Analysis: Reconsidering American/Israeli Passion for PLO Statehood

The time has come to ask all those of us who had supported the concept of a Palestinian Arab state to recognize the error in our ways.

The concept of ceding a sliver of the land to another people may have been a good one.

After all, why should neighbors not find a way to make peace with one another?

However, the Arabs reject the idea, and continue to demand that three million of their refugees return to where they came from in 1948 and that the return of the Jews to our land cease and desist.

Contrary to Israel’s and American expectations, at no time has the Palestinian Arab national movement ever proclaimed – “Give us Gaza and the West Bank and we will give you peace”

Those who have advocated sovereignty for Palestinian Arabs do not do so out of malice or hatred of the Jewish people.

People who advocate the idea of PLO statehood often do so out a commitment to justice and self-determination.

However, my own personal involvement of twelve years on the Israeli Left led me to meet with and dialog with many sympathizers to the PLO on the other side.

PLO activists would always ask me what they thought to be reasonable: We will give you peace if you relinquish up your obsession for Zionism.

>From Day One of the Oslo process, Arafat has been taking Truth Serum every day and proclaiming to his people that the purpose of the process to be the conquest of the entire land.

Three million residents of the UNRWA Arab refugee camps believe Arafat and they ready themselves to join forces with his trained and well motivated Palestine Liberation Army of 50,000 to liberate the rest of land of Israel.

An Arab guerilla army against the seemingly invincible Israel Defense Forces? Ask the FLN in Algeria and the NLF in Vietnam. They remain models for the PLO.

The leaders of Israel, anxious in their passion for peace after one hundred years of war, moved quickly to cede territory and to provide training, arms and cooperation with Arafat’s military forces, while Arafat was arming and training the Hamas.

Yet the tragic mistake was in the speed of the Oslo process.

The late Israeli Intelligence Chief, General Aharon Yariv, who conceptualized the very concept of “territory for peace”, told me as follows: “People misunderstood us. We never said territory before peace. We said territory for peace”.

Israel’s ideal peace treaty was forged with Jordan, over a period of twenty four years. Israel made a deal with the Hashemite kingdom in 1970 and consummated it as a formal peace treaty with King Hussein only in 1994.

The Jewish state first wanted tosee how Hussein would behave. And Israel tested him, during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the 1982 Lebanon invasion, the 1987-93 Intifada and the 1991 Gulf war. Only then did Israel sign a formal peace treaty with King Hussein.

That is not what happened with Arafat, the PLO and the new Palestine Authority. Tragically, Israel’s Palestinian Arab protagonists view the Oslo process as a stage of war with the state of Israel, and they see Israel ceding territory as a sign of weakness and surrender, not as a step towards peace.

When Arafat says Jihad, “holy war“, he means it.

Palestinian Official Acknowledges Torture

Palestinian security forces abused some prisoners’ human rights, a colonel in those forces acknowledged last week.

Col. Jabril Rajoub, head of the Preventive Security forces of the West Bank city of Jericho, acknowledged those abuses in a meeting with human rights organizations last Wednesday. He was in Washington for the signing of the most recent Israel-Palestinian pact.

Rajoub assured these organizations that human rights violations will be controlled in the West Bank.

He said all previous abusers will be charged and tried.

His organization is the section of the entire Palestinian National Security forces responsible for the protection of human rights in the Palestinian autonomous region of the West Bank.

“I understand their (human rights organizations) concerns about the violations of human rights. I offer them the opportunity to investigate, check and monitor our process of interrogation,” Rajoub said.

The Death of an American

James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, questioned Rajoub about a recent suspicious death: On September 29 a Palestinian American from Dallas, Azzam Mohammed Rahim Mosleh, died in captivity.

“(Mosleh’s) body was delivered to his family in the West Bank with marks all over his body, and it appeared that he been tortured,” Zogby said.

He said Palestinian security officials reported that Mosleh died of heat exhaustion, but did not issue a medical report.

Rajoub said that Mosleh had committed many crimes including two murders. “(But) this does not justify at all his death while under interrogation.”

