this as all political parties officially support the two state solution, although the NDP have shifted to a position of criticism of Israel’s most recent actions and attacks on Sheikh Jarrah, the al-Aqsa mosque, and Gaza.

With a final thank you to Netanyahu Trudeau ends with “Canada and Israel achieved a great deal together.” Wow, oh so true, this implicates Canada in Israel’s war crimes and humanitarian crimes, while providing the linguistic obfuscation to make it sound all so wonderful. Not such strange bedfellows.

Jim Miles is a Canadian educator

18 June 2021

Source: countercurrents.org

By Rima Najjar

Today, June 15, 2021, Israeli Jewish supremacists are marching in East Jerusalem as Palestinians call for a ‘Day of Rage’ in response.

“We call on all free people everywhere to stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people and its just cause and end the Israeli aggression on our people and holy places,” The Committee of Islamic and National Groups stated. “Let the world know that the continuous Israeli violations in Jerusalem will remain to be the trigger, which sparks the fight.”

Palestinians see the Israeli annual raid of the Old City (including the Haram al-Sharif complex, where al-Aqsa mosque is housed) in celebration of the occupation, annexation and Judaization of Jerusalem under the flag of the Zionist Jewish state as an abomination.

In previous years, Palestinian Jerusalemites mostly cowered and shuttered their businesses and homes in the face of the rampage and hate-filled slogans of the Israeli Jewish marchers. They too took to describing the event as instigated by “far-right and anti-Palestinian activists,” rather than by the very apartheid and systemic structure of the Jewish supremacist state itself.

But this time, as Ahmed Abu Artema wrote in The Electronic Intifada on 14 May 2021, this time, it’s different:

The current escalation is distinguished by the fact that the Palestinian people demanded a response to the practices of the Israeli occupation. Hamas, in responding, is being considered heroic.

There is no public judgment or denunciation of Hamas’ decision to act, even when citizens are paying the harshest price of Israeli aggression, losing their loved ones and their homes.

It is clear in Gaza that Palestinians remain firm in their belief in resistance as the pathway to liberation from occupation.

This round of fighting is also significant because it came as a response to continuous violations in Jerusalem.

All previous rounds of Hamas escalation have been provoked by Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip. Thus, when Jerusalem called for Gaza’s aid, and Gaza rose to defend Jerusalem, this amplified the burgeoning sense of Palestinian national unity and liberated the Palestinian resistance from its isolation in Gaza.

In effect, this time, Hamas is saying to Israeli Jews in occupied Jerusalem: If you want to worship in the Old City, leave your occupation flags at home and leave al-Aqsa alone.

Wikipedia informs us about Jerusalem Day in the following harmless Israeli PR narrative as: “an Israeli national holiday commemorating the reunification of Jerusalem and the establishment of Israeli control over the Old City in the aftermath of the June 1967 Six-Day War.” All kosher and above board.

That PR is in keeping with today’s rhetoric by Internal Security Minister Omer Bar-Lev, who issued a statement justifying the provocation of the Flag Day March through Jerusalem as, of all things, a democratic act!

“In a democracy it is allowed and important to demonstrate for all types of causes as long as it is within the confines of the law. We will hold a police assessment about the events and we will operate according to the recommendations of the police.”

For Palestinians, the rampaging herds of Jewish youth annually coursing through their streets shouting “Death to Arabs” are a far cry from what Bar-Lev is suggesting — that they represent a far-right racist group, like the KKK in the US, who have the right to freedom of speech in a democracy. What he is obscuring is the fact that Israel, as a state from top to bottom, is a Jewish supremacist colonial-settler state whose reason and strategy for existing is exactly that of these rampaging hoards.

To Palestinians, this march through Jerusalem means that “opportunities” continue to open up in Israel for “a lasting and radical solution of the most vexing problem of the Jewish state” — the Palestinian population.

Consider this:

On this day in 1948, future Israeli Prime Minister Sharett exulted to World Zionist Organization head Goldman on Israel’s successful ethnic cleansing: “the most spectacular event in the contemporary history of Palestine…is the wholesale evacuation of its Arab population…The opportunities opened up by the present reality for a lasting and radical solution of the most vexing problem of the Jewish state, are so far-reaching, as to take one’s breath away. The reversion to the status quo ante is unthinkable”, i.e. the refugees would not be allowed to return.

What we’re seeing here is the rise of a nakedly genocidal regime in Israel, one that is identical and faithful to its fundamental Zionist roots. And as a friend commented on Facebook: “This is going to go from horrible to a level of atrocious we can’t imagine. And thus makes stepping up the resistance even more imperative.”

Palestinian rage is righteous. It ought to be clear to the world now what and who “the obstacle to peace” is and has always been. This remarkable Palestinian uprising may have been sparked by the Sheikh Jarrah expulsions, but it has radiated across all of Palestine and beyond.

__________________

Rima Najjar is a Palestinian whose father’s side of the family comes from the forcibly depopulated village of Lifta on the western outskirts of Jerusalem and whose mother’s side of the family is from Ijzim, south of Haifa.

16 June 2021

Source: countercurrents.org

By Jake Johnson

Just hours after far-right marchers chanted “Death to Arabs!” during a demonstration in the streets of Jerusalem, Israeli war planes bombarded the occupied Gaza Strip early Wednesday morning in the first series of airstrikes launched by the new government of Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, a former IDF officer who once boasted that he has “killed a lot of Arabs.”

While initial reports indicated that no Palestinians were killed in the new bombing campaign, the air raid intensified fears of a fresh wave of violence by the Israeli government just weeks after a tenuous cease-fire agreement paused Israel’s deadly 11-day assault on Gaza last month, which killed more than 240 people.

The Israeli military characterized the latest airstrikes as retaliation for “incendiary balloons” released into Israel from the Gaza Strip. The balloons reportedly caused at least ten fires in Israel.

“Homemade fire balloons versus U.S. bombs. Is there a better example of the disproportionate use of force?” asked Ariel Gold, national co-director of the anti-war organization CodePink.

Abu Malek, whom the Associated Press identified as “one of the young men launching the balloons,” said the incendiary objects were released into Israel in response to a far-right, government-sanctioned march through Jerusalem, where demonstrators rallied alongside several members of the Israeli Knesset and chanted “Death to Arabs!”

Israeli police fired rubber bullets at Palestinians who tried to disrupt the march, which reached the main entrance to the Old City’s Muslim quarter.

“This is a genocidal chant. Let’s call it what it is,” tweeted U.S. Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.). “I represent many within the Jewish community who disavow and condemn this hateful language. So why does only a small portion of our Congress?”

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the first Palestinian-American woman ever elected to the U.S. Congress, said that “after racist and violent ‘death to Arabs’ marches earlier today in Jerusalem, children in Gaza are being woken by bombs in the middle of the night.”

“Israel’s government doesn’t value Palestinian lives,” Tlaib added. “It has managed a decades-long ethnic cleansing project, funded by the U.S.”

The Israeli airstrikes came just over 48 hours after the country’s parliament narrowly voted to replace former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with Bennett, a change that defenders of Palestinian rights did not applaud given the latter’s record and policy stances, which include support for annexing the occupied West Bank in violation of international law.

“While being hailed by many as the opportunity for a fresh start, Naftali Bennett is at best a continuation of Netanyahu’s policies and at worst an ideologue whose positions are to the right of Netanyahu’s,” Gold of CodePink wrote for Common Dreams on Monday.

Originally published in CommonDreams

16 June 2021

Source: countercurrents.org