Arafat Negotiates with Hamas

Will Have to Compromise With Hamas
Yedioth Ahronoth (p. B9) by Roni Shaked — Gaza, unlike the West Bank, is a powder-keg for Arafat too. Hamas has been flourishing, especially in the past few months, thanks to the socio-economic distress there, and has begun to pose a threat to Arafat. The activities of welfare organizations and the help of Islamic charity funds has made them an alternative to the PA. Thus, for example, Hamas summer camps –an entire month with two meals a day, lessons in English, computers, and weapons training, along with tradition and religion — cost only ten shekels in Gaza. Gaza is not homogenous. Despite the cooperation between the various organizations since the beginning of the Intifada, there are still many pockets, like Rafah, where Arafat has no control. The opposition organizations feel stronger there, with wider public support, and do not always fulfill agreements and understandings. After the Dolphinarium attack, Arafat held many meetings with Hamas and managed to convince them to coordinate their military actions with him. But in the past three weeks, Hamas, along with operatives of the new ‘Popular Resistance’ organization, has started firing mortars from Gaza into Israeli territory.

The PA reaction: Ghazi Jabali and soldiers from Moussa Arafat’s (the Rais’s cousin) Military Intelligence erected roadblocks in order to arrest the operatives of Hamas and the Popular Resistance. The result: gun battles at one of the roadblocks and the wounding of three members of the Popular Resistance. The atmosphere began heating up. On Monday there were marches and a protest in Gaza against Arafat’s security coordination with Israel. Protesters marched on the Burij police station and tried to take it over. Palestinian police officers succeeded in repelling them. The protesters changed direction, marched to the house of Moussa Arafat, fired at his car and his house, and engaged in gun battles with his bodyguards and reinforcements from the PA security organizations. Only after midnight, when the security organizations cut off the flow of electricity to Gaza, did the shooting stop.

Arafat, who was in the Persian Gulf at the time, received reports of the loss of control and immediately returned to Gaza to deal with the problem. This incident can indeed teach us much about the fragility of the internal stability of Gaza. Arafat can use his armed forces against Hamas, but his problem is that today most of the public supports Hamas and its policy of terror attacks. An opinion poll conducted this week in the territories revealed that 95% of the population of Gaza supports military actions against settlers and soldiers in the territories, and 65% supports terror actions inside Israel.

Therefore, Arafat has no choice but to resolve his conflict with Hamas. He must compromise in order to preserve national unity and avoid an internal crisis. And compromise with Hamas has clear significance: a green light for escalating the struggle against Israel.

This article ran in Yediot Aharonot, July 27th, 2001

Arafat’s New Army

On Tuesday, a few hours after Yuri Gushtzin was murdered and his body dumped near the slaughterhouse in Ramallah, the “el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades,” the military arm of Fatah, took responsibility for the murder.

The announcement was no different from dozens of press releases published in recent months with the signature of the organization, taking responsibility for shooting attacks, bombs, mortar fire and other murderous actions. Since the beginning of the Intifada the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades have played a vital role in leading the armed struggle against Israel. On the West Bank, in the Gaza Strip and inside the Green Line, some 6,000 terror attacks were carried out in this period, the decisive majority of them by the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades.

The name of the commander of the organization, which has established itself as the central military wing of the Fatah movement, is Haj Abu Ahmad. Israel’s intelligence arms have no picture of Haj Abu Ahmad, nor do they have any other identifying details. There are those who say that he is hiding in Nablus, while others say that he is abroad, pulling the strings of terror from there. Hussam Khadr, one of the leaders of the Tanzim in the Balata refugee camp, says that Abu Ahmad is nothing more than an invention of Israeli Intelligence.

The mystery that surrounds the identity of the commander Abu Ahmad, reveals much about the organization’s operational methods. Maximum secrecy, compartmentalization of underground cells, operations in small groups, cruel acts of terror, and the most significant point: unconditional and unquestioning loyalty to Yasser Arafat. For them, he is the source of authority for carrying out acts of terror.

For Arafat, the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades are a central tool in controlling the height of the flames of the Intifada. They don’t need to receive an explicit directive from him in order to decrease or escalate the level of terror attacks. They know how to translate the Rais’s body language, his expressions, his tone and the meaning of his words, into the rhythm of bursts of Kalachnikov fire.

