Friday, November 15, 2024
Facebook Linkedin RSS Twitter

Philadelphia Inquirer: U.S. Government and European Community Finance PLO Broadcasts

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

I am a daughter of Palestine….

Koran in my right hand, in my left — a knife.

A slightly older girl with her ponytail wrapped in a checkered kaffiyeh gives an emotional recitation of a poem for Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat:

I am finished practicing on the submachine gun of return….

We swear to take vengeful blood from our enemies for our killed and wounded. We will board a bustling boat which will take us to Jaffa.

The girl approaches Arafat, who plants congratulatory kisses on her cheeks.

These are excerpts from children’s programs broadcast on Palestinian television, a facility funded in part by American aid. They are the basis of what might be called Exhibits A and B in a case the Israeli government is mounting against the Palestinian Authority. It says the fledgling Palestinian radio and television network is being used as a powerful propaganda tool to incite hatred against Israel.

The excerpts are from broadcasts aired before three suicide bombers killed four Israelis in Jerusalem on Thursday, but they are considered all the more incendiary by Israelis in the aftermath of the latest Islamic terror attack. The images of violence and death on the broadcasts are especially galling to many Israelis because of repeated pledges by Arafat to crack down on terrorism. After a June 30 suicide bombing of a Jerusalem market killed 15 Israelis, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu threatened to jam the broadcasts. He didn’t carry out the threat, but he is expected to voice the complaint when Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright visits this week.

The Palestinian Broadcasting Corp. is a creature of the 1993 peace accords, which afforded Palestinians the first trappings of self-rule. The “Voice of Palestine” radio broadcasts began in 1994, television the following year.

The network was nurtured with about $500,000 in equipment and training from the U.S. Agency for International Development and with more than $6 million in aid from the European Union, according to network chairman Raddwan Abu Ayyash. A spokesman for the United States Information Service in Jerusalem said he could find records for only $70,000 in U.S. aid spent on training and TV cameras, but he added that the United States provided other funding for the network.

The network is based in Ramallah, a sun-bleached West Bank city that has become the de facto seat of government for the Palestinian Authority. Abu Ayyash, a prominent journalist who was jailed by the Israelis in the 1980s, denies the broadcasts incite, but concedes they relay an increasingly angry mood among Palestinians.

“I can’t put love longs and dances on television when people are being killed,” Abu Ayyash said, referring to Palestinians killed while taking part in attacks on Israeli soldiers. “Journalists have to be part of society and reflect what is happening on the ground.”

To some extent the debate over Palestinian media mirrors the larger debate about Arafat himself: The conflict between his conciliatory statements, usually in English, to diplomats, and his often incendiary speeches in Arabic to his Palestinian political constituency.

Israeli officials protested last month when Arafat embraced a Hamas leader and delivered an anti-Israeli tirade to supporters in Gaza in which he declared, “all options are open” — a clear implication that armed struggle remained a possibility.

Palestinian TV broadcasts the usual mixture of sports, movies, cartoons, talk shows and news. Most of it is not nearly as violent as, say, the police dramas on American television, but the shows do reflect a society preoccupied with war and struggle. In a show about the opening of Palestinian schools, girls in frilly white dresses were shown dancing — incongruously — with Kalashnikov rifles that they twirled like batons. In another broadcast, a schoolboy, asked what he got out of summer camp, answered: “I am defending the homeland and undergo training like army drills.”

There is a children’s quiz show about great figures in Palestinian history — many of whom are considered heroes by Palestinians, but terrorists by Israelis.

One show featured Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam, a sheik who was killed by the British in 1935. The military wing of Hamas, the Islamic resistance movement, which has carried out many terrorist bombings in Israel, was named for Qassam.

The heroine of another episode was Delal Al-Magribi, a woman who commanded a bus hijacking near Haifa in 1978. Thirty-four Israelis and nine Palestinian commandos, Magribi among them, were killed. The quiz-show emcee referred to Magribi as “our sacred martyr.” Under the peace accords, the Palestinians were allowed to set up a police force, but not an army. But it is hard to tell the difference in some of the Palestinian footage — shot MTV-style with inspirational music accompanying shots of police marching in formation, drawing rifles and diving under burning barricades.

In one rapid and heavily edited sequence in a music video, an Israeli soldier is shown firing a gun. Then, a quick cut and a shot of a girl falling in a forest.

The television excerpts were taped and translated from Arabic by the Palestinian Media Review, a private, nonprofit organization run in part by former Israeli security specialists. English-language transcripts were shown to Abu Ayyash, who said they appeared to be accurate, but added that they represented only a few examples from hours and hours of programming.

David Bar-Illan, Netanyahu’s spokesman, says he is most distressed by the broadcasts designed to influence children. “The unfortunate thing is that it leaves very little hope for a better relationship between the two peoples… especially if children are being taught to hate Israelis,” he said.

Ghassan Khatib, an independent media analyst and head of the Jerusalem Media and Communication Center, says the Palestinian programming has grown more militant since Netanyahu came to power in 1996, coinciding with the souring relationship between the Israeli and Palestinian leadership.

“I think in the beginning, when the Palestinian Authority first took over in 1994, they were speaking in a very moderate voice, avoiding anything that was very hostile or critical of Israel,” Khatib said. “Later, it changed. The mood became hostile. I don’t think the Palestinian Broadcasting Corp. is to blame. I think they are reflecting the views of official Palestinians.”

One article in the peace accords says that Israel and the Palestinian leadership must “foster mutual understanding and tolerance and shall accordingly abstain from incitement, including hostile propaganda.” But exactly what constitutes incitement — and what is merely the free expression of opinion — is a matter of intense debate.

Itamar Marcus, codirector of the Palestinian Media Review, says the problem with Palestinian broadcasting lies not strictly in what is said, but in the mood created.

“It is a whole atmosphere of a nation preparing for war,” Marcus said.

Marcus is particularly critical of Palestinian TV’s habit of broadcasting maps of Palestine that include all of Israel — not just the West Bank and Gaza, the territories that Palestinians expect to make up a future Palestinian state.

“There is no sense here that they are willing to accept Israel as a neighbor,” Marcus said.