“None of my Preventive Security forces were involved in the interrogation of this guy (Mosleh)”, Rajoub said.

Saiid Hamad, deputy director of the Palestine Liberation Organization in Washington said Mosleh was interrogated by the Palestinian National Security forces, the umbrella organization in control of the Preventive Security forces and several other Palestinian security institutions.

PLO Chairman Yaser Arafat assigned a commission to investigate this death, Hamad said.

Palestine’s Human Rights Monitors

Rajoub said the Preventive Security forces are trained in public enforcement, public relations, criminal procedures and human rights issues.

Under the 1994 Gaza-Jericho Agreement between Israel and the PLO, the Palestinians took authority of the city of Jericho in the West Bank. Rajoub was appointed by Arafat as the head of the Preventive Security forces.

“Since I took over the Preventive forces in Jericho last year no Palestinian attacks on Israel were initiated from this city,” said Rajoub.

Rajoub’s authority will be growing as a result of the latest Palestinian-Israeli pact.

Zogby said that the agreement signed in Washington back on September 28, 1995, would extend Palestinian rule to many other major cities in the West Bank. Zogby added that Rajoub’s authority will spread to most of the other cities in the West Bank soon after Israeli withdrawal from these cities.

Amnesty International Critque

According to Amnesty International, human rights abuses continue in the Palestinian controlled areas.

A May 1995 Amnesty International report said serious human right violations committed in the occupied territories have not been given a high priority by the Palestinian authorities.

“Palestinian Security forces have killed at least 16 Palestinians since May 1994,” said the report and the results of the investigations into the deaths were not made public. The report also said that 13 of the 16 Palestinians were killed during demonstrations against the Palestinian authority.

Pernille Holtedahl, coordinator for Israel and the occupied territories for Amnesty International said at least three Palestinian died in Palestinian custody.

Rajoub: The Veteran Revolutionary

Rajoub is a veteran of the Palestinian struggle against Israeli occupation. He said he spent a total of 17 years in Israeli prisons experiencing torture and hunger strikes.

“I am a revolutionary,” Rajoub said, adding that he was an active fighter who participated in attacks against the Israeli occupation.

Jordan: Al-Majd on ‘Arafat-Abu-Marzuq Meeting, US Initiative

Yasir ‘Arafat has asserted that US envoy Dennis Ross, who arrived in the Middle East yesterday, is carrying an important draft US initiative to end the deadlocked Palestinian- Israeli negotiations. US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright will soon submit the initiative after sounding out Arab and Israeli stands.

Following a private meeting with Hamas [Islamic Resistance Movement] leader Musa Abu-Marzuq after midnight on Tuesday, ‘Arafat said he mobilized the world against Israel. He added that in the aftermath of the suicide operation in Jerusalem, Washington realized that a Palestinian-Israeli deadlock bodes severe dangers and damage.

‘Arafat complained to Abu-Marzuq about the shortage of supply items in all occupied Palestinian territories. He pointed out that Israel for the first time closed Palestinian border crossings with Jordan and Egypt and restricted the movement of Palestinians, including his own movements as Netanyahu refused to let him use his plane and he was forced to take two planes, an Egyptian plane that carried him to Cairo and a Jordanian one that brought him to Amman.

Although ‘Arafat was cautious during his one-hour meeting with Abu-Marzuq at the Guest Palace, he briefed Abu-Marzuq on his efforts with the US Administration to release him when he was detained at a New York jail.

Abu-Marzuq thanked ‘Arafat for not submitting to Netanyahu’s pressure to arrest Hamas leaders. ‘Arafat said his principles prevented him from committing such acts, pointing out that he had intervened personally to release Hamas leader ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz al- Rantisi when summoned by the Palestinian security department after the Jerusalem martyrdom operation. Al-Majd has learned that Jordan, Israel, and the United States paused before this meeting and the message ‘Arafat wanted to send to these parties through his important and surprise meeting with Abu- Marzuq which also coincided with another important meeting ‘Arafat held with Iraqi Ambassador to Jordan Nuri al-Wayyis.

