Why the PA Textbooks Remain a Secret to the Israeli Public

The school system of the nascent Palestinian Authority, established in the wake of the Oslo peace process, has fostered the first curriculum since Nazi Germany to train children in the art of war against the Jews. Yet the thorough research of the school books of the Palestinian National Authority remain a secret to most people in Israel. Why?

When the CMIP presented its evaluation of the Palestinian Authority school books at a well attended press conference at the King David Hotel on November 21, 2001, several media outlets were noticably absent: the three main Israeli newspapers were not there: HaAretz, Yediot and Maariv.

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency, which supplies releases to all the Jewish media and Jewish organization, was also not there. The JTA bureau chief in Israel, David Landau, co-author of the seminal 1993 volume, New Middle East, the book that promoted the Oslo process, has never reported about PA education.

Israel TV was there, yet preferred to delay the news of the press conference from its main 9 p.m. newscast until the less viewed midnite newscast.

Israel Kol Yisrael Radio news ran a story of the press conference on exactly two newscasts.

The people in Israel are therefore left in the dark concerning the PA curriculum.

Two days before the press conference, the Beligian Foreign Minister visited Israel, the PLO press agency WAFA announced that the Belgian government would be funding this year’s set of PA school books.

When I asked the Belgian foreign minister’s press secretary about the reason for the Belgian funding of the school books, she specifically mentioned that she had heard that the CMIP had reported that there had been an “improvement” in the content of the books.

The CMIP could only point to cosmetic improvements in the books, such as the “recognition” of the Jewish connection to Palestine during the time of King David.

Queries to the Israel Foreign Ministry concerning the school books produced a response:

The Israel Ambassador to Belgium, Mr. Shaul Amor, was instructed to discuss the school books with the Belgian Foreign Minister, while the Israel Foreign Ministry issued a release that it would conduct its own inquiry concerning the PA school books.

This would represent the first time that the Israeli government has conducted a study of PA textbooks.

The question remains as to whether the Israeli government will ever protest the content of the PA school books to the funders of PA education.

The Israeli public at large does not yet know about the PA curriculum.

In the Shadow of 1914: The Current Situation

With each passing day, the political landscape across the globe looks increasingly like August 1914. Then, it took only the assassination of an Austrian archduke by a Bosnian-Serb nationalist to ignite the First World War.

The second decade of the century was a time of fear and deep suspicion, of secret alliances and dark conspiracies. Militarism was on the rise and great-power rivalries dominated world politics. For a young, naïve generation the promise of modernity was about to collide with the forces of an older, more-sinister world. It would be a costly fight.

Eighty years later, another assassin is on the prowl. This time he’s an Islamic fundamentalist with dreams of a Middle East free of Western influence. His goal is nothing less than a resurgent Muslim civilization and a new world order that no longer includes the United States at its helm.

The weapon of choice for Osama bin Laden is not the bullet, but commercial jetliners, and possibly biological toxins, targeted at the heart of American cities. With his vast resources and a network of committed followers, he may just have initiated the first global conflict of the 21st century. Such is the power of terrorism.

Two months after the attacks of September 11, all the pieces are coming together. A coalition of antiterrorist countries, led by the United States, is being formed on one side. A loose coalition of rogue states and committed terrorist organizations has formed on the other. Each side has issued ultimatums from which it cannot comfortably retreat.

Propaganda and patriotism have aroused popular anger. Armies are on the march. The antagonists have a clear and uncluttered vision of what’s right. Each has a global reach. Each has weapons of mass destruction. Each has God on its side.

President George W. Bush has declared a global war on terrorism. His spokesmen have acknowledged that the fight may yet extend to 60 or 70 countries, each home to an underworld of crime and subversion. It could take years before the scourge is eradicated. The United Nations has been mobilized with every state being asked to weigh into the fight. “Either you’re with us or you’re against us,” is the battle cry out of Washington.

As always, the Middle East remains a flash point for conflict. Its nations are restless, frightened and poised for war. Terrorism has reached a crescendo in Israel, with scores of Israeli citizens and Palestinians being killed and injured each week. A senior Israeli minister has been assassinated. The prospect of peace has all but vanished. Oslo is dead. Both the Israeli and Palestinian societies are at a breaking point. Each has warned the other that a single act of violence could unleash a chain of events leading to a regional meltdown.

In Egypt, the government has said it will not stand by if Israel mounts a major offensive against the Palestine Liberation Organization inside of territory it controls. Hezbollah, backed by Syria and Iran, continues to probe Israel’s northern defenses, attempting, yet again, to drag Jerusalem into the Lebanese quagmire. Other terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine are itching for an opportunity to strike at Israeli urban centers in the hope of demoralizing the population, instilling panic and bringing about the collapse of the Jewish state.

Indonesia, the largest Muslim nation in the world, finds itself on the verge of disintegration. Rising popular anger over the U.S. campaign against Afghanistan coupled with mounting social unrest, economic collapse and increasing religious militancy could lead to widespread destabilization across Southeast Asia.

Megawati Sukarnoputri, Indonesia’s president, ominously has warned that the nation is in danger of becoming the “Balkans of the East.” She said, “If [violence] continues, we will split into lots of small races, into lots of small countries, all of which will be weak in the face of outside forces.”

To build its antiterror coalition, the United States has looked first to NATO, invoking Article Five of the Atlantic Charter for the first time in history. Old rivals of the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance now are joined against a new enemy. An attack on one is an attack on all.

Great Britain has committed its largest force to battle since the Falklands War. London joined Washington in launching the first strike on Afghanistan, using submarine-launched cruise missiles while also dispatching SAS commandos.

French support of Operation Enduring Freedom consists of intelligence-gathering, reconnaissance aircraft and mine-clearing ships. The Germans are providing 3,900 troops along with airborne medical craft, armored reconnaissance vehicles and nuclear/biological/chemical detection equipment. The Italians have offered an aircraft carrier and up to 2,700 soldiers. Canada is committing 2,000 troops, six ships, six aircraft and a commando unit.

The Australians, too, have rallied to the allied battle standard with troops and equipment. Always eager for a good scrum, the Aussies once again find themselves up against a Muslim foe. Afghanistan may not be Gallipoli, but its defenders are equally ruthless and the terrain just as challenging.

In what is their first overseas deployment since World War II, Japan is providing military support to the U.S. antiterrorist effort. Many Chinese are worried that this could signal the beginning of a remilitarized Japan. Beijing has moved troops to its westernmost province as a precaution and closed its border with Afghanistan.

Russia, too, is on heightened alert, its leaders mindful of the fury of radical Islam and its potential to spread chaos well beyond the borders of Afghanistan. The Kremlin is concerned that U.S. forces operating within its sphere of influence in Central Asia may not leave after the fighting. No less than seven of the former Soviet republics have pledged their support for the war effort. Some are allowing U.S. troops to be based on their soil. Naturally, the Kremlin is nervous. Once again, the “Great Game” is being played out in Asia.

There may yet be a popular backlash in those countries bordering Afghanistan – Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan – where dissident Muslim minorities are displeased with offers made by their governments to aid the U.S.-led coalition. The signs of a geopolitical collision are everywhere.

Popular discontent and a mounting refugee crisis threaten to topple the government of Pakistan, which has the second largest Muslim population in the world. Were this to occur, the Pentagon is set to launch a commando raid to seize the country’s stockpile of an estimated 23 nuclear weapons. Sympathies for the Taliban run deep within Pakistan. Across the Muslim world, thousands of recruits are heeding the call to jihad and flocking to Afghanistan, via Pakistan, for a millennial fight against the infidel. Iraq, like the proverbial Cheshire cat, waits quietly in the wings.

Rising disaffection within Saudi Arabia could bring down that regime, throwing into chaos a significant portion of the world’s oil supply and leaving unresolved the future of Islam’s holiest shrines. The same is true for Egypt, where not since the 1940s has the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood enjoyed such broad, popular support. Today, university students, the country’s middle class and the Egyptian intelligentsia have joined with the impoverished masses in a growing wave of opposition to the Hosni Mubarak regime.

The Great War erupted in 1914 when mass discontent and old political rivalries led small states to challenge the composition of the existing social order. Then, as now, terrorism merely was the catalyst for chaos, a pretext for settling old scores.