Voice of Palestine radio referred to Thursday’s suicide bombing as a “terrorist attack,” but in “occupied Jerusalem.”

Under an unusual structure, the Palestinian Broadcasting Corp. reports directly to Arafat, bypassing the Palestinian Ministry of Information. He is able to dictate its content while shaping a different message when addressing diplomats, Israel and the Western news media.

In September 1996, on the day before protests over a tunnel opening in Jerusalem’s Old City led to clashes in which 61 Palestinians and 15 Israelis died, Arafat told Palestinian police: “The believers shall fight for the cause of Allah. They shall kill and be killed…. Our blood is a small price to pay for the cause.”

Addressing a news conference as the clashes spread, he spoke of the need to “calm the situation down.”

Last month, during another widely broadcast speech delivered to the Palestinian legislative council during a visit by U.S. envoy Dennis Ross in which Arafat promised to crack down on terrorism, the Palestinian leader said: “We must confront them. We must confront them…. We must confront them in every sense of the word.”

Arafat carefully refrains from any references to “the Jews” or even to “the Israelis,” usually specifying that his anger is directed toward the Netanyahu government and often going out of his way to praise other Israelis. With some exceptions, the same applies to other senior Palestinian officials.

The Israeli government, however, has complained about the Mufti Ikrama Sabri, who in a recent Friday prayer broadcast by radio from Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa mosque, called for “Allah to take revenge on behalf of his prophet against the colonialist settlers who are sons of monkeys and pigs.”

Abu Ayyash and other broadcast officials contend that if they had the resources to carefully scrutinize Israeli television, they would find an equal or greater number of inflammatory anti-Arab statements.

“People sometimes make extreme statements, especially on our live shows. I can’t put plaster over their mouths,” Abu Ayyash said. “At times, I’ve tried to soften the mood, but if this is the way people think, these are the kinds of things they say.

“What I won’t do, though, is become a branch of Radio-Television Israel. That is what Netanyahu would like us to do and that is an occupier’s mentality,” Abu Ayyash said. “This is Voice of Palestine. We have to reflect our own culture and our own history.”

Barbara Demick is a Inquirer Staff Writer

Senior Palestinian Official Calls for Destruction of America and Labels it a Terrorist State

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

Following are excerpts from the Friday prayer sermon delivered by PA Mufti Ikrama Sabri at the Al-Aksa mosque in Jerusalem on September 12, 1997.

Sabri’s sermon was broadcast on the Voice of Palestine, the PA’s official radio station, immediately following the 10 minute address by U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to Palestinians on the same station. Sabri is the official Mufti (senior Muslim cleric) of the PA, and was appointed to his position by Yasser Arafat.

“Oh Muslims, we must raise our voices against America, its ally Britain and all the infidel nations and say that Israel is stealing our land and establishing illegal settlements… Why does America support settlements in Israel? Are the settlements not terrorism? And therefore, America is the chief of the terrorists. Oh Allah, destroy America, her agents and her allies! Cast them into their own traps, and cover the White House with black!

Oh Muslims, our brothers in faith everywhere, the purpose of the American Secretary of State’s visit to Palestine is to support the Israeli position regarding deceitful security and fanatical settlements… The strategic covenant between Zionism and the Crusaders is a satanic alliance hostile to Islam and the Muslims and we expect no good from it. The Muslim masses in Palestine and the world over condemn Albright’s declarations issued today and in the past two days. The masses condemn America’s pro-Israeli stance, which demonstrates that global forces, the heretics, the terrorists and those filled with hate are forging an alliance against Islam and Muslims… Oh Allah, destroy America, her agents and allies! Allah, raise the flag of Islam over the Al-Aksa mosque, Jerusalem and Palestine… “

Two months ago, in his prayer sermon of July 11, 1997, Sabri also called for the destruction of America. Following are excerpts from his July sermon, broadcast on the Voice of Palestine:

“Oh Allah, destroy America, for she is ruled by Zionist Jews… Allah will paint the White House black! Clinton is fulfilling his reverend’s will to identify with Israel…. The Muslims say to Britain, to France and to all the infidel nations that Jerusalem is Arab. We shall not respect anyone else’s wishes regarding her. The only relevant party is the Islamic nation, which will not allow infidel nations to interfere…. The homes the Jews are building will become Arab property, with Allah’s help…. “

Allah shall take revenge on behalf of his prophet against the colonialist settlers who are sons of monkeys and pigs…. Forgive us, Muhammad, for the acts of these sons of monkeys and pigs, who sought to harm your sanctity.”

The Voice of Palestine is under the auspices of the PA’s Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation (PBC). According to the Philadelphia Inquirer (7th September, 1997), the PBC has been funded in part by the United States government.

Should a Publicly Funded Leah Rabin be Above Public Reproach?

By
David Bedein
-

Under a special act of the Israeli Knesset, Leah Rabin receives public funding for travel and communications.

The time has come to introduce international public scrutiny of Leah Rabin’s use of Israel taxpayer funds.

Most recently, Leah Rabin signed a “peace declaration” with Yassir Arafat in Ramallah, which Arafat curiously refused to translate and distribute in Arabic.

Leah Rabin once again referred to Arafat as a “man of peace” while mentioning Israel’s current Prime Minister as a “man of war”.

The governor of Ramallah who hosted Leah Rabin, Mustafa Liftawi, planted a bomb in Zion Square in Jerusalem on July 5, 1975, killing thirteen people.

Lifatwi expresses no regrets.

Meanwhile, a clause inserted into the Declaration of Principles for the Oslo accords and signed by Yitzhak Rabin and Yassir Arafat was that no one with a background in terror activity could be employed by the Palestine Authority

Asked about this Arab terrorism, Leah Rabin shrugged her shoulders and told the Times of London that “there were Jewish terrorists, too”.

It is not clear as to how seriously the Israeli public takes Leah Rabin. Perhaps that is why the Israel Labor Party Movement did not make much use of her during the 1996 electoral campaign.

However, Leah Rabin has a mesmerizing effect abroad.

In Leah Rabin’s public appearances abroad, she does not hesitate to mention that Israeli opposition leaders distributed Yitzhak Rabin’s picture in an SS Uniform, despite the fact that Leah Rabin knows that this is a lie.