A senior Palestinian source told al-Majd he believes that through his meeting with Abu-Marzuq, ‘Arafat wanted to make Netanyahu understand he still has lots of options he can use, particularly the military action option Hamas still upholds.

The Palestinian official refused to comment on what messages ‘Arafat wanted sent to Jordan through this meeting. However, he clarified that ‘Arafat’s message to Clinton and his administration is evidently clear; it stated that Israel’s security cannot be attained through Netanyahu’s suppressive and intransigent measures but rather through reconciliation with the Palestinians, who can coordinate their programs so that Palestinian extremists will be able to serve and not destroy the goals of moderates.

On ‘Arafat’s meeting with the Iraqi ambassador, the Palestinian official said ‘Arafat gave him a message for President Saddam Husayn thanking him for his speech on the anniversary of the Iraqi July revolution. In his speech, Saddam had called on Arabs to support the Palestinian Authority and ‘Arafat’s positions although he disagrees with him and rejects the Oslo accord.

The official added that points of agreement between Saddam and ‘Arafat are growing and that the two sides call for regaining Arab solidarity and convening an Arab summit in the nearest possible time.

Excerpts from an interview with Nayif Hawatimah, Secretary-General of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine

[‘Isa] Have you taken notice of the reports prepared by the Central Control Commission regarding the spread of huge corruption within the lobbies of the Palestinian Authority? If your answer is in the affirmative, how would you comment on this?

[Hawatimah] We have in our possession a report prepared by the Central Control Commission, which came in 600 pages; a report prepared by the Ministerial Committee headed by al-Tayyib ‘Abd-al- Rahim, which came in 129 pages; and a report prepared by the Legislative Council’s Financial Committee, which came in 60 pages. All these reports show that the octopus of corruption is spreading in all areas of the Palestinian Authority and its security and intelligence arms. Furthermore, these reports recommended the resignation of the entire Palestinian cabinet. They acknowledged that $326 million; that is, 43 percent of the 1996 budget, was embezzled; that 35 percent of this budget was spent on security agencies; and that 12.5 percent of the budget went to ‘Arafat’s office. Some 9.5 percent of the budget; that is, $73 million was left to the entire population of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, who total 2.5 million people. With regard to the Palestinian diaspora, they got nothing of this budget.

Before these reports saw the light of day, we urged ‘Arafat to heed the appeals of the people and realities in this regard. This was contained in a letter I sent him through ‘Abbas Zaki [member of the Fatah Central Committee and member of the Palestinian Legislative Council] in reply to an oral message ‘Arafat sent me in April through Zaki. In our appeals in this regard, we clearly underlined the need to deal blows to Mafia gangs and corruption within the lobbies of the Authority’s organs.

Now, these reports, all of which were prepared by the Authority itself, recommend the dismissal and trial of five ministers, rebuking two others, and questioning another. They also demand an investigation of why monopolies, chief among which are the Petroleum Corporation, the al-Bahr Company, the Tobacco Company, the Cement Corporation, the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation, and the Cereals Corporation were placed under the control of brother ‘Arafat’s office. Likewise, the revenues of 12 basic commodities do not find their way to the Authority’s treasury, are not subject to auditing, and are not deemed part of the general budget; not to mention the second budget [the second treasury], whose assets are deposited in four Israeli banks. These assets are in excess of $500 million. These assets, which are fetching 16-23 percent interest, are used for speculation on a par with the shekel.

This is a far cry of the hunger suffered by our people in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem. This also shows how the Palestinian Authority is neglecting the Palestinian diaspora, who unleashed the revolution and the PLO. This is a joint far cry appealing for an end to corruption, and for the dismantlement of these institutions, so that there may be room for the launch of new institutions that would be highly efficient, trustworthy, and accountable. Consequently, we demand public trials attended by human rights organizations and representatives of donor nations to curb the spread of corruption that has spared nothing.

[‘Isa] But some of the ministers whose names were mentioned in the reports said that the charges against them are politically motivated and that they are aimed at dismissing them.