But the price the great powers paid for their blunder into global war was more than they ever had imagined. Fratricidal destruction, economic ruin, the beginning of the end of empire and the collapse of monarchical rule across Europe brought closure to a world that had emerged with the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 and ended in the trenches of the Somme.

To be sure, World War I was bitter medicine. Yet, it did clear Europe of its strangling undergrowth of petty autocracies and many of its protected monopolies. Ultimately, the war led to the growth of modern governmental institutions and the triumph of democracy in Europe.

Much as in August 1914, many U.S. allies in the Muslim world are undergoing social and political convulsions. Several may not outlast the current turmoil. Countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Indonesia fear that, whichever way they turn, the ides of March may be upon them. Embrace too closely the U.S.-led war effort and the Muslim world will see this as a betrayal of Islamic unity. Show only lukewarm support for the coalition and these countries may find themselves at odds with Washington.

These are unsettling times, a period when the destinies of countries are shaped by historical currents outside their control. To its credit, the Bush administration has come to understand that the war in the Middle East is more than just a fight to defeat terrorism. It is a fight to determine the shape and political composition of the region for the next 100 years. For the United States, this is a defining moment, a historical contest over whether our ideas of democracy, freedom and modernity will reign supreme in the new century or whether anarchy and asceticism will assert its hold over great swaths of the world.

To be sure, the assassination of one archduke reasonably cannot be compared to the murder of more than 3,000 innocent people, but its consequences can. Punitive strikes against those responsible for the worst foreign attack ever on American soil certainly are justified. An expanded war beyond the borders of Afghanistan may be a necessity. Yet, in marshaling a highly militarized world into a broad antiterror coalition, there always is the risk that events could ignite a global conflict that quickly could escape our government’s control.

U.S. policymakers must remain mindful of history in all they do. The guns of August 1914 have awakened to our drumbeat. The memory of a lost generation hangs heavy over the world tonight.

This article appeared in Insight Magazine, December 10, 2001 issue.

Rand Fishbein is President of Fishbein Associates Inc.,
former staff member U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittees
on Defense and Foreign Operations

How Is Israel to Respond When They Attack Our Airports?

On Monday, US Secretary of State Colin Powell will deliver a speech at the University of Louisville in which it is expected he will set forth an American plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. In a meeting with European leaders this past Tuesday, Secretary Powell announced that he was wrong last spring to have accepted Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s demand that a total cease-fire of seven days precede any resumption of negotiations or freeze in Israeli building activities in the Jewish towns in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Powell now publicly sides with the Arab view that Israel must enter negotiations while its citizens and cities remain under constant attack. The ramifications of this US position shift are that the Bush Administration now apparently accepts the Palestinian- Pan-Arab view that terrorism against Israelis is a legitimate way for Palestinians to express opposition to Israeli policies.

The American adoption of this Palestinian – Pan-Arab position, together with President Bush’s embrace of the call for the establishment of an independent state of Palestine raises a number of questions for Israeli military strategists. What is the strategic significance of the establishment of a state abutting Israel that overtly engages in terrorism and other forms of violence against the Jewish State? How will an independent Palestinian state differ from the Palestinian Authority from a military perspective?

How will an independent Palestinian state impact the regional military balance between Israel and its Arab neighbors? How will international backing of Palestinian terrorism impact Israel’s ability to ensure its survival? Finally, how must the answers to these questions impact the government’s policies regarding Israel’s positions in negotiations that will take place under fire and under increasing American pressure to establish an independent State of Palestine as quickly as possible?

According to retired IDF Major General Meir Dagan, former terrorism advisor to Prime Minister Netanyahu, and military affairs advisor to Ariel Sharon during his tenure as Opposition Leader, “After a year and two months during which the Palestinian Authority has actively waged a terrorist war against Israel, there can be no room for doubt in anyone’s mind that the Palestinian entity that will be established will be hostile to Israel and as a result, Israel will have to relate to this state as an enemy state.”

Although it is now clear that the new State of Palestine will be hostile, what will be the practical significance of this hostility? Last week, the Ariel Center for Policy Research published an analysis entitled, “The Palestinian Security Forces: Capabilities and Effects on the Arab-Israeli Military Balance.” The author, IDF Lt. Col. (res.) Gal Luft, who is now completing his doctorate at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, served as a battalion commander in the Gaza Strip and West Bank throughout most of the 1990’s and in that capacity worked closely with the Palestinian forces. Luft judges that Arafat has amassed a regular military force of 46,000 troops. In addition he estimates approximately 40,000 additional personnel are members of the PLO’s Tanzim militia, augmented by several thousand additional forces in the Islamic Jihad and Hamas terrorist organizations. Because many members of the regular security forces also serve in the Tanzim militia, it is difficult to arrive at the precise number of Palestinian forces.

Arafat’s regular forces are disbursed among thirteen separate and distinct security organizations, the largest of which, the National Security Forces, numbers some 14,000 soldiers who are organized into brigades and battalions in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. This body, which constitutes the backbone of the Palestinian fighting forces, has yet to take part in the fighting against Israel. In an interview early this week Luft explained, “The most reasonable explanation for this is that Arafat decided not to have his main force take part in the fighting in order to continue to enjoy the image of the underdog fighting a fierce, professional army. The problem is that no one seems to notice that his main force has been standing on the side watching. When the IDF invaded six cities in the Palestinian controlled areas and met with zero resistance, it seems that the lesson the army took away is that it can come and go as it pleases – like a knife cutting through margarine. The truth is that the Palestinians made the decision not to resist us. If they decide otherwise, the picture will look completely different.”

Luft contends that the term “Police Force” that was attached to the Palestinian forces is a misleading distortion of reality. “There is no Palestinian police force here,” he says. “There is a Palestinian army. It is organized as an army, trained as an army and carries out the fighting functions and operations of an army.”

When the Palestinian Authority was first established, everything seemed different. Israel armed the Palestinian forces and ensured they were adequately trained. According to Brigadier General (res.) Dov Gazit, who served as the first Coordinator of Activities with the Palestinian Police for the IDF, “We operated from the assumption that they were supposed to provide us with security and quiet. During the initial phase, when they first came into the field, things looked promising. Aside from some isolated incidents, the daily cooperation went smoothly.” On the other hand, the built-in contradiction between the Israeli expectation for cooperation and the Palestinian national aspirations was clear to anyone who wished to see. “They did not confiscate illegal arms as they were treaty-bound to do. They also absolutely refused to implement other key elements of the security accords such as extraditing suspected terrorists to Israel and they had difficulty carrying out arrests of terrorists. We accepted this state of affairs at the time because we understood that they were just getting organized and they had a need to be sensitive to their public opinion,” Gazit recalls.

According to Luft, the first big fault-line in cooperation between the Israeli and Palestinian forces developed in September 1996, in the wake of the Israeli Government’s decision to open a subterranean tunnel under the Western Wall in Jerusalem. The Palestinian Authority’s decision to react to the action by firing on Israeli forces caught the Israeli army by complete surprise. Luft contends, “For us the battles were a partial eye-opener because they showed our forces in the field just how quickly our relations with them could turn from cooperation to confrontation. On the other hand, we still didn’t understand that we had to stop viewing the Palestinian forces as a police force and had to start looking at them as a military force.”

For their part, the Palestinians viewed the battles of September 1996 as a total military victory and a true watershed event. Luft notes, “The Palestinians refer to the battles as ‘The September War.’ In three days of fighting they killed more of our forces than we killed of theirs, and among our casualties, they killed a Colonel and moderately injured another Colonel and a Brigadier General.” Luft continues that in the aftermath of what the Palestinians considered an unvarnished success, they embarked on a vast build-up of their force levels and worked intensively to improve the quality of their forces and their battle-readiness. Palestinian commanders were sent to Pakistan, Egypt, and other countries to receive advanced training.

These commanders then returned to the Palestinian Authority to train the troops in the field. Luft points out that the improvement of the Palestinian forces was demonstrated when, “Shortly before the current so-called intifada began, the Palestinians conducted a brigade exercise and they didn’t look bad at all.”