Leah Rabin knows that sworn testimony at the Shamgar commission that investigated the murder of Yitzhak Rabin proved that Israel Intelligence officer, Lt. Col. Avishai Raviv, who reported directly to Rabin, was the only man who distributed the Rabin picture in the SS uniform and the only man who waved that picture in front of an Israeli TV camera.

Leah Rabin knows that sworn testimony at the Shamgar commission that investigated the murder of Yitzhak Rabin from more than twenty people showed that it was Avishai Raviv who implored Yigal Amir to kill Rabin.

Leah Rabin also knows that the Shamgar commission that investigated the murder of Yitzhak Rabin identifies Yigal Amir as an officer of Israeli intelligence.

Yet none of this makes it into Leah Rabin’s repertoire abroad, which are reported as tirades against Israel’s current government, which she consistently accuses of playing a hand in her husband’s murder.

With the approach of the New Year, the time has come to reconsider the standing of Leah Rabin, and to monitor every speech that she makes.

Is Diana a Role Model to Emulate?

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

Here are a few of the special stories you’ll find in this week’s issue of the Jewish News of Greater Phoenix…. Online!… as well as the Jewish community’s need for more positive role models like Princess Diana at http://www.jewishaz.com/jewishnews/970912/diana.shtml.

Diana Spencer a postive role model for Jews? Hello?

What kind of Judaism do y’all practice out there in Arizona?

Let’s remember all the positive things your role model did:

  1. She utterly failed (from her end) to keep her marriage together.
  2. She cavorted about in public with the disreputable playboy son of a shady Arab businessman who the British government had refused for years to grant citizenship.
  3. She abandoned her children with the father.
  4. She dishonored her family, the Royal Family and England itself.

Diana Spencer haimish? I think the Yiddish phrase that more adequately describes her and all that surrounds here is “goyishe nachas.”

I certainly hope you don’t use this role model to teach Jewish ethics and foster Jewish continuity out there in Arizona.

Full Letter Given to US Secretary of State by American Hospitalized by Bomb Victim

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

September 9, 1997

Dear Secretary Albright,

As a United States citizen, I am deeply touched by your personal visit.

By the grace of God, I was spared death, as a nail-filled bomb pierced most of my body

With help from above, I will recover, but I am deeply troubled by what I saw.

As a yeshiva seminary student, I try to search for a deeper understanding of the events that I see.

And as I lay in a hospital bed, I also try to comprehend the ongoing political process.

I am deeply troubled by what I see. In December of 1992, the late Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin expelled 400 Hamas members from the country. Yet after intense US state department pressure, the Israel government gave in, and allowed these terrorists to return to the country. That mistake has cost hundreds of lives. I almost paid for this blunder with my life.

Secretary Albright, please do not be fooled and deceived any more. Yassir Arafat has embraced and armed Hamas leaders and has embraced their policies. It has been exactly four years since Arafat signed the Oslo accords at the White House, promising that the PLO would revoke the covenant to destroy Israel. After fours years it remains just that; a promise.

Enough is enough. Secretary Albright, precious lives are at stake. The policies that you choose are crucial. The decision not to stand up to Hamas four years ago almost cost me my life, while claiming the lives of over 300 terror victims. Your decision to stand up to Arafat could save lives tomorrow. Please do the right thing.

Respectively Yours,

Daniel Miller, age 19, student studying in Jerusalem from Miami, Fla
Orthopedic Recovery Ward
Hadassah Hospital
Jerusalem, Israel

An Interview with Col. Yoash Tsiddon-Chatto

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

The career of Col. Yoash Tsiddon-Chatto is one of the most distinguished in Israel. He played a leading role in the development of the Israel Air Force, and after his retirement from that career he played a vital role in the economic life of the country and later in the Knesset before the Oslo agreements.

His contributions to Israel are so numerous that this entire column would be consumed by simply reciting a portion of them. What is important is that he was sufficiently trusted to be a member of the carefully selected Madrid Peace Mission in November 1991, which was foiled by the Oslo operations of Yossi Beilin. His views about the current Government of Israel and the Oslo peace process are very important. Col. Tsiddon-Chatto was one of those responsible for the electoral reform that instituted in direct elections for the position of Prime Minister, resulting in the present leadership, of Benjamin Netanyahu.

What is perhaps most important is that Col. Tsiddon-Chatto is optimistic about Israel’s future despite the internecine squabbles of the Israeli politicians and the sometimes imperfect performance of the Israeli Government. That confidence is based on the fact that despite those failings, the Jewish population has risen from a mere 500,000 at the end of the Second World War to the present figure of almost five million. The most recent Russian immigration is almost threefold the original population of the Yishuv at the declaration of the existence of the state.

Despite his optimism, however, Gel. Tsiddon-Chatto believes that we are heading for a confrontation with the Palestinian Arabs and perhaps the Arab states as well. What is not certain is when that confrontation will occur. It will certainly come, according to the Colonel, but whether sooner or later is not predictable at this moment.

Whether the confrontation will lead to war is also uncertain at this moment, but it is quite clear that war can be avoided. War or peace will be determined by the ability of the Israelis to deter the Arabs by the strength of their armed forces. If, but for a moment, the Arabs believe that they can win even a moderate or limited victory, war will become inevitable.

To maintain that deterrent power, Col. Tsiddon-Chatto argues that there can be no diminution of the defense budget. This is essential because the question of peace or war depends upon deterrence and the Arab acceptance of Israeli military superiority. Col. Tsiddon-Chatto has discussed in articles published in Israel the fashion in which the budgetary needs can be met.

Within this view of the Israeli situation, Col. Tsiddon-Chatto evaluates the Hebron accords in a purely rational unemotional fashion. It is his view that this agreement is similar to placing highly volatile, explosive material near an open flame in a kitchen. Israel must react vigorously to any incitement. Col. Tsiddon-Chatto recalls having seen a confidential letter from Kissinger to Shamir, reportedly dated Feb. 8. 1988, urging the Israeli leader to react swiftly and with maximum force to suppress the intifada, accepting the fact that there would be a momentary sharp, negative international reaction and censure which would die down very quickly and would soon be forgotten. If however, the situation was permitted to fester, it would become a chronic problem.