[Hawatimah] I firmly believe that these ministers want to turn their backs on all these reports that implicated them in corruption scandals. I would like to tell you in all honesty that the reports, copies of which are in our possession, are clear. Moreover, several officials affiliated with the Palestinian Authority, including Hanan ‘Ashrawi, ‘Abd-al-Jawad Salih, and others, commended the accuracy of the reports. However, they affirmed that these reports did not address the activities of the monopolies working under the direct supervision of brother ‘Arafat’s office. Given all of the above, all files must be opened and referred to court. First of all, all the ministers whose names are mentioned in the reports must be relieved of their posts and sent to court, as happens in all world states. They must undergo transparent trials in the presence of international observers.

[‘Isa] With regard to ‘Arafat, is it possible that he is unaware of this huge corruption?

[Hawatimah] We within the revolution and the PLO, as well as Palestinian laymen, cannot assume that the ruler is good and that it is his entourage that is corrupt. I will address this issue in a book that will see the light of day soon. The ruler is well aware of many things being done by his entourage. Nonetheless, he is not necessarily aware of all the minute details. He knows a lot about what is going on around him. The self-rule authority is coming face-to-face with a huge report. There is huge corruption, and brother Abu-‘Ammar is aware of many things in this regard.

Getting Ready to Take on Iran? Jerusalem Bombing Linked to Iran?

The Israelis are very worried about Iran. And the Israelis are the major force in the U.S. pushing Washington to confront Iran. As was the case with Iraq just a few years ago, partly it is a matter of what “excuse” to use and how to mold public opinion to support military action.

Yesterday, an Israeli-connected news agency reported on a Jordanian newspaper story that for the first time linked the recent Jerusalem market bombing to Iran. That report follows below. One important caveat: as for “disinformation” mentioned in the story, the greatest likelihood is that the Israelis are the ones involved in disinformation as they continue to contemplate attacking Iran themselves while attempting to push Washington into a confrontation with Tehran.

The Israeli goal, shared by many in the U.S., is very simple: to destroy Iran’s military power and set back its nuclear and missile programs by a decade — as was the case with Israel’s attack against the Iraqi Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981.

So just what are the Israelis so worried about?

They are worried that so far the Iranians have not been infiltrated and co-opted — as has been successfully done with most of the Arab “client-regimes”, most especially the Jordanians, the Saudis, and the Egyptians.

They are worried that the Iranians remain a source of inspiration, as well as funds and arms, for other nationalist and Islamic oriented forces in the region.

They are worried that the Iranians continue to supply weapons to the Hizballah and others to counter the U.S. and Israeli military dominance in the region.

They are worried about the talk of, and small steps toward, a joint Syrian, Iranian, Iraqi alliance against Israel; especially troubling should there be revolution in any of the major countries Israel now relies on — Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, as well as Jordan.

And at the top of the list they are worried that within the next few years Iran will develop nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them.

It should be remembered that last year the well-respected Janes Military Review outlined that among the four most likely scenarios for a new Middle East war is a surprise Israeli strike (coordinated with the U.S. of course) against the Iran.

It should be noted, in closing, that there are some analysts who suggest neither the Israelis nor the Americans are really ready for a major confrontation with Iran; and in fact that there is hope to avoid it fearing its possible repercussions throughout the Muslim world. Even so, these analysts suggest, Washington and Tel Aviv hold open the possibility of such a confrontation as a way of “deterring” the Iranians from helping those in the region who are attaching the American presence in the Gulf and the on-going Israeli occupation of the Palestinians.

MID-EAST REALITIES is published a number of times weekly on the Internet. Email to infomer@middleeast.org for details how to receive MER regularly. For detailed information about the weekly MER-TV program email to infomertv@middleeast.org.

e-mail: MER@MiddleEast.Org
Fax: 202 362-6965
Phone: 202 362-5266, Ext 638
Internet: www.MiddleEast.Org.

Can the Orient House be Closed Down?

Last week it was reported that the Netanyahu government believes it cannot legally close down Orient House because it is a “private home”. A review of the applicable law indicates that the ownership of Orient House is not relevant.