Last week, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres promised that the Palestinian State that he will help establish would be demilitarized. Luft rejects the Foreign Minister’s announcement out of hand with a mixture of derision and anxiety. “All the talk about demilitarization is just hot air. Such talk is more a sedative for the Israeli public than a statement with any real substance. If until now the Palestinians broke every promise and breached every commitment they took upon themselves regarding limitations on their force levels, type and quantity of weaponry and cooperation in destroying the terrorist infrastructures and organizations, what evidence exists that they will behave differently as a sovereign state? To the contrary, the Palestinians will have much less to lose by breaching their signed commitment and we will have much greater difficulty enforcing our positions once they have their state. If for instance the Palestinians place heavy artillery on the heights commanding the West Bank and aim their guns toward Ben-Gurion International Airport, what will Israel do? How will we explain to the world that we attacked a sovereign state that everyone supports because its actions were a clear provocation and we needed to defend ourselves? In the Versailles Peace Treaty, the Allied governments limited the German army to one hundred thousand troops. Twenty years later we had the Whermacht. All these announcements about a demilitarized state are cheap demagogy – an attempt to hide the truth from the Israeli people.” While Luft is concerned with what he views as the IDF’s underrating of the already existing Palestinian forces, he does not believe that the Palestinian Army will be able to mount a serious threat to Israel in a conventional war between the two countries. The greater danger that he foresees is the role that the Palestinian army will play as part of a coalition of Arab states in a regional war against Israel. “The most problematic scenario for Israel is the highly likely possibility that the Palestinians will participate in an Arab coalition against us. They have an interest in such a war and they will have the capacity to sabotage our mobilization of our reserve forces and are liable to damage the IDF’s ability to move forces and tanks to the Jordan Valley and the Golan Heights.

Here then, the Palestinian military threat is transformed from organized terrorism to a blow on Israel’s strategic capabilities to prevail in a regional war.”

Luft agrees with Major General Dagan that no doubt exists that signing a peace treaty will in no way reduce the Palestinians’ hostility toward Israel or lower their level of motivation to fight Israel. He explains, “We have to understand that the key to a state’s military strength is its perception of the threat arrayed against it. Without a doubt the Palestinians feel threatened by Israel. In addition to the threat perception you must add the huge mobilization potential of the Palestinian army because 75 percent of Palestinians are under the age of 35. We also mustn’t forget the fact that Palestinian society is highly militaristic.” In summary, Luft concludes that granting sovereignty to a Palestinian state will increase the maneuvering room of an already existing enemy army, while at the same time reducing Israel’s ability to enforce its positions and ensure its security.

Major General (res.) Yom Tov Samia, until recently the Commander of the Southern Command of the IDF, explains that in his view, it isn’t the Palestinian regular forces who manifest the primary threat to Israel but rather “the commingling of regular forces and terrorist squads and the backing that the terrorists receive from tens of thousands of regular forces.” From Samia’s perspective, “We have to reach a situation where in the framework of a Palestinian state, there won’t be armed militias operating at the side of the Palestinian army. There will be a need to demand that their forces are consolidated under one command hierarchy and one Chief of Staff who will not be Arafat or his successors.”

General Dagan agrees with General Samia’s assessment and in his view, it is not the Palestinian forces at their current levels that constitute the paramount threat to Israel from the Palestinians, but rather the integration of terrorists and terrorist doctrine into the Palestinian regular forces that manifest the greatest danger – a danger he views as a threat to Israel’s very survival. “The Palestinian state will constitute a strategic threat to the survival of Israel because of the absorption of terrorist doctrine into its fighting forces. The sense the Palestinians have now, that they can operate from bases in close proximity to Israeli population centers without fear of Israeli military reaction will only be amplified after they receive independence. From their territory the Palestinians can destroy the whole fabric of life in Israel, to an extent that will make life here completely unbearable over time. They will be able to repeatedly and continuously sabotage our electrical grids, our telecommunications lines and infrastructures, and they will be able to deplete our water supply and pollute our environment – lowering our air quality, polluting our soil and our streams. They will be able to terrorize our citizenry with mortar and Katyusha rocket attacks on our urban centers. In short, by creating a reality of a war of attrition, they will embitter our lives to an extent far greater than what they have accomplished until now, and over the course of time, bring about the disintegration of the State of Israel. Plainly, from their actions and behavior up to now, one can conclude without any reasonable doubt that not only will they have the ability to do this, they also have the desire to do this.”

Generals Samia and Dagan also agree that in addition to the Palestinian terrorist threat, from a military perspective, the Palestinian state must not have the ability to raise a true conventional army. To prevent this, both insist that Israel must ensure it retains complete and sole control over the international borders of the Palestinian state.

According to General Samia, in a future accord between Israel and the Palestinian entity, “Israel must insist that the Palestinian army will not be an army in the full sense of the word. It must be a limited force without heavy weaponry. In order to ensure that this is the case, it must be agreed that for the next fifty years, Israel will be the sole party responsible for ensuring security against foreign threats. The only armed force that can be deployed west of the Jordan River is the IDF.”

General Dagan adds, “I am not so much bothered by the term ‘sovereignty’ as I am concerned by the content behind it. If, from a purely military perspective the Palestinians retain more or less what they have today, then we can live with it. The damage they can do to us in a regional war will be point specific, limited – temporary control over an isolated settlement or delaying the movement of our heavy equipment to the Jordan Valley for a few hours. Things like these will not, at the end of the day, influence the IDF’s ability to win the war. The main problem will arise if they are granted control over any international border. Then they will automatically become a regular member of an Eastern front arrayed against us that will include Iraq, Syria and Jordan. If this is allowed to happen, then, in the event of war, we can have our first engagement of Iraqi armored forces not on the Jordan River, but in Ramallah, ten kilometers from Jerusalem. This is the real danger. On the other hand, if we can limit their sovereignty in a way that will ensure our control over the lateral roads that cross the West Bank to the Jordan Valley and we continue our sole control over the international borders, we can live with it.”

After Secretary of State Powell’s address on Monday, Israel will be forced to enter into negotiations with the Palestinians from an extremely weak bargaining position. By not seizing the diplomatic and military initiative in the wake of September 11th, the Israeli Unity Government enabled the Arab bloc to link the establishment of a Palestinian state to their support for the American war against Islamic terrorism. Powell’s latest announcement that he is removing America’s backing from Prime Minister Sharon’s position that negotiations cannot be undertaken under fire creates a situation unprecedented in its bleakness. It deprives Israel of international support for its claim that the granting of Palestinian statehood must be conditioned on that state living at peace with the Jewish State.

It can be reasonably assumed that the international community, led by the Bush Administration, which now openly differentiates between the right of other sovereign states to self-defense and the right of the State of Israel to act to ensure its survival, will reject the views expressed by Generals Samia and Dagan, and Lt. Colonel Luft’s assessments regarding the military threats to Israel emanating from a Palestinian state. Given the current international climate, insistence by Israeli negotiators that Israel retain control of all international borders even after the establishment of the Palestinian state is liable to cause a major crisis in Israel’s relationship with the United States. However, as the experts explain, Israel has no choice. In the words of General Dagan, “The establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state, in the full sense of the word will be catastrophic for the State of Israel.”

This article ran in the weekly newspaper, Makor Rishon, on November 16, 2001

The Rabbi Who Favors a Binational State

Viewers of CNN news probably are familiar with Rabbi Arik Ascherman, the tall, thin bearded man who places himself before Israeli bulldozers on their way to demolish Palestinian homes or olive groves. There he stands-until Israeli soldiers drag him away.

The American-born, Harvard-educated idealist explains that he had an epiphany during the sixth and seventh months of the current intifada. It was then that he graduated from protesting the war against civilians to performing acts of resistance, such as defying bulldozers and trying to refill ditches blockading Palestinian villages.

“I’ve moved to a different space,” he said recently in Los Angeles, which he visited as part of a nationwide American tour. “I am trying to get through to the average Israeli, to make him understand the wholesale war that is being waged against the non-combatant Palestinian population.”

Ascherman stressed that RHR works for the human rights of Jews, Palestinians and foreign workers alike. It has condemned both Israelis and Palestinians, he explained, but contends that it is Israel who holds most of the power.

“The work I do isn’t fun,” stated the dedicated humanitarian, speaking to a small audience at the Workmen’s Circle in Los Angeles on May 9. “As a rabbi and a Zionist, it’s not a great pleasure to work in the deepest, darkest secrets of Israeli society that most would rather think do not exist.”