The Oslo process is doomed to failure as soon as the major issues are reached in the negotiations. As soon as the Arabs comprehend that there can be no Arab Law of return and that the security needs of Israel involve the construction of roads under Israeli control that cut into very tiny pieces any Arab autonomous territory, they will have to lower their expectations. The fact is obvious that there can be no territorial contiguity or unity to the proposed Arab state or autonomous territory, nor can Jerusalem be divided.

The collapse of the Oslo process, however, does not necessarily mean war. If Israel has sufficient deterrent power, the Arabs will keep the peace. The introduction of ballistic missiles in the region, as has been done by the Arabs, increases the need for massive deterrent power on Israel’s side. If Israel is strong enough, peace will survive, but every Israeli government will have the constant task of maintaining that high level of deterrent force in order to convince the Arabs of the futility of war.

On the other hand, the failure of the Oslo process should lead to new solutions to the conflict, in the eyes of the Colonel. The two main issues requiring affirmation are the “civil” rights of the Arabs and the security of Israel. Innovative suggestions must be forthcoming to insure that a peace takes those two needs into account and satisfies the requirements of both sides.

That solution cannot, however, satisfy all of the present Arab demands. The full extent of those demands became evident in a symposium held by the Dayan Institute of Tel Aviv University in the late summer of 1994 in which Col. Tsiddon-Chatto participated. At that symposium were to be found all of the prominent Arabs who spanned the entire spectrum of political opinion, from those who were members of the Labor Party to those who were declared supporters of the PLO.

Without exception, those Arabs pointed out that even if a new Arab state were to be created between Jordan and Israel, that would be insufficient because almost a million so-called Israeli Arabs would still ho living under “foreign” domination. The claim of the Arabs was that, if the Jews truly wanted peace, they would have to change the name of the state so as to reflect the entire population rather than merely the Jewish majority. The state, in effect, would have to become a bi-national one with a new flag and a new national anthem.

It would also have to include an Arab law of return to admit all Arabs who supposedly fled from the land as well as their descendants. In other words, the success of the Oslo process means the disappearance of the Jewish State and the end of Zionism, as well as the creation of still another Arab-dominated state.

The very Declaration of Independence that was read at the foundation of modern Israel, which stated that this was to be a Jewish state, would be declared null and void. The 2,000 year-old dream would have ended in complete failure.

This was net merely a demand of the radicals or fundamentalists; it was a demand of all the Arabs who participated in the symposium. Those claims revealed how unrealistic were the expectations of the Arabs which were engendered by Israeli radicals like Yossi Beilin or Yaron Ezrahi.

The most recent events prove that Col. Tsiddon-Chatto was almost prophetic in his predictions. Arafat and the Palestinian (Arab) Authority are fully responsible for the end of the Oslo process. The attempts of Yossi Beilin to conduct a private diplomacy of appeasement to salvage the wreckage are both illegitimate and unwise. President Clinton’s attempt to save his reputation by applying mere pressure on Israel is also ill founded. Either Arafat is responsible for controlling the Arabs, or there can be no autonomous area.

As Col. Tsiddon-Chatto indicates as emphatically, there must be a totally new approach to the process of making peace between Arabs and Israelis, one with much lower expectations, certainly without a new Arab state. There must be a new proposal that may result in true peace between the parties to the dispute.

In a new paper that will hopefully be published in the near future, Col. Tsiddon-Chatto suggested that there can be municipalities enjoying some degree of Arab autonomy within Israel, but that the Arab political rights can only be secured by giving those Arabs in the Holy Land Jordanian citizenship. His arguments are strong ones, but they do require even further lowering of the expectations and goals of the Arabs. Let us hope that these new suggestions are given an adequate examination.

Will the PNA Make a 100% Effort?

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

The following are selections from “Basic Fateh Position” – “an editorial submitted to the press by the Palestinian Liberation Movement, Fateh” which was published in the September 5, 1997 edition of The Jerusalem Weekly.

The Palestinian leadership understands that the US demand represents an Israeli strong desire not for peace but to create a situation which results in a Palestinian civil war. In fact, asking the PNA to make 100% effort means transforming it into an army of collaborators and agents according to Israeli dictates. That will never happen. The PNA remains the outcome of the PLO, and it represents the Palestinian dream that will one day come true.

… the Accords do not commit the Palestinian side to execute Israeli demands of arresting members of the opposition or destroying the infrastructure of that position. The Oslo Accords commit the Palestinian party to applying its own laws, which consider illegal all actions that directly harm the peace process.

The PNA will never act the way the Israelis used to. It cannot, for example, impose collective punishment on its people. It is true that the PNA could act against Jihad and Hamas through paralyzing their infrastructure and arresting some members. That is only adopted when these position forces declared their responsibility for attacks resulting in loss of lives.

However, talks between these forces and the PNA have led to a general understanding that bars any opposition group from carrying out actions that may undermine the jurisdiction of the PNA or jeopardize its security. Following this understanding, the PNA released all detainees who proved to have no connection whatsoever with actions considered criminal according to the Palestinian law. Therefore, it is utterly illegal for the PNA to redetain innocent people who were released earlier.

In fact, the PNA will be violating human rights stated in international conventions if it, for example, puts in prison a person like Abdul Aziz El-Rantisi, a leading member of Hamas.

… if Albright’s emphasis is the implementation of Israeli dictates, the US Secretary of State may not be able to achieve a breakthrough. Although we are eager to see the US shouldering its responsibility towards the peace process as a co-sponsor. Palestinians will not welcome her arrival if it becomes conditioned upon Palestinian execution of 100% security measures. We will not be happy to see the killer attending the funeral procession of the victim.

… Our dealing with Albright’s initiative will be based on our steadfast adherence to peace agreements and to our national rights including the right of return. self determination and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. We will not, therefore, allow Israel to turn Albright’s projected visit into an attempt to patch up an outlet for Netanyahu’s government, which has imposed the most inhumane measures on our people.

In facing such a possibility the Palestinian leadership has decided to adopt a policy of steadfastness and confrontation. A special committee has been set up to put forward a plan to be implemented at the political level by providing answers to possible questions Albright’s visit may pose.