The closing the offices of the PLO in Jerusalem was made possible by the Law Implementing the Agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area (Restriction on Activity) 1994 which was passed by the Knesset on December 26, 1994. The Law is popularly known as “The Orient House Law”.

During the course of debate of the Law, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin asserted that without such legislation he did not have the legal authority to close offices of the PLO in Jerusalem.

The law prohibits activity by the Palestinian Authority and gives the government the ability to ban PLO activity as well.

The following is a translation of selected portions of the Law:

“4. (a) The Government may, by means of an order, prohibit the opening or the operation of a representative mission of the PLO, order its closure, or prevent the holding of a meeting on behalf of the PLO or under its auspices within the area of the State of Israel.

“6. For the purpose of executing orders pursuant to paragraphs 3 or 4, the Israel Police shall have all the authorities given to it by any law, including the authority to enter into any place, to remove from there any person, to close the place, to disperse any meeting, and to take any action necessary to ensure the execution of the order and to use reasonable force for this purpose.

“7. Where an order has been issued pursuant to paragraph 3 or 4, prohibiting the opening of or operation of a representative mission, the license required for such activity shall not be granted under any law.”

There is absolutely no reference in the law to the ownership of the “place” being closed down.

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, the Palestine Authority and the Hamas: A Surprising Cooperative Relationship

Almost four years ago, when Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin shook hands with Yassir Arafat, the head of the Palestine Liberation Organization, on the White House lawn most people in Israel and abroad expected that Arafat would form a new Arab entity that could restrain violent Moslem movements known as the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad.

That was the rationale behind what later became known as the Oslo peace process, where Israel was expected to cede land, while Arafat’s PLO was expected to form a new Palestine Authority that would fight Hamas/Islamic Jihad and other Arab terror groups that continued to threaten the lives of people in Israel.

Yet from day one, the opposite has occurred. Instead of cracking down on Hamas, Arafat openly woos the Hamas. When I asked Arafat about Hamas at his press conference in Oslo where he was about to receive the Nobel Peace Prize in December, 1994, he answered by saying that “Hamas are my brothers. I will handle them in my own way”.

And when the PLO celebrated its thirtieth anniversary in January 1995, Arafat delivered a series of lectures in Gaza and in Jericho to his own people, praising suicide bombers and refusing to condemn the Hamas attacks which took place at the time. Arafat’s speeches of praise for the Hamas were televised by the new Palestinian TV network that was controlled and operated by Arafat himself. Video cassettes of Arafat’s harangues became popular in the Palestinian Arab open market

Arafat’s strategy was best summed up by US ambassador to Israel and presidential confidante Martin Indyk, who told the Los Angeles Times in March 1996 that Arafat had decided to coopt rather than to fight the Hamas.

Arafat’s co optation of the Hamas was not only in words, but in deed.

On May 9, 1995, I covered a Gaza press conference held by Arafat’s local Palestine Liberation Army police chief Ghazzi Jabali, in which the representatives of Arafat’s Palestine Authority officially announced that they would license weapons for the Hamas. only one month after the Hamas carried out an attack on an Israeli civilian bus near Gaza, killing six young Israelis and one American student, Aliza Flatow.

At Jabali’s packed press conference, carried live on PBC radio, Jabali announced that Hamas leaders such as Mohammed Zahar would be allowed and even “encouraged” to own weapons under the protection of the Palestine Authority. On the same day, our Palestinian TV crew filmed an armed Zahar, standing in front of a skull and cross bones imposed on a map of Israel, as he addressed an angry mob in Gaza and called for bloody overthrow of the state of Israel. Jabali would later assure the Associated Press on May 14, 1995 that he was expecting the Hamas and Islamic to keep their licensed weapons “at home”.

Yet for the last two years both the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad have openly operated with weapons licensed by the PA. Meanwhile, all levels of Arafat’s military forces acknowledge that they have recruited radical Islamics to join forces with them.

And on each occasion when Arafat was asked to “crack down” on these Islamic groups that took credit for fatal terror bombs against Israel, Arafat ordered the mass roundups that resulted in confessions, and then the mass release of prisoners.