Rabbi Ascherman first locked horns with Israel’s Catch-22 mentality in his attempt to preserve the house of Saleem Shawarmah. The modest house has come to symbolize Israel’s policy to make it nearly impossible for Palestinians to receive legal building permits. Then, when they are forced to construct a house without a permit, their homes are demolished for having been built illegally.

Shawarmah built his house in 1996 in the West Bank village of Anata.

“Anata is the biblical Anatot, home of Jeremiah the Prophet,” Rabbi Ascherman noted. “I wonder what he would have to say about all this if he were here today.”

The house was demolished in July of 1998, rebuilt, and demolished again in August 1998. In the summer of 1999, the house again was rebuilt and dedicated.

“Israel lives in a bubble in which it claims every action is carried out according to law,” Rabbi Ascherman said. “It is important to step back and look at the big picture-that no Palestinian is getting a permit-and then step forward and recognize the absurdity of the micro view that questions the legality of the decision.”

When it questioned the reason for the demolition of the Shawarmah house, RHR was told that the family had no permit to build on agricultural land, that the house was on a slope with a steep incline, or was too close to a strategic road.

“When all these excuses resulted in bad public relations, the government floated a trial balloon that two co-owners of the land had failed to sign a permit to build,” the rabbi continued. “We replied, ‘Fine, tell us who the two co-owners are and we will get their signatures.’ The civil administration stated it couldn’t release this information, then it claimed it had lost the file. Finally, we signed up everyone in the village and we never found these two co-owners.

“Thirty days ago,” the rabbi told his audience, “the Israelis bulldozed Saleem’s home again. I was arrested for trying to prevent the demolition. I believe his house was targeted because it has become a symbol of the struggle against house demolitions.

“Micro or macro,” he pointed out, “the political decision is not to let Palestinians live in Area C.”

Area C, Rabbi Ascherman explained, is West Bank land under total Israeli control; still-to-be-negotiated Area B is under Palestinian civilian and Israeli military jurisdiction; and Area A is Palestinian-controlled land.

Nonetheless, he said, he believes RHR’s efforts have helped the Palestinians, and that house demolitions diminished drastically since the organization, as a member of the Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions, became involved in 1998. He qualified this, however, by noting that, three months after the onset of the al-Aqsa intifada in September 2000, the Israeli army and civil administration resumed demolishing Palestinian homes.

Since Ariel Sharon came to power in March, the rabbi added, there have been three days of massive demolitions, and more have been ordered.

All Jewish Israelis, he said, were angry when, in October, Israeli Arabs protested in sympathy with Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. “There was anger when Israelis had to turn on the radio to learn what roads were safe inside the Green Line,” Ascherman recalled.

“Yes, the Palestinian protests inside Israel were violent, but there was no use of arms,” he specified. “High unemployment was a major factor in the demonstrations. Testimony at the commission of inquiry has highlighted excessive use of force and the fact that some of the demonstrations were taking place peacefully inside villages. Twelve of the 13 Israeli Arabs were killed in an area under the command of Alec Ron,” the rabbi noted, “whom the Palestinians identified as racist.”

The Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem has released a report documenting that, across the Green Line, Palestinians only took up firing arms after Israeli security forces shot to kill rock-throwing youngsters. This report, he stressed, revealed that, in some cases, Israelis were firing in self-defense, but that in many others, excessive force over and beyond military regulations was exercised. According to B’Tselem, ambulances, medics and humanitarian workers dispersing medicine and food were targeted by Israeli soldiers and prevented from carrying out their emergency work. Photos provided by the Israeli army to back up allegations that Palestinian ambulances were running guns were not of ambulances at all.

Turning to the failed Camp David peace talks, Rabbi Ascherman noted that “the average Israeli says [Israeli Prime Minister Ehud] Barak offered more to the Palestinians than any other Israeli leader.” Although Barak had “moved the peace negotiations forward by light-years,” Ascherman added, “before too many crocodile tears are wept, look at how the Palestinians perceive this.

“We had warned for a long time that the Palestinians had tuned out on negotiations between the leaders because actions speak louder than words,” he continued. “Parallel to the negotiations, the Palestinians were victims of a quiet war of settlement expansion, tree uprootings, unfair water allocations, and withholding the freedom of movement. They didn’t perceive this as a peace process. This quiet war against the Palestinians is something for which we Israelis must accept responsibility.”

Israeli Media Blackout

Ascherman decried the Israeli media’s near-blackout on the work of RHR and other Israeli peace organizations. Allowing that the situation has improved slightly, he lamented the scant coverage of what is happening to Palestinians during their intifada.

“Every hour, Israelis hear about Palestinian attacks,” he said, “but they don’t know the rest of the story-the targeting of medics and health workers, the uproooting of 30,000 olive trees, the humiliations, blockades and excessive force against unarmed protesters.

“When I talk to Israeli reporters,” he said, “they ask if my source is Palestinian or the army. When Palestinians are automatically discounted as a legitimate source…something is wrong.”

At the onset of the current intifada, Ascherman said, one of RHR’s first important efforts was to help Palestinians prevented by the siege from leaving their villages to harvest their olives. “When we were there,” he recalled, “the army protected us from the settlers and the media showed up.”

Israel is mowing down Palestinian olive trees, the rabbi said. The systematic destruction of a staple of the Palestinian economy-its olive trees, some of which are hundreds of years old-Ascherman finds particularly egregious. RHR is seeking international donations to support families whose trees have been uprooted. In addition to replanting saplings, RHR is trying to support families who will suffer economic losses for six to 10 years, until new trees bear fruit. Palestinians estimate this loss at $75 per tree per year. In addition, RHR is selling olive oil for families who can’t sell their oil because they are forbidden from transporting goods into Israel or across borders.

The residents of Deir Istia appealed to the Israeli high court against a plan to destroy 1,500 olive trees. The army wanted to remove the trees after an Israeli woman was seriously injured by stones thrown from an olive grove.

“We won, and only 10 trees were cut down,” Ascherman said. “What is really going on,” he acknowledged, “is wholesale pressure against the Palestinian people.”

“I’m not saying the Palestinians are angels,” the rabbi added, “but Israel is the dominant power, it holds all the cards. As a rabbi, it is my duty to talk to Jews about injustice. In the year 2001, we have the scientific technology to disperse crowds, even riots, without using lethal force.

“The assaults on Palestinian civilians have been so massive that it has forced me to move to another level,” he said. “The bottom line is I have a two-year-old daughter and I want to be able to say the right thing in a few years when she asks, ‘Daddy, what were you doing when the Palestinians were being assaulted?'”

Rabbi Ascherman is married to Rabbi Einat Ramon, the first Israeli-born woman to be ordained as a rabbi. They hold the distinction of being Israel’s only rabbinic couple.

Despite death threats from right-wing extremists who charge RHR with harming Israel’s best interests, Ascherman says his efforts to break down Palestinian stereotypes are in Israel’s long-term interests.

“It’s almost like deja vu when I call on families living in tents or caves and the parents waken their children to introduce them to us,” Rabbi Ascherman related. “Even though these are humiliated people whose homes have been destroyed, they tell their children they want them to meet religious Jews who are helping them.”

During the question-and-answer period, the rabbi was asked if the Conservative and Reform Jewish movements have been active in RHR.

“They tend to concentrate on their struggle for recognition in Israel,” he relied, “and don’t want to get involved as movements.” He pointed out, however, that RHR is the only Israeli rabbinical organization comprising Reform, Orthodox, Conservative, Renewal and Reconstructionist rabbis and students. Many Conservative and Reform rabbis, he added, become involved as individuals.

When asked about the right of return for Palestinian refugees, Rabbi Ascherman was silent for a good half a minute before responding that his personal belief is in one secular democratic state in which everyone has the right of return.

“I believe that in the long term, we need a world without borders or nation states as we know them today,” he explained. “However, I don’t believe it will work to do this in Israel/Palestine alone, or that such a solution is workable in the short term.”

He qualified this by stating that there are only a handful of Israelis willing to consider this premise, because “this can only be done when a state is no longer necessary to guarantee the physical and cultural safety of Jews in our historic homeland.”