The Jerusalem Times, 5th September, 1997

Dr. Aaron Lerner,
Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
P.O.BOX 982 Kfar Sava
Tel: (+972-9) 760-4719
Fax: (+972-9) 741-1645
imra@netvision.net.il

Arafat & Palestinian Unity

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

The following are selections from “Demarcating ‘security cooperation'” by Graham Usher which appeared in AL-AHRAM WEEKLY, 28th August – 3rd September, 1997

Last week representatives from the Palestinian Authority (PA), the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), and 11 other Palestinian political groups gathered in Gaza and Ramallah for a special “national unity conference” to meet the challenges thrown up by the crisis in the peace process.

Most Palestinian commentators saw the participation of the Islamist groups Hamas and Jihad (who boycotted earlier ‘national dialogue’ meetings in February and April) as testimony to Yasser Arafat’s ability to preside over all streams of Palestinian opinion. It is less clear whether this tacit acknowledgment of Arafat’s leadership will translate into “common ground” for action in the weeks ahead as the conference demanded.

“… the mere presence of Hamas and Jihad at the conference was evidence of Arafat’s ‘appeasement of terrorism'”, said Israeli Government spokesman, David Bar-Illan.

The same message was conveyed by Israeli leader Benyamin Netanyahu in phone calls over the weekend to President Mubarak and King Hussein. The U.S. government also commented that Arafat’s public embrace of Hamas leader Aziz Rantisi “was not particularly constructive in resorting [restoring?] trust and confidence” to Israeli-Palestinian relations.

Arafat was unapologetic. The national conference was a response to the Netanyahu government’s policies of humiliating the PA and an “internal affair” that concerned Palestinians only, he said. It was a line that went down well on the Palestinian streets.

The collapse of the Oslo peace process has been accompanied by a decline in Palestinian support for Arafat and the PA. This discontent has not been confined to the )PA’s Islamist opposition. Recent months have witnessed a growing convergence between Hamas and elements of Arafat’s own Fatah movement, including those Fatah activists who staff the PA’s myriad security forces.

In June the PA’s head of Preventive Security in Gaza (and Fatah leader) Mohamed Dahlan, admitted that the PA may have “erred” in its ruthless suppression of Hamas following the suicide operations inside Israel in the spring of 1996. Now he says, the PA and Fatah believe that “Hamas has a very important presence in building the Palestinian homeland”. West Bank leader, Marwan Barghouti, has also warned that any indiscriminate arrest sweep by the PA of Hamas members “under Israel’s dictates” would be resisted by Fatah, “with demonstrations if necessary”.

Fatah’s new found sensitivity to Hamas is not solely due to the rejectionist policies of the Netanyahu government. It is also a recognition of Hamas’s growing strength among Palestinians.

Over the last year, Hamas in Gaza has quietly rebuilt its infrastructure, providing welfare to needy Palestinian families where PA provision (dependent on revenues collected in — and currently frozen by — Israel) has conspicuously failed.

Hamas also seems to have overcome the political schisms that nearly wrecked the movement after the 1996 suicide attacks. Then there were open divergences between Hamas’s Gaza-based leadership (which publicly opposed the operations) and its Jordan-based leadership (which supported them). The recent release from Israeli and American custody of such militant leaders as Rantisi in Gaza and Musa Abu Marzouk in Jordan has, say sources, united Hamas around a new consensus of opposition not only to Oslo but also to any “fratricidal conflict” with the PA.

In such circumstances it is understandable why Arafat has chosen to talk to his Islamist opposition rather than suppress it. Whether the national conference amounts to an “embrace” is another question….

At the same time as the national conference, PA security chiefs were meeting with their Israeli counterparts and American CIA officers to establish a new “mechanism” for security cooperation. The events were hardly coincidental, say sources. With security liaison, Arafat is signaling to the Americans that that he is committed to working with the Israelis to prevent terrorism in Israel. And with the national conference he is signaling that the PA cannot and will not become “an Israeli militia” in the self-rule areas.

Netanyahu has long rejected this distinction. Arafat’s hope is that the Americans will not do likewise.

(Thanks to Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA for editing these selections)

Corruption Under Arafat: the Legislators Speak

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

Within the Palestinian Authority (PA) there is an office entitled General Control (GCO). In May it issued a report that included a startling claim: because of corruption $326 million, roughly one fourth of the PAs budget, disappeared in 1996. The Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), which is elected by the people, commissioned nine of its members to check these findings. On July 29 they presented their report. In a stormy Council session, which Arafat did not bother to attend, the legislators called on the president to dissolve his government by September, form a new one based on experts, and bring those suspected of corruption to trial. Some of the gravest suspicions concern two of Arafats senior ministers, Nabil Shaat and Jamil Tarifi.

I asked Dr. Kamal Sharafi, who headed the committee of nine, why the Council found it necessary to check the report of the PAs comptroller. Sharafi: “The GCO report was an important contribution toward correct administrative procedures, but it had flaws. There were simple arithmetical errors. In many cases the GCO inspectors had written detailed accounts which did not make it into the final version. Many violations were ignored or left hanging. The main problem, though – which we have tried to correct – was the lack of conclusions. The GCO report failed to accuse persons by name, whether directors or ministers. You might have thought it was the Palestinian people that had stolen the money! The GCO did not ask the Attorney General to formulate indictments. The result was a series of wishy-washy, toothless recommendations, calling weakly for reform and delivering a few hazy warnings, whereas what was needed was a cry for legal action.”

The PLC Committee’s “report on the report” notes further flaws.

(1) The GCO failed to check important companies and public institutions that receive funding from the PA. These include the Petroleum General Commission, the al-Baher Company, the Tobacco Company, and the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation. (Challenge has reported on the corruption in several of these; see Issues 39 and 43.)

(2) The GCO confined itself almost exclusively to Gaza. Its report covered less than a tenth of the ministries, institutions, municipalities, and non-governmental organizations receiving benefits from the PA.

(3) It stayed clear of the many security forces, although the Council turned up evidence that they are full of illegal practices, meddling where they have no business. The GCO also kept away from President Arafats office. (PLC Report, pages 3,4, and 30.)