And in thirty seven documented instances since 1994, the Palestine Authority has offered asylum to Hamas and Islamic Jihad members who murdered Israelis and took refuge in the new safe havens of Palestinian Arab cities that were protected by Arafat’s armed forces.

A case in point: Muhammad Deif, the admitted Hamas mastermind of the October 1994 kidnapping and killing of the nineteen year-old American-Israeli, Nachshon Wachsman, wanders Gaza freely, armed and untouched. When I asked Arafat’s commander of the Palestine Liberation Army about Deif, he told me that he was under direct orders from Yassir Arafat not to touch Deif. This, despite the fact that U.S. President Bill Clinton declared at Naphthous’s grave in March 1996 that Israel should not continue any negotiating process with Arafat and the Palestine Authority until and unless Arafat hands over Deif to stand trial.

Each Friday, over the past three years, Arafat-appointed Hamas Muftis in Nablus and in Jerusalem deliver weekly sermons in their respective mosques that call for JIHAD, holy war, against the state and people of Israel.

Not to be outdone, Arafat consistently addresses Palestinian crowds as if he were trying to emulate the Hamas, and not as if he was interested in restraining them.

Arafat’s own Jihad harangues have continued when the Oslo peace process was going well with Israel, and when it was not.

Arafat’s arming, encouragement and emulation of the Hamas occur in the open, and in public domain, at a time when more than two hundred foreign and Israeli news bureaus cover Arafat and his new Palestine Authority.

Yet an unwritten rule exists in the media, even among the Israeli press, that downplays the significance of the PA-Hamas cooperation, and Arafat’s calls for armed struggle with Israel.

Many close followers of the Middle East situation wrongly assume that there are two entities – the PLO and the Hamas, and that they somehow remain in conflict.

Analysis: Reconsideration of Our Passion for PLO Statehood After Tisha B’av

The time has come to ask all those of us who had supported the concept of a Palestinian Arab state to recognize the error in our ways.

The concept of ceding a sliver of the land to another people may have been a good one. After all, why should neighbors not find a way to make peace with one another.

However, the Arabs reject the idea, and continue to demand that three million of their refugees return to where they came from in 1948 and that the return of the Jews to our land cease and desist.

Those of our fellow Jews who have advocated sovereignty for Palestinian Arabs do not do so out of malice or hatred of the Jewish people.

They advocate such an idea out a theoretical concept of justice and self-determination.

My own personal involvement of twelve years on the Israeli Left led me to meet with and dialogue with many sympathizers to the PLO on the other side.

PLO activists asked what they thought to be reasonable: We will give you peace if you ive up your obsession for Zion.

From Day One of the Oslo process, Arafat has been taking Truth Serum every day and proclaiming to his people that the purpose of the process is the conquest of the entire land.

Three million residents of the UNRWA Arab refugee camps believe him and they ready themselves to join forces with his trained and welll motivated Palestine Liberation Army of 50,000 to liberate the land of Israel.

A guerilla army against a nation with a strong army? Ask the FLN in Algeria and the NLF in Vietnam. These are the models for the PLO

The leaders of Israel, anxious in their passion for peace after one hundred years of war, moved quickly to cede territory and to provide training, arms and cooperation with Arafat’s military forces, while Arafat was arming and training the Hamas.

Yet the tragic mistake was in the speed of the Oslo process.

The late General Aharon Yariv, who conceptualized the very concept of “territory for peace”, put it best: “The Oslo process misinterprets our concept. We never said territory BEFORE peace. We said territory FOR peace”.

The ideal peace deal was with Jordan. Israel made a deal with the Hashemite kingdom in 1970 and signed the deal with King Hussein in 1994. The Jewish state first wanted to see how Hussein would behave. And Israel tested him, during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the 1982 Lebanon invasion, the 1987-93 Intifada and the 1991 Gulf war. Only then did Israel sign a formal peace treaty with King Hussein.

That is not what happened with Arafat, the PLO and the new Palestine Authority. They see the Oslo process as a stage of war with the state of Israel, and they view the ceding of territory as a stage of surrender. Those who support this Olso process should take “Tisha B’av” and its message to take stock of reality.