Pat McDonnell Twair is a free-lance writer based in Los Angeles

A Profile: When A Social Worker Who helps Terror Victims Becomes a Terror Victim

Scenes of terrorism in newspapers and television have the same effect on me: they inspire shock and anger. There are the pictures of the ambulance crews, the Chevra Kadisha (Jewish burial Society) workers literally “picking up the pieces” and the sobbing relatives and friends at the funerals. Then it’s on to the next news story.

Yet the tragic effects of terrorism don’ t end at death or even at the funeral. What has been ignored has been the debilitating psychological trauma on the surviving victims and their families,as well as the struggle to recuperate and return to a normal life.

For many victims, the story begins just as they start to recuperate.

National Insurance, known as Bituach Leumi covers most Israelis. Due to the grim facts of life here, there is a special department of “shikum” (rehabilitation) specifically designated for victims of terrorism. Mrs. Osnat Sasson, a sephardic woman in her thirties, with olive complexion and jet black hair, is one of the social workers in that department. For six years she has helped people get through the trauma, the confusion, shock, and disruption of their family life.

Osnat is a neighbor of my sister, a resident of Kibbutz Rosh Tzurim in Gush Etzion.

Never did she dream that one-day she would also have to go through the rehab process herself.

She confided that she always had fears that her husband Tsachi might be lost to her.

Tsachi was of course in the Israeli army reserves like every other Israeli.

He was called up once a month like all other Israeli men to serve his country.

Osnat was often apprehesive that he could get hurt during army service.

It never dawned on her that it would come from terrorism.

And then the unthinkable occurred.

Tsachi was on his way home to Gush Etzion on February 10th of this year.

As he exited one of the tunnels just outside Jerusalem, he was shot dead by a sniper from area of the Arab village of Beit Jala (under Palestinian Authority control.)

An Israeli ambulance appeared on the scene within minutes. The PLO snipers kept firing at the ambulance while the ambulance paramedic driver leaped into Tzachi’s car. There was little that he could do.

Tzachi had been killed instantly.

Now, many months later, you would never known what had happened by calling Osnat at her home.

If you would get the answering machine you would hear the taped message of the soft-spoken voice of her husband Tzachi saying something about the electrical services he provides.

Osnat had been married to Tzachi for 7 ½ years. She is now widowed with 2 young children.

Not long after the murder she was interviewed by CNN. It happened that on the same day of her husband’s death, Israel Defense Forces killed three Palestinians.

The reporter asked her how she felt about their deaths.

She was outraged. The Palestinians were killed for shooting at Israeli soldiers.

Had they not fired, they would have been left alone.

Her husband’s “crime” was that he driving home from work.

Such a moral equivalence enraged her.

Her children are slowly coming to realize that their abba (father) will never be with them for the holidays and for other family activities like tiyulim (outings, hiking).

I was amazed at her composure and serene demeanor.

What goes on in her social work office?

In November a terrorist opened fire on a bus in Jerusalem’s French Hill neighborhood, killing two school children and wounding over 20 other people.

The first stage was to hold a debriefing for those present.

They recall events and express their feelings in front of others so that they know that they are not alone in what they are going through.

After the families of those murdered sat the traditional seven days of mourning (Shiva) special assemblies are held in the school over a period of time to help the students cope with the loss and their own fears and insecurities.

The wounded are taken to the hospital for treatment.

The social worker then visits the hospital to determine the needs of the entire family- for their life has now been disrupted.

If, for example, a father is hospitalized, that means that the mother/wife has to visit and leave the children at home.

Jerusalem is home to many very traditional Orthodox families with many children.

In one case, Ms. Sassoon helpd with a father of 14 children whose wife had to attend to him.

The family needed a babysitter to watch the kids, and a housekeeper to take care of cleaning, shopping and cooking.

Money was needed to pay for transportation to the hospital and medical clinics.

The mother needed guidance on how to manage under stress, and how to handle her husband when he is released.

She is nervous, angry, worried, and afraid and prone to let it out on her children.

Even when the father returns, it won’t be like it was before.

At time like this, everyone needs more attention and without proper outside intervention the tensions could escalate into a never-ending cycle of frustration.

After the horrific explosion at the Sbarro eatery in Jerusalem, Osnat met with a 17 year old waitress who normally works behind the counterthat moved out of direct danger the last minute. Her hand was injured from the blast.

Osnat visited her in the hospital, then she met afterwards with her parents.

The waitress suffered from loss of sleep and appetite, grew increasingly impatient with her family, and had frequent crying spells.

The parents were alarmed at the change in their daughter’s behavior and seeming change in personality.

The parents were reassured that this behavior was normal.

This lowered they fear of her symptoms.

The bombing took place three weeks before she started her studies in school.

By the beginning of the school year, she was calm enough to go back to school and start her studies. It takes on average of six weeks to get through the initial period of shock.

Psychological aftereffects include: insomnia, anxiety, fear of revisiting the scene of the incident, fear of entering a bus or any other activity associated with the event, and obsessive recall of the trauma. Some feel guilt: Why did I say this or do that to him/her before they died??

People who are sensitive have trouble returning to work. Others, who have lost a dear one, need to undergo grief counseling once a week for the next six months.

Many of the families instinctively reach out to other families who have already gone through this experience. Israel is a small country and it doesn?t take long to find and contact others for support and assistance.

In short, the act of terrorism has a ripple effect that affects the spouse, the children and relatives, the job, friends, and schoolmates. It affects business establishments that lose customers and Israel as a whole that loses tourists and investors.

For Osnat Sassoon, faith played a big role in helping her cope with life.

“Tsachi is in a good place… There are no ‘accidents’… Since I have no control I give it over to G-d. I have questions, but if I know that G-d is above, then I can manage below.”.

I was amazed at Osnat’s faith and level of acceptance.

Faith seems to be the main ingredient that allows Israelis to carry on, whether they be religious or secular.

When Christians and Jews Prayed Under Fire in Bethlehem

As fighting continued in Bethlehem, the Israel and Palestinian communist parties distributed a memo to the media on the morning of Monday, October 22, in which they informed the press that leading Christian clerics would march on Bethlehem the next morning.

The memo made it clear that the purpose of the march was two-fold: to protest the Israel Army’s presence in Bethlehem and to pray for peace. Anyone reading the memo would not know that the Israeli army had entered Bethlehem after the Palestinian Liberation Army had used the high positions in Bethlehem to launch mortar attacks on the southern neighborhoods of Jerusalem.

The march organizers did not hide their desire to engage the Israeli army in a violent confrontation at the checkpoint.

The image of Israeli troops clubbing priests on the nightly news flashed in my mind.

Understanding the dangers inherent to Christian – Israel relations, I faxed the memo announcing the march to Jack Padwa, the honorary chairman of the ADL in Israel and one of the leading lights in the area of Christian-Jewish dialogue. Upon receiving the fax, Padwa immediately sought out and met with Papal Annuncio Monseniur Pietro Sambi, who acts as the Vatican ambassador to Israel, at a reception in Jaffa. Padwa shared the memo about the march with Msgr. Sambi, who assured Padwa that the Christian clergy would not be used for political purposes.

At the checkpoint entrance to Bethlehem on the morning of October 23, I watched more than two dozen Christian clerics showed up, flanked by PLO and Israeli communist demonstrators as expected. The demonstrators waved their signs in Arabic, Hebrew and English: Free Palestine, Stop the Occupation, Israel Out of Bethlehem. A yelling match began, with the marchers demanding to enter Bethlehem, waving their signs.

Msgr. Sambi was there, He called together the Christian clerics and said, in resonant voice, that what they had come to Bethlehem to do was to march in a prayer vigil for peace in Bethlehem They then marched peaceably through Bethlehem, and chanted psalms in Latin and proceeded in a dignified march to Manger Square in the center of the city, where representatives of Christendom prayed for peace in the Holy Land.

While Christians prayed in Manger square, Arab snipers from a nearby hill overlooking Bethlehem renewed fire on the southern neighborhood of Gilo in Jerusalem. An Israeli tank inside Bethlehem returned the fire.

Yet despite the exchange of fire, the Pope’s ambassador can take credit for preventing might have been an unfortunate confrontation between IDF troops and the leading Christian clergy in he middle east.