The PLC Committees mandate restricted it to checking the GCO report. It could not undertake an independent investigation into areas which the latter had not touched. Despite this limitation, and despite lack of cooperation on the part of the PA comptroller as well as several ministries, the findings are chilling. The overall picture is one of a mafia-style government, where the main point of being in public office is to get rich quick. The Palestinian citizen, after thirty years of neglect under Israel, has fallen into the hands of a ruling class whose motto appears to be, “Eat, drink and be merry.” The PA budget and the funds from the donor nations flow around and around within the closed circle of the few, who live a life of luxury while the people they are supposed to serve go hungry. In matters of health care and basic commodities, says the PLC Committee, the little person is a victim of dubious deals between the Palestinian and Israeli ruling elites. This conclusion may seem sweeping, but it arises from every page of the Committees report. Except for the Ministry of Education and that of Statistics, even the few untainted offices are described as inefficient and unprofessional. The report notes excessive duplication of tasks and overlapping of responsibilities, especially between the West Bank and Gaza.

The PLC Committee cites many kinds of corruption. There are ministers who violated their responsibilities to the point of endangering lives. There are unsupervised bank accounts containing what are supposed to be public funds. There are cronyism and nepotism, monopolies, releases from customs. Wherever greed can get its foot in, the space appears to have been filled. In this article we shall concentrate on three ministries where corruption is especially rife. We shall then briefly survey most of the others.

1. The Ministry of Health (Minister: Riad al-Zanoun)

Bad or expired drugs were used to treat cancer patients in ministry medical centers. With regard to other medicines as well, the Gaza branch of the ministry used drugs which the West Bank branch had rejected because they failed to meet specifications and had not been registered. Suspicion: Health ministry officials were (and are) in cahoots with a company called Al-Shifa, which imports medicines into Gaza. The report names Dr. Ziad Shath, general director of the ministrys pharmaceutical division, who allowed Al-Shifa to bring in the unregistered drugs on the pretext that registration was underway.

On another get-rich note, Al-Shifa imported several drugs as donations from Egypt: exempt, therefore, from customs and value-added tax (VAT). It then turned around and sold them to the Health Ministry including customs and VAT. Suspicion: Al-Shifa was aided in this exercise by one Khamis Najjar, a director of the ministry in Gaza, and by the Minister of Civil Affairs, Jamil Tarifi, a name we shall soon encounter again. The Committee recommended that Arafat direct the PA Attorney General to prosecute the three men named above.

In addition, a fifth of the Health Ministry’s budget went to medical expenses abroad. (“Abroad” includes Israeli hospitals.) The Council found this figure rather high. In some cases it was Arafat who ordered the transfer of patients abroad; he had the Finance Ministry deduct the money from the Health Ministry’s budget without notifying the latter. There is also the case, still pending, of Dr. Ibrahim Abu Hmeid, who was appointed to coordinate the distribution of patients among hospitals in Jordan. Several Jordanian hospitals have accused him of receiving bribes and embezzling funds. The Committee asserts that he had accomplices. Its report also raises the inevitable question: Where in all this was the Minister of Health? (PLC Report, pp. 7-8.)

2. The Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation (Minister: Nabil Sha’at)

Nabil Sha’at is known to millions as one of the chief Palestinian negotiators.

The council found many offenses. For example, any ministry is supposed to open a separate account with the Ministry of Finance for each of its projects. Thus Finance holds the money given by funders for the project, and it can supervise expenditures. Shaats ministry, however, opened separate accounts. Thus ministry officials could conspire with officials of a donor country, open an account together, and manipulate the funds without the knowledge of Finance. This practice has also opened the door for ministry officials to appoint themselves to jobs in the ministrys projects, giving themselves fat second salaries. The private account gives rise to another perk as well: You hire someone to a project for a large salary, but by prior agreement you pay the person less. The difference goes into what is called a “black box.” Shaat and his director-general control the black box. They hid it from the GCO, but the Council Committee found it.

Other ills in the Ministry of Planning:

  • Tenders were granted under suspicious circumstances to companies with family connections to people in the ministry.
  • Within the ministrys projects, there was often no regard for budgets; purchase prices were high; there was a lack of competition and a lack of transparency.
  • The ministry used project funds to cash personal checks for the Minister.

These practices have damaged the PA’s credibility with the donor nations.

The Committee has called for an investigation of Nabil Shaath together with three of his deputies. (PLC Report, pp. 15-16.)

3. The Ministry of Civil Affairs (Minister: Jamil Tarifi)

The Committee devotes four closely-written pages to this ministry, to which the GCO had given only scant attention.

The largest area of offense concerns the granting of exemptions on import duties, especially in the matter of automobiles. This can be a lot of money: the duty can amount to half the price of the (pre-duty) car. The right to grant customs exemptions is vested in the Finance Ministry, not in Civil Affairs. The latter was able to get a foot in, however, in the following manner: All imported goods must enter through Israel. Israel collects the customs on goods which are destined for the Palestinian areas and then transfers this money to the PA. Someone from the PA had to be present at the Israeli gateways, therefore, to tell the Israelis which goods to exempt. Logically, this should have been someone from Finance, but in fact it was Civil Affairs Minister Jamil Tarifi who got the task, perhaps because of his many Israeli connections, which date from before the Intifada. Infringing on the prerogatives of Finance, Tarifi personally exempted cars, furniture, and other goods, including the medicines mentioned above. The paperwork was slipshod or nonexistent. Many cars, after receiving Tarifi exemptions in the name of this or that governmental body, were converted to private ownership. This was the case, for example, with a certain Mercedes, which wound up belonging to none other than… the Coordinator of Customs Exemptions in the Ministry of Civil Affairs.

At Oslo Israel permitted a few thousand PLO members to return. The PA granted them exemptions from customs. This opened the door to abuse: many a car was exempted on the fictitious claim that it belonged to a returnee. Such a one is Ibrahim Awad Abdel Qader Salameh, 75 years old, supposedly the proud owner of a brand new Jaguar. He does not get to use it much. The family members of Minister Tarifi are always taking it out for a spin.

A country without industry or natural resources depends heavily on customs duties. The loss of money through false exemptions amounts to a serious blow.