When Arafat says JIHAD, he means it.

The Bridge : An ecological and bio-ethics disaster

When a group of Australian athletes attempted to cross the hastily constructed bridge erected over the Yarkon river, tragedy struck. The bridge collapsed, sending tens of young people plunging into the contaminated waters of the Yarkon River. Instead of competing at what many have called the Jewish Olympics (the international athletic competition called the HaMaccabiah Games) some of these Australians found themselves fighting for their lives in Israeli hospital intensive care centres. Apart from the expected trauma of a bridge collapse many were suffering complications suffered from inadvertently swallowing the poisonous waters of the Yarkon. Police rescue workers who waded into the sewage filled waters to rescue the athletes also were hospitalised, suffering from exposure to the high levels of poisonous substances used to coat the waters against the mosquitoes.

Dr. Eli Richter, Head of Environmental Medicine for Hebrew University, told Hebcom, “The medical problems of the victims were seriously complicated by the toxic substances in the waters of the Yarkon. Swallowing the waters and absorbtion through the skin negatively effected the victoms’ vital organs and pulmonary system.” Dr. Richter went on to say that toxic waste substances in the Yarkon seems to be a “never ending story.”

Israeli authorities suspect that faulty bridge construction caused the collapse. The chief Rabbi of Israel, Rabbi Israel Lau, stated that this tragedy is an indictment of Israeli indifference to human life in general. “We don’t pay enough respect to the value of human life, if we can do something as idiotic as this, which cost human lives.” He went on to connect what happened to the high level of traffic and industrial fatalities that occur in Israel yearly. He also implied that this disregard for the rights and safety of our fellow citizens is the real cause of the problem, ” It must shock us out of our apathy in the face of growing numbers of victims of work accidents and road accidents. What they have in common is a lack of proper respect for the value of the sanctity of life.”

Whatever the findings of the Israeli court of enquiry which has been appointed to determine if the bridge was safe, they will probably address themselves to the issue itself and not the cause. It is likely that the pollution levels of the Yarkon River will hardly be discussed at all. In this atmosphere of negligence in the building industry, in transportation, and in factory safety it comes as no surprise to find that the waters of the Yarkon are as deadly as the poorly constructed bridge which spaned it.

Rabbi Lau placed saw beyond the event and addressed the real cause; a lack of a basic bio-ethic awareness which could provide a safe human environment for the regions citizens as the century ends. Dr. Frank (Yeruham) Leavitt, of the Ben Gurion University Medical Ethics Center stated, “The Jewish people have lived so long in Exile, in lands not our own, that we never leared to love and respect the land. It will take years to build a culture with a bio-ethic oriented love for the environment.”

The problems of pollution started long before the emergence of the state of Israel. Josephus, the ancient historian, writes about the pollution of lake Kennerit during the Jewish Wars when the waters were tainted red by Jewish blood and that floating Jewish bodies made it difficult to manoeuvre a boat. Josephus gave us what was perhaps one of the first chronicles of a major man-made ecological disaster.

Today’s pollution is sewage, industrial waste, and insecticides; but, like the wages of war, the results of indifference to a safe human environment can be equally catastrophic for the area’s residents. The almost total disregard shown by the Israelis for their environment is now being mirrored by the newly emerging Palestinian Authority who do not see human and environmental issues as being their number 1 priority. One of the major architects of the Oslo peace accords, M.K. Jossi Sarrid, who served under Rabin and Peres as the Minister of the Environment, apparently didn’t place the Yarkon Pollution problem very high on his list of priorities. His pre-occupation with the endless Oslo peace process obviously cut drastically into his environmental work load.

The by-pass roads, which were hastily cut through vineyards and natural drainage areas, were built in great haste by the labour government. They were built without the proper commissioning of an environmental impact study which would address the issues pertaining to agronomic needs in the arid Judea and Samaria semi-desert region. The price of these roads may ultimately be higher than M.K. Sarid, the former Minister of the Environment, could have possibly envisioned.