As the procession of Christian clerics proceeded to Manger Square, I ascended the daily Israeli tour bus to the building erected that now surrounds Rachel’s Tomb. If Christians are saying Psalms, perhaps this was a hint for me to do the same at the one Jewish place of worship in Bethlehem. Rachel’s Tomb is a different place today, with heavy walls and iron doors built to protect it from the fighting outside. As you enter the shrine, something new has been added – a memorial to Joseph, Rachel’s oldest son. The Shawls from Joseph’s tomb in Nablus (taken over by Moslems and converted into a mosque a year ago) have been relocated to Rachel’s Tomb, with a sign hanging overhead that quoted the Talmudic legend that Joseph came to cry at his mother’s tomb.

At Rachel’s Tomb, I saw a familiar face. Yitzhak, the caretaker since the IDF took it in 1967. The now white-bearded Yitzhak, pale and thin, looked like he had been through an illness. A burly IDF colonel entered with me, and asked Yitzhak for a skull cap and asked if he could give him a book to pray from. The soldier said that he had not been in the shrine for more than twenty years, and that he had seen some terrible things in the past few days. As Yitzhak handed the officer a book of psalms and a skull cap.

Yitzhak said quietly that he had also seem terrible days. Yitzhak’s twenty-year old daughter, Tehilla Maoz, had been blown to bits at the Sabarro restaurant in Jerusalem two months ago.

The IDF colonel began to sob, and embraced Yitzhak, who then told the officer that on the night before her death that Tehilla had said to her father that she was worried about her father and pleaded with him to reconsider working in such a dangerous place.

As I chanted a few psalms, I looked up to the sign behind where Yitzhak stands. “Rachel Cries for Her Children Who are No More”.

Christians and Jews recited Prayers and Psalms in Bethelem, while Moslems fired at will.

Public Condemnation; Private Glee

Executive Summary

Palestinian press treatment of the Islamic suicide attacks on New York and Washington on September 11 was a prime example of the power the Palestinian Authority wields over newspapers and media. Both PA-owned as well as privately-owned newspapers were careful not to praise the attacks attributed to Saudi billionaire fugitive Osama Bin Laden. At the same time, Palestinian columnists and news reports expressed empathy with Islamic anger against the United States and were venomous toward Washington’s efforts to call to account Bin Laden and his allies for the attacks. The newspapers also condemned the U.S. retaliation against Afghanistan and predicted that any war against terrorism would be futile. To Palestinians, the message was clear: Bin Laden’s goals can be supported without direct reference to the September attacks.

The Report

Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat laid down strict guidelines for press coverage of Bin Laden’s attacks on the United States. The directives banned any coverage of the widespread demonstrations in support of Bin Laden in such cities as Gaza City, Nablus and Rafah. But the newspapers were encouraged to be venomous toward the United States and the West in an effort to provide a framework of empathy for Bin Laden’s attacks.

At first, PA newspapers prominently displayed the condemnation over the September 11 attacks by Arafat and several leading officials. This included Arafat’s donation of blood in Gaza for the victims in the United States, Still, the condemnation was selective and included only those Palestinians who focus on the West, such as PA International Cooperation Minister Nabil Shaath, PA Information Minister Yasser Abbed Rabbo and Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi, who is Arafat’s unofficial spokeswoman in the West. Aides to Arafat who dealt with such allies as Iran, Iraq and Syria were silent.

At the same time, the PA press avoided virtually all coverage of the demonstrations in support of Bin Laden in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The demonstrations took place hours after Islamic suicide attackers destroyed New York’s World Trade Center and a wing of the Pentagon in Washington. At first, the PA allowed the pro-Bin Laden rallies as long as foreign journalists were banned from recording the enthusiasm expressed over the killing of 6,000 a.m.ericans. But as the demonstrations were being reported in the West and spread throughout the PA areas, Arafat ordered his security forces to stop the rallies.

PA Censors Reports on Anti-U.S. Protests

In Gaza City, the efforts to stop the demonstration by supporters of the Arafat-led Fatah movement and Islamic opposition members were bloody. Three Palestinian students were killed and a dozen were injured on October 8. Demonstrators accused Palestinian officers under the command of Brig. Gen. Ghazi Jabali of shooting at protesters. At first, the PA turned silent and then referred to the police officers as “masked gunmen.” The reason for the pro-Bin Laden demonstrations was censored. Instead, the Palestinian press referred heavily to the “unfortunate events in Gaza.” The nature of the pro-Bin Laden rally was not mentioned.

The leading force in shaping the Palestinian message was the Ramallah-based Al Hayat Al Jedida, which is owned by the PA. The newspaper — with the smallest circulation of the three Palestinian dailies but receiving the largest official subsidy — viewed the Gaza City shootout as a threat to Palestinian unity rather than a call to support Bin Laden. The newspaper on October 10 provided extensive coverage of the calls to stop internecine strife and heal the rift within society.

“Numerous appeals were voiced by the leadership yesterday, including nationalist and Islamic forces and human rights roup, to immediately stop the calls that were voiced in the unfortunate events in Gaza, in which citizens fell victim and many were wounded, and to ban the internal fighting in light of the difficult conditions that are taking place at this time,” Al Hayat Al Jedida said on October 10.

At the same time, the PA press was ordered to stress that regardless of the attacks on the United States and Palestinian support for Bin Laden, the Palestinian people remained the chief victims of terrorism. The message was relayed by Arafat to all Palestinian newspapers on October 10. Arafat said he condemned “terrorist acts against the American people when the Palestinian people fall victims to terrorism and occupation.”

Bin Laden Obtains Understanding

The political editor of Arafat’s Wafa news service, elaborated. The editor, who represents Arafat’s thinking, warned Palestinians to refrain from public support of Bin Laden. The Palestinians were urged not to be swept away by the support expressed by Bin Laden in the video broadcast on the Qatari-owned A-Jazeera satellite channel, popular in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The editorial warned that words “have a greater lethality than weapons” and whipped the Palestinian populace into a frenzy.

Here, the editor referred to the damage of the pro-Bin Laden riots. He said young Palestinians in Gaza city had engaged in “activities full of hostility, arsons and various attacks that do not suit our tradition and what we are going through from the killing terrorism, hunger and tearing of limbs. What took place in the Gaza Strip, the clashes with our national police, disturbs us. And it does not matter who is the source or who started it or who attacked, who shot or who threw a firebomb.”

At the same time, the Wafa editor expressed understanding with the enthusiasm showed by Palestinians over Bin Laden. Bin Laden’s target, the United States, was deemed as a supporter of Israel and an oppressor of Palestinians. At the same time, the PA news service urged Palestinians to be wary of Bin Laden’s goals.

“Osama Bin Laden threw into the air expressions that the Palestinian people were forced to absorb,” Wafa said. “The Palestinian people do not support terrorism and operates within the upgrading against the occupation. Nobody can criticize or condemn us because our true targets are against occupation troops and settlements and against all that which is opposed by international law — not against citizens. It seems that some people are itching to threaten the United States that oppresses us. This is something else. Bin Laden’s words went to the heart of the frustration by Palestinians and the oppression they suffer and the treatment they receive from the United States. But we have to understand that this is a framework that will turn us into frustrated people. We have to change the conception toward us. We are not enemies of the United States and the West. The most dangerous thing about Bin Laden is his attempt to turn the war as a conflict against Muslims, Christians and Jews and thus sacrifice the Palestinian conflict and damage the legitimate Palestinian rising.”

Palestinian legislator Ashrawi, who is also spokeswoman for the Cairo-based Arab League, reiterated this theme. She also dismissed Bin Laden’s right to speak for the Palestinian people. But in remarks reported by Al Hayat Al Jadida, Ashrawi linked terrorism in the Middle East to U.S. support for Israel. “Washington will act according to its interests and its solidarity with Israel until it becomes clear to the U.S. that Israel is the source of instability in the region, something which is costly to the Palestinian people and the greater Arab world,” she said.

Israel Was Behind the Anti-U.S. Riots

When the pro-Bin Laden riots died down, the Palestinian press turned to condemnation of the U.S.-led war against Afghanistan. Now, those killed by Palestinian police were no longer termed “wild youngsters.” They were termed “martyrs,” a term used for Palestinians killed in Israeli attacks and regarded as heroes. At the same time, Palestinian newspapers reported Arafat’s assertion that an Israeli agent was arrested for organizing the pro-Bin Laden demonstrations. Arafat said the Israeli agent gave 8-10 Palestinians gifts and cameras to record the demonstrations. There was no confirmation of this charge from any other source.