Tarifis list goes on. Israel issues work permits, and the PAs ministries of Labor and Interior are supposed to distribute them. But here too Civil Affairs got a foot in — again, it seems, thanks to Tarifis connections with Israel; his ministry gets work permits and hands them out without telling anyone.

Unknown to the Ministry of Finance, Tarifi illegally imposed fees on trucks bringing goods to and from Jordan. At one point, says the Committee, he got the Israelis to close the Jordanian border for two weeks to all trucks bringing cement except those of a company called al-Karmel, which belongs to his eldest son.

The Committee sums up Tarifis offenses by calling them “a blatant attack on public funds.” It asks that the Attorney General bring the Minister to justice. (PLC Report, pp. 17-21.)

4. Examples from other Ministries.

  • Finance (Minister: Muhammad Nashashibi): The Council Committee criticizes this office for losing control in areas which it is supposed to regulate, like customs exemptions and project accounts. Several officials, it notes, took advantage of their positions to establish private companies. (PLC Report, pp. 5-6.)
  • Agriculture (Minister: Abdel Jawad Saleh): The Committee found evidence of many violations, but it did not go into detail. (Ibid.,p.9.)
  • Public Works (Minister: Azzam al-Ahmad): Most purchases were made by direct order, always from the same importers, rather than by tender. Mr. al-Ahmad states that the violations took place before there was a minister for Public Works. (Ibid.)
  • Social Affairs (Minister: Intisar Wazzir): This office failed to use proper procedures in the handling of large donations and in distributions to the needy. (Ibid., pp. 9-10.)
  • Post and Communication: Among various offenses, this stands out: Many telephones which are supposed to be in government offices have found their way to the private homes of officials and employees. The PA pays their phone bills. (Ibid., p. 10.)
  • Housing (Minister: Abdel Rahman Hamad): The earlier GCO report noted serious administrative, legal, and financial violations, most of which occurred during the term of the former minister, Dr. Zakarieh al- Agha. The violations include (1) a housing project which was carried out in defiance of regulations, using materials that did not match specifications; (2) questionable allotments of land; and (3) the plunder of sand, one of Gazas few and nonrenewable resources. The Committee made inquiries, but the ministry failed to cooperate in response. (Ibid., p. 12.)
  • Interior: The GCO report exposed the manipulation of state funds. The ministry gave the Council Committee a “positive and reliable response.” (Ibid., p. 13.)
  • Culture (Minister: Yasser Abed Rabo): The minister charged the public $7,671 to install a central heating system in the house he is renting. Almost 90% of the ministry employees are in administrative positions, although many lack educational qualifications. (Ibid., p. 14.)
  • Information (same minister): Large sums are budgeted for purposes not connected to the ministrys work, including a $10,000 personal allowance for the minister. (Ibid.)
  • Supplies (also called Rations) (Minister: Ali Shaheen): This winter people in Nablus got sick because they ate flour whose date had expired. A PLC member, Khussam Khader, exposed the case, showing that old flour had been repackaged. The Council laid the responsibility on the Ministry of Supplies and passed a law redefining its role. Yet the ministry continues to interfere in the sale of flour. It worked in cahoots with a Finance Ministry official, Muhammad Jaradah, using public money to import flour through a company which Mr. Jaradah heads. The Supplies Ministry also blocked the border to other companies, so that Mr. Jaradahs would have the monopoly. (Ibid., p. 21.)
  • Transport (Minister: Ali Qawasmeh): Because of slipshod office procedures the PA has lost control over the use of government cars, though it pays all the costs. The Transport Ministry illegally converted some government cars to private ownership without notifying Finance, which is supposed to oversee public property. (Ibid., pp. 22-23.)
  • Youth and Sport: Ministry officials used donated money, intended for renovating playgrounds, to cover private expenses. (Ibid., p. 23.)
  • Local Governance (Minister: Saeb Erakat): This ministry supervises municipalities and village councils. The GCO report covered only thirty of the latter, but it exposed administrative, financial and legal violations. The Committee demanded a response to the GCO findings, but the ministry has refused to cooperate. (Ibid., pp. 25-26.)
  • Monetary Authority: The committee found excessive and unjustified expenses, as well as discrepancies between financial files and daily books. (Ibid., p. 26.)
  • TV and Radio Broadcasting Agency: Purchases and tenders are not subject to supervision. As in the case of all ministries and agencies, income is supposed to be transferred to the Finance Ministry for supervision and control, but this is not done. (Ibid., p. 27.)

All nations suffer from corruption, but who would have expected so much so soon? One reason, the Committee report makes clear, is the chaos that prevails in rules and regulations, in defining spheres of authority, and in norms of financial management. (Ibid., p. 28.) All beginnings are difficult, and this is no exception. But other beginnings have a grace which this one lacks. Such widespread corruption could not take hold if the leaders had any national feeling, or sense of community, or higher purpose. These things were surrendered at Oslo. The PA is the creature of Oslo, where a national hope was betrayed for the sake of personal power. That was the arch-corruption. The present examples are its offspring.

Amid the gloom there remains a spark of light: the fact that the PLC Committee report could appear at all. Once again the legislative council has proved, despite its limitations, that there are those who seek to establish a new Palestinian society on foundations of sound administration and public rectitude. We spoke, for example, with Ali Girbawi, a professor in Political Science at Bir Zeit University and head of the Palestinian Independent Commission for Citizens Rights. In response to the Committee report, he said, “I think that the Palestinian Legislative Council has found its own strength. I dont think they were aware that they could do what they have done. Now they have realized that they have an impact. If they will hold the executive to account, the people will support them.”

The Committee report exposed the alienation, even hostility, between the PAs executive and legislative branches. The entire Council approved the report, including PLO supporters close to Arafat, whereas most cabinet ministers took it as a declaration of war. Soon after its publication, sixteen ministers gave letters to Arafat signaling their readiness to resign if he wished. (The sixteen did not include Nabil Shaath, Jamil Tarifi, and Yassir Abed Rabu.) Public opinion in the West Bank saw this collective performance merely as a ploy aimed at taking the sting from the report. Kamal Sharafi, head of the Committee, told Challenge: “We didnt ask anyone to resign. We only demanded that Arafat disperse the cabinet, bring in the Attorney General, and put the guilty on trial. As far as were concerned, any ministers who are cleared can become part of the new cabinet.”