The present Minister, Raful (Rafiel Eitan, former IDF Commanding General), evidently is continuing his predecessors’ level of Environmental Activism. Reports indicate that very high levels of pesticides were pumped into the Yarkon only three days before the tragedy. There is no indication that the possibility of children or animals inadvertently drinking these poisoned waters were taken into account by any responsible environmental protection agency or citizens’ group. It is probable that none were even informed that the pesticides were being used in such an un-regulated land obviously irresponsible manner.

The issues of water pollution in general, and of the problems of the Yarkon in particular, were aired many times on Israeli Television and Radio over the past twenty years.

In a country whose pre-occupation has shifted from survival to becoming a “first world” nation, the issues of the environment have had little impact on the average Israeli. It is to be hoped that this tragedy will bring the struggle for environmental and human bio-ethics to the attention of the area’s lawmakers.

Unfortunately, another round of peace talks may push what happened into the limbo of “yesterday’s news”. This warning to both Israeli and Palestinian alike, could go unheeded… and if so, the price of peace will be a peace without joy.

Same Policy Same Results

The Prime Minister today told Arafat – in a media oriented demonstration of supposed strength – after scores of innocents were killed and wounded – that he must bring a connection between what he says and what he does. Look who is talking.

In the past months there were several failed attempted attacks. Some were thwarted, some discovered in time, but the Israeli government was not alarmed by the attacks which almost occurred.

Since Arafat signed the Oslo Agreement in September ’95, he has violated its every section: He incites to terror, helps Hamas and Islamic Jihad continue their attacks (as long as they take place outside the territory of the Palestinian Authority) and at the very same time with unbelievable gall blames the GSS [General Security Service] and IDF [Israel Defense Forces] with carrying out the attacks against Israel.

The Labor leadership did not have the will to admit their historic mistake. Instead of this they covered for the PLO, in the baseless hope that this will cause it to change.

Peres even changed the failure to an ideology: “The trick is not to denigrate the PLO”, he tended to claim (as if insisting on our survival was a denigration of the PLO), “the trick is to make them a partner.”

Peres didn’t change Arafat into a partner, but the government lost as a result of the February-March ’96 attacks.

The Likud promised a total revision of this policy, but followed exactly the same path. Netanyahu covered for the PLO in every possible way. He even forbade his aides from publicizing the violations of the agreement by the PLO for many months. He talked about “reciprocity” and did the opposite. He signed the Hebron Agreement without the Palestinian Charter being amended, without Arafat stopping the incitement to jihad and without the extradition of a single terrorist murderer.

It is not only that the PLO didn’t take measures agaisnt the Hamas and Islamic Jihad, he released 120 of the most dangerous terrorists and didn’t honor Israeli and American requests that he arrest them again. And the Israeli government remained silent.

When PLO soldiers murdered 16 IDF soldiers in September ’96 Netanyahu and Mordechai forgave the blood of their soldiers and the PM called Arafat in Washington his “friend and partner.” The entire security system knows that the Palestinian Authority smuggles automatic weapons, but the government remains silent.

Information about the “laboratory” in Beit Sahour, where armed bombs were discovered, was given to the PLO months ago, but they didn’t do anything. And the government remained silent. And recently, only days ago, it became clear that the commander of the Palestinian Police, an Arafat loyalist, personally prepared a murder squad of Palestinian police, with a stolen car and weapons. They carried out one attack and were caught on the second. But the Israeli government protested with a weak voice and went silent. And while PLO officials deny responsibility and the charges, our Foreign Minister promises that the PLO will “conclude the investigation.”

The Prime Minister, instead of taking actions against the PLO, took pride only yesterday that he, unlike the Labor government, succeeded in stopping the terror. But he who calls Arafat a partner also when he acts as an enemy, has coming to him what happened to the Labor government. The same policy yields the same results.

Yigal Carmon served as the advisor on counterterrorism in the office of the Israel Prime Minister, 1988-1993

This article orginally appeared in the Israeli daily newspaper, Yediot Aharonot, on July 31, 1997 and was translated by Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)