Al Hayat Al Jedida ran a cartoon on October 11 that showed Uncle Sam, or the United States, carrying a missile. Behind Uncle Sam was Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, his hands full of blood. The cartoon is entitled: “Washington intends to attack other countries.” An accompanying article compared the Palestinian victims of the war with Israel to the Afghan victims in the U.S. offensive.

The dailies were also full of reports that reflected Palestinian anger toward Washington. Palestinian newspapers published a poll by Bir Zeit University that 90 percent of Palestinians believed that Washington support of Israel was the source of hostility toward the United States. Most of those polled expressed hatred toward Washington’s policy or the United States. The October poll reported that more than 72 percent oppose Arab or Palestinian participation in the U.S.-led war against terrorism.

The Futility of a U.S. Counter-Strike

The Jerusalem-based Al Quds daily took a different approach on October 11. The newspaper tried to demonstrate the futility of the U.S. war against Bin Laden. A cartoon showed a fat U.S. general asking a junior officer: “Check how much damage was achieved by 90 missiles.” The soldier replied: “The damage is 90 missiles, commander.”

Al Hayat Al Jedida relayed a similar message on October 15. It showed President George Bush telling Americans: “We will fight terror.” The second image shows telling Bush: “And we will win.” The third image shows a forlorn Bush on top of an Afghan mountain, remarking “Wow, I have no idea how.” The newspaper featured an accompanying article that termed the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan as “a war of terror against terror, a confrontation between terrorists. And here [in the PA], the angel of death is still among us. The [Israeli] government of murder continues to kill and has exacted several times the number of people that fell in the two two towers and those that fell in Afghanistan.”

The Ramallah-based Al Ayyam continued with this theme in a cartoon on October 19. The drawing showed a huge bat with bared teeth threatening Ramallah. On the wings of the bat is written “Terrorism.” But the “o” in “terrorism” contained a star of David.

Backlash Against Giuliani

Nowhere was there a greater expression of Palestinian venom against the United States than in the episode of New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s rejection of a Saudi gift of $10 million. In October, Giuliani dismissed a donation by Saudi Prince Walid Bin Talal, terming it “blood money.” The Palestinian press joined with its counterparts in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Gulf countries in terming the attitude of the American as the root cause of all evil. Here, Giuliani was described as a Zionist supporter who allowed Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert complete access to City Hall and was even deemed a deputy mayor.

The Palestinian charge was led by Al Hayat Al Jadida editor Hafez Barghouthi wrote. Barghouthi poured his wrath on Giuliani, terming him a fraud and hater. “New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani became obsessed by his hatred of Arabs even before the terrorist attacks on New York,” the flamboyant editor wrote on October 17. “He hides his first name, chosen for him by his Italian father, so as not to remind the Jewish voters of the infamous Rudolph Hitler. This is why he prefers to shorten it to Rudy.”

Barghouthi defended the Saudi refusal to cooperate with the U.S. war against terrorism. The editor said the Saudi kingdom is defending its rights by refusing to help in the effort against Bin Laden. Barghouthi did not refer to the connection between Riyad and Bin Laden.

“There is an intense offensive against Saudi Arabia because it is not automatically signing up for the American war; on the contrary, it has many legitimate reservations regarding Western policy towards the Arabs,” Barghouthi wrote. “Anyone following the Israeli and American columnists smells a media trap aimed at accusing the Saudi kingdom of terrorism, and even of harboring terrorists. [This is] not because it is true, but because Saudi Arabia is fighting alone on several fronts to protect the uniqueness of Saudi policy. It will not enter into another’s war when it does not know where that war is headed; it fights terrorism in its own way and protects the interests of itself and its citizens.”

Allies of Giuliani were not ignored. This included New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who welcomed the decision by the New York City mayor and criticized Saudi Arabia.

“Friedman says that the United States is not responsible for what he calls the widespread ‘frustration’ among young Saudis that makes them support Bin Laden,” Adli Sadeq writes in Al Hayat Al Jedida on October 17. “He contends that it is not Washington that maintains an autocratic regime, and denies young people their political rights. He chides the Arab countries for their failure to [deal with] the challenges of development, and says that North Korea’s average per capita income in 1950 was similar to that of Arab countries, but that today Korea has left the Arab states far behind. According to him, the United States is not responsible for this.”

“Thomas Friedman is a liar and a fraud,” Adli Sadeq continued. “The United States is the enemy of the democratic aspirations of the Arab peoples; it is the friend and protector of dictatorships and autocracies; it is the number one schemer against development in the Arab world. With regard to the media attack on Saudi Arabia, I maintain that Riyad is doing the right thing. Refraining from joining the Americans. is counted in the tally of the Saudi government’s good deeds.”

The Palestinian reservations regarding Bin Laden did not include the use of Islamic suicide attacks against Israel, the United States and its allies. Palestinian newspapers praised the use of suicide bombers, particularly against Israel. But the newspapers quoted Islamic clerics as promising Islamic suicide attackers heaven with scores of virgins to service them.

“The Americans and the eunuchs at their sides [i.e. the rulers of Arab and Islamic countries] think that if they kill us, they will win,” Dr. Yunis Al-Astal, a lecturer in the Islamic Law Department at Gaza Islamic University, wrote in the Hamas weekly Al Risala on October 11. “They do not know that with their weapons they only expedite our arrival in Paradise. We yearn to reach paradise; it is our abode, and in it are ‘the black-eyed,’ confined to pavilions, and also there are [women] with downcast eyes whose chastity has not been violated before us by either man or jinn. In contrast, the value of this world in which we live, which they [the U.S. and its Arab allies] think that they have attained, is in our eyes not worth the wing of a mosquito.”

The Islamic Jihad’s weekly, Al Istiqlal, focused on the merits of suicide attacks in the wake of the destruction of the World Trade Center. The newspaper on October 4 published announcements of the death of suicide bombers that resembled wedding announcements. Indeed, Islamic newspapers as well as some secular publications in the Palestinian press regard the suicide bomber as marrying a “black-eyed virgin” in heaven.

“With great pride, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad marries the member of its military wing, the martyr and hero Yasser Al-Adhami, to ‘the black-eyed,'” Al Istiqlal writes.

Palestinian Media Watch and MEMRI provided some of the translations for the above report.

The Double Message of the Israeli Government

It goes without saying that there is universal disappointment with Israel’s information policies.

The problem is not the lack of funds or professional resources at the disposal of the Israeli government.

The problem remains the double message that the Israeli government conveys.

A case in point:

On October 28, 2001, the state of Israel spoke in two tongues concerning Yassir Arafat’s responsibility for the current wave of Arab terror in Israel.

Throughout the morning of October 28th, Israel’s minister of Foreign Affairs, Shimon Peres, gave an endless round of news interviews, to Israeli and foreign news bureaus in which he said that Arafat was not responsible for the current wave of terror.

Peres spoke of Arafat’s arrests of terrorists, and of Arafat’s efforts to quell Islamic terror groups.

In the afternoon of October 28th, Peres took the unprecedented step of initiating an appearance on the Voice of Palestine radio station in which he assured his listeners that the Palestinian Arab people would soon have a state of their own.

Meanwhile, on the same day of October 28th,, IDF sources met with more than a hundred journalists to provided data that connected Arafat and the PLO to every form of Arab Islamic terror activity that currently plagues the state and people of Israel.

IDF sources noted that when Islamic terror groups train and operate in the full view of the Palestinian Authority security services, they get the message that their activity operates with the full blessing of Arafat’s regime.

IDF sources provided the media with documentation that the Islamic Hamas terror group’s military wing operates as an official integral part of Arafat’s Palestinian Authority security forces in Gaza.

IDF sources told the media that they were were not surprised that on the morning of October 28th that two Hamas terrorists in the service of the Palestinian security services had that very morning murdered four more women and wounded fifty civilians in cold blood at the Hadera bus station.

IDF source emphatically pointed out that the Hamas killers were on the list of wanted terrorists whom Arafat had refused to arrest – especially since they were operating in the open.