In the meantime an additional factor has emerged. Even as the PLC Committee was conducting its investigation, Arafat appointed Taib Abed al-Rahim, General Secretary of the Presidential Office, to make a detailed inquiry into acts of corruption. The result has been yet another report, 200 pages long, which Arafat is keeping to himself. There are, then, three studies of corruption: that of the GCO, that of the PLC, and now this. The bevy of reports may reduce the overall impact. If Arafat refuses to deal with that of the PLC and ignores its recommendations, the Council will be exposed in all its impotence. Kamal Sharafi, however, counsels against despair. “Let’s wait till September,” he says. Meanwhile, corruption is thriving.

PLO’s Qaddumi on Relations With Jihad, Hamas

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

[Humaydi] Do you think that your recent statements have succeeded in dispelling the clouds of tension that loomed over the skies of relations between President Yasir ‘Arafat and the Lebanese Government?

[Qaddumi] Undoubtedly, many of the media interpretations of Abu-‘Ammar’s [‘Arafat’s] statements have not been correct. I do not think that ‘Arafat would ever contemplate harming any Arab country. Indeed, he has always been and remains anxious to safeguard his relations with the Arab countries particularly those connected with the political settlement [of the Arab-Israeli conflict]. Furthermore, Abu-‘Ammar holds the fondest of memories about the Lebanese people for embracing the Palestinian revolution for numerous years.

[Humaydi] Do you mean that Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq al- Hariri has gone somewhat too far in his criticism of ‘Arafat?

[Qaddumi] We had hoped that there would have been no statements. When I discussed this matter with Abu-‘Ammar, he gave instructions to issue further statements. We can never do anything to harm Lebanon particularly as Israel’s aim is to poison the Arab climate.

[Humaydi] Did you clarify the situation during your meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Faruq al-Shar’?

[Qaddumi] When we come to Syria we do so knowing that Syria is the stronghold of the Arab struggle. So we discuss all matters, particularly as Syria is keen on doing all it can to serve the Palestinian cause.

[Humaydi] Have you discussed the question of a possible visit by Abu-‘Ammar to Syria?

[Qaddumi] We will choose the proper time for Abu-‘Ammar’s visit so that it yields the desired fruits. We have talked frankly about this matter with our Syrian brothers.

[Humaydi] Do you think the freeze through which the peace process is going at present provides an adequate climate for ‘Arafat’s visit?

[Qaddumi] This depends on the evaluations of both the Syrian and Palestinian sides. Damascus always welcomes the presence of Palestinian leaders and at no time whatsoever has it objected to the presence of Palestinian leaders. Indeed, Abu-‘Ammar started his revolution from Syria’s bosom.

[Humaydi] What role did you play in the visit [to Syria] by the delegation of 1948 Palestinians [from Israel]?

[Qaddumi] I am in constant touch with the brothers in the inside. They had a strong desire to visit Syria. I conveyed this desire to the [Syrian] brothers in many ways and continued to do so until Syria agreed to welcome them.

[Humaydi] Will the next stage be to invite the Israeli left?

[Qaddumi] That is up to the Syrian brothers.

[Humaydi] What did you discuss with the Palestinian opposition in Damascus?

[Qaddumi] The brother members of the opposition who operate under he banners of the PLO, the Executive Committee, and the Palestine National Council have the right to know all the details concerning the developments taking place. On our part, we are anxious to coordinate positions with those in the outside, because the [Palestinian] National Authority is far from them by virtue of its preoccupation with the negotiations.

[Humaydi] What would you say about the “initiative” by Ramadan ‘Abdallah Shallah, leader of the Islamic Jihad organization, concerning his readiness to join the PLO?

[Qaddumi] We welcome them, and this is only natural. For these brothers form part of the national movement and consequently they should be included within the framework of the Palestinian mechanism.

[Humaydi] Even despite the fact that they are branded as terrorists by some quarters?

[Qaddumi] I reject such charges against them. The Islamic Jihad and the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) are parts of the national movement and it is their right to resist the occupation in whatever way they deem fit.

[Humaydi] Including the launching of suicide-military operations?

[Qaddumi] We differ with them over the methods they use. You yourself know that our movement Fatah is a fedayeen organization. It is Israel which created the current situations and poisoned the skies of the occupied Arab territories, and consequently it has been the cause of such actions. We do not want at all to see harm coming to civilians. But, unfortunately, these poisoned climates created by Netanyahu have led to such actions.

[Humaydi] The Islamic Jihad leader set the condition of breaking the link between the PLO and the Palestinian Authority. What are your conditions?

[Qaddumi] We are negotiating with them without any previous commitments. For the PLO is the wider framework and so we should listen to what everyone says and discuss their views.

[Humaydi] Do you think the Palestinian Authority’s arresting Hamas and Jihad elements would lead to an inter-Palestinian clash?

[Qaddumi] I do not think so, because the brothers in the three sides realize that internecine fighting is a very grave matter. However bad the relations among them become, none of the sides will embark on internecine fighting. May I point out in this regard that the three sides have had dialogues in the past and agreed that the Hamas and Jihad elements would not stage any operations from Gaza and would not announce any operations from there.

[Humaydi] Do you think the [recent] failure to claim responsibility for operations was due to this understanding among the various sides?

[Qaddumi] Nobody knows who carried out the [Jerusalem] double-suicide operation. It seems Israel has been exploiting this ambiguity to level charges against several Arab countries so that it can launch aggression on them and to justify its freezing of the peace process.

1...1,1891,1901,191...1,200Page 1,190 of 1,200

Column from the Director

David Bedein
David Bedein
2477 POSTS6 COMMENTS
Michael Kuttner
Michael Kuttner
429 POSTS0 COMMENTS
Rochel Grosz
Rochel Grosz
1 POSTS1 COMMENTS
daniel
daniel
0 POSTS0 COMMENTS
© A WEBstationONE.com production, partially funded by the Internet Development Fund and the IDF Link technology.

© 2003-2020 All rights reserved. Articles and Special Reports on IsraelBehindTheNews.com are copyrighted. Every reader is welcome to reprint any and all articles, and with citation.