This double message that the Israeli government has conveyed to the media and to the world at large, has continued since October, 1986, when Shimon Peres became the Foreign Minister of the State of Israel and when Dr. Yossi Beilin became his deputy at that ministry. Peres and Beilin revised the way in which the government of the state of Israel would relate to the PLO – Even though this seeming policy change did not sit well with then- Likud Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir

At the orders of Peres and Beilin, no longer would the Israeli government ministry of foreign affairs distribute the PLO covenant. No longer would the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs define the PLO as an enemy. The 1986 Peres/Beilin policy change paved the way for the US government to recognize the PLO two years later.

This policy change in the Israel Foreign Ministry became permanent.

Even when the Likud held power in 1990-1992 and 1996-1999, Israel’s Foreign Ministry would not provide governments of the world with the basics of PLO involvement with terror activity.

Even though Israel Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu hired a high level professional staff to provide the media with weekly reports of PLO involvement in terror activity, which functioned under the able direction of David Bar Ilan. Yet when I covered the negotiations conducted by Netanyahu government with the PLO in Oslo in August 1998 and at the Wye Plantation in October 1998, the Israeli embassies in Washington and in Oslo did not distribute any of the material on the PLO that the office of the Israeli prime minister had prepared in Jerusalem. Upon further investigation, Iraeaeli embassy officials informed me that this was a matter of policy.

The bottom line: When the Prime Minister of Israel and the IDF prepare carefully researched material on the PLO, Israel’s representatives abroad, working under the aegis of Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, will make sure that material critical of the PLO will never reach beyond the shores of the Mediterranean Sea.

The Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs is invested in an Oslo process that has engaged in a policy of repackaging Yassir Arafat and transforming him from a terrorist into a statesman, reality not withstanding.

The Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs is armed with a substantial budget to promote that view, and works in tandem with Dr Yose Beilin, whose Economic Policy Forum, funded by the European Union, continues to prepare new plans of appeasement for the PLO.

Neither Peres nor Beilin demand that the PLO disarm the Islamic terror groups inside their security services not even to modify the new school curriculum of the Palestinian National Authority which trains a new generation for war with the state and people of Israel

With public opinion polls showing the Israeli left at an all time low, Peres and Beilin recognize that their current Arafat appeasement efforts represent their “last hurrah” of a ministry of foreign affairs which they “reconstituted” in 1986.

Peres and Beilin will now make that one last effort to appease Arafat.

The solution for journalists:To ignore Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and to report the reality of the PLO.

Yusuf Abu Snena – Headlines of his Sermon on Friday, 26th October as Broadcast on the “Voice of Palestine” PBC Radio: The Palestinian War on America

Yusuf Abu Snena is a religious preacher at the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and and an official of the Palestinian Ministry of Religious Affairs.

“More than 50 were killed during the last week on our holy land, and they have become Martyrs, not for their own sake but for the sake of our nation. Israel’s call to fight fellow Palestinians, as a condition for Israeli withdrawal from the Palestinian lands and cities, must be dismissed out of hand. This is only a tactic to cause a split in the nation and a civil war, which is unacceptable. the U.S. support for renewed Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and cities should serve as a lesson to those who shed tears for the American bloodshed (on 11 of September) and for those who did not shed tears for the Palestinian loss of blood. All we have to say is: Trust in Allah and stand up to the insults from the Americans to the Arab people.

In last week’s sermon we warned against believers in the false American promise to support the establishment of a Palestinian state. which they wish to be a persecuted and a rebuked country without a nation, if the criminal aggression continue it will be a weak nation, without dignity, especially if the vagueness of the other Arab States continues, then the nation will become no more then a guinea pig prior to its establishment. The attack on our Islamic allies seems to be a repetition of the First World War, reminding us of the cooperation between the heretics to bring down the German nation, which was destroyed by the heretic nations, thus giving those heretic and imperialistic nations the freedom to invade our Arab Muslim homelands. These heretic nations are once again attacking, like dogs, Muslim Afghanistan, and are fighting Islam everywhere. And the True Believers and the Afghans can only trust in Allah.

Hostile American planes are killing innocent people who are supported by Arab Muslim and other countries. These are heretic nations seeking to destroy Islam. but, servants of Allah, do not forget. We must all give praise to Allah.

Allah will not allow them to conquer Palestine and following that, other Arab cities like Damascus, Beirut, Baghdad and there after Kabul.

Imperialism is returning to Arab regions, through the guise of a “war on terror”, and therefore the question must be asked: When the English and the French fought the Nazis, were they then also fighting terror or were they fighting Islam?. The war in Northern Ireland has been continuing for tens of years. Why did we never hear the word “terrorism” in this case? Why do we only hear the word “terror” used against the Muslims, whom the enemies of Islam want to destroy. This is part of the Crusaders plan….

We must all praise Allah and unite. The events of today are like those of the past. “The issue today is not only Afghanistan but it also points to Europe and those who support Europe both from the east and from the west. This is an attempt to return to the wars of the Crusades.”

We urge all Muslims to unite in a war against the Crusaders, and pray that Allah will bring vengeance upon them.

B’tselem spokesman admits that the report in “incomplete”

On October 25, 2001, the 5:00 p.m. Voice of Israel Radio Newsreel announced that the Israel research group Btzelem, financed by the New Israel Fund and European governments through the European Union, has issued a special report with the newsworthy finding that 42 Arabs had been killed since the October 17th assassination of Israel Minister of Tourism Rehavam Ze’evi.

The report does not mention how many of the 42 Arab fatalities were armed – only that 21 of the Arabs killed were civilians, including five minors and four women, and that ten of the dead were Arab security personnel.

The report does not mention the proximity of any of the fatalities to the gun positions of the PLO.

When our agency asked the Btselem spokesman why they have not provided the number of civilians who were armed, or whether the fatalities were near gun positions, the answer was that the report was not yet complete.

The report does not mention the proximity of the 42 Arab fatalities to Arab gunners who were firing machine guns and mortars against Israeli communities.

The report mentions that one Israeli civilian was killed during this time period, without mentioning that he was ambushed and murdered while on a hike on the Judean Desert, and that he was not caught in any kind of cross-fire during a riot.

The report ascribes the only reason for Israel’s action in the context of Ze’evi’s killing, without mentioning that Bethlehem, Beit Jalla, the UNRWA Aida refugee camp and Beit Sahour have been used as staging grounds for mortar attacks on Jerusalem’s southern neighborhoods.

The report describes the hermetic closure as “unprecedented in its severity”, without mentioning that the “unprecedented severity” of mortar attacks from these Arab villages on Southern Jerusalem.

The report describes the IDF attack on Hamas military officers as “four civilians extrajudically executed by Israel, without mentioning that they had taken credit for the recent murder of two Jewish women along with other Arab military attacks against civilian targets.

When we mentioned to the Btzelem spokesman that during a time of war you do not provide trials for the enemy – you kill the combatants, he remarked that Israel is not now in a time of war. When we asked about the Hamas military commanders that Israel had killed, the Btzelem spokesman remarked that the dead Hamas commanders were civilians and not combatants.

The report mentions that “hospitals have been hit” and “that their operations have been disrupted”. The report fails to report that the hospital that was hit in Beit Jalla is next to where the PLO has placed the gun positions to fire from on Jerusalem.

The report rejects the notion that it is a procedure for gunmen to “hide behind civilians and shoot”. Has Btzelem not witnessed the fact that the PLA has made it a policy to commandeer homes in Beit Jalla and to fire from those homes and to draw fire back at those homes?

The report calls on the IDF to “avoid fighting in population centers” without recognizing that that is where the PLO is attacking from.

The report condemns Israel for interfering with the “free movement of… medical crews” without mentioning that the IDF have intercepted Red Crescent ambulances that have been transporting arms. Btzelem neglects to mention that the head of the Red Crescent is Arafat’s brother.

The report rejects the IDF decision to “undertake a wide scale military operation within population centers”, without mentioning that the PLO has indeed decided to conduct a war from the haven of those very population centers.

The report continues the Btzelem policy of describing rock throwing rioters as “unarmed demonstrators”, so long as they are not armed with automatic weapons.

Yet Btselem calls the IDF troops “trigger happy”.

Perhaps the timing of the weekend press deadlines in Israel and around the world was the priority of the report.