Dahlan and Tirawi Sign Up

A few days after the outbreak of the Intifada, when developments already pointed at long-term fighting, Arafat needed an extra-governmental military wing not identified with the Palestinian Authority institution, which would be loyal to his policies, obey his orders, receive wide support on the Palestinian street and, most importantly, would be strong enough to fight against the settlers and IDF soldiers. The goal of the establishment of this organization was to consolidate all of the Fatah fighters under the new framework in order to improve the fighting capability of the Palestinians in the armed struggle against Israel.

The military core group of Fatah, the movement headed by Arafat, answered all of these criteria. The process of building the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades took several months. In an attempt to give the new body a measure of operational momentum, and thus also turn up the level of the Intifada a few notches, Arafat allowed his security organizations — Mohammed Dahlan, commander of the Palestinian GSS in Gaza, and Tawfiq Tirawi, commander of General Intelligence in the West Bank — to join the fighting under the umbrella of the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades.

The organization was established in stages, not in one fell swoop. The first shot was fired in Nablus, on October 12, 2000, during a military parade attended by several hundred Fatah members armed with a wide range of weapons: pistols, rifles, sub-machine guns, and hand grenades. In a ceremony held at the end of the parade, the establishment of the “armed militias” was announced. Three or four days later, announcements were already being released, signed by the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades. After Nablus came Ramallah, Gaza, Khan Yunis, Hebron, Bethlehem and other cities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Fighting cells were also established in towns under Israeli security control. The process of establishing a firm base for the organization took several months. Today, the organization already includes most of Fatah’s fighting activists.

The Language of the Rifle

In September of 1993, after the historic handshake between Arafat and Rabin on the White House lawn in Washington, Fatah announced a halt to its armed actions against Israel. Contrary to Israeli expectations, Arafat did not turn Fatah into a political party, instead building the movement as a popular organization with military characteristics in order to provide him with a lever to bring out the masses for confrontations with Israel, and also to use in armed struggle when the time came. So it was, for example, during the Tunnel Riots of September 1996, the Nakba Day riots of May 2000 and, of course, in the el-Aksa Intifada.

In contradiction to the agreements, which required Arafat to confiscate illegal weapons, he did not disarm Fatah. On the contrary, he provided it with weapons and ammunition from PA warehouses, and PA officers trained cadres of fighters from among Fatah youth.

Military power was kept decentralized, in separate groups on a local level, mainly in the refugee camps. Arafat did not fight against them, and forgave them when they attacked the PA or when they acted like street hoodlums.

Immediately after the establishment of the PA, many groups of veteran Fatah fighters were posted to the intelligence organizations commanded by Rajoub, Dahlan, or Tirawi, but their loyalty was and still is to the mother movement, Fatah.

When the Intifada broke out, it was easy to establish the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades on this base. And since the outbreak of fighting, Fatah has renewed, widened and broadened the base of its military wing. The call was easily answered: these are fighters who wanted to show their abilities and military power, fighters who are loyal to Fatah ideology, and who believe that the peace process has failed. [… ]

A week ago the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades released a pamphlet detailing the ideology that guides them: “The ten hungry years of the peace process proved that the Zionist occupation that disturbs the heart of the Palestinian homeland understands nothing but the language of rifles and fire and the language of revolution and the bullets of the revolutionary fighters. Jerusalem is Arab and Muslim land and not one grain of its soil can be given up. The return of the refugees to their homes is the heart of the problem and its foundation, and any concession on their rights is considered treachery. Unity is the main gate to the liberation of Palestine.” [… ]

According to Israeli assessments, the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades include several hundred active fighters; of those only a few dozen are in the operational cells which are carrying out the shooting attacks and planting bombs. The upkeep of such units requires a large amount of money for salaries, vehicles, the purchase of weapons and ammunition, and operational costs such as apartment rentals. The organization is believed to be funded by the Palestinian Authority in the framework of the budget allocated to Fatah.

The military wing of Fatah is at the height of a process of growth and stabilization. This is an organized system that coordinates actions between various sectors and transfers weapons from place to place. Thus, for example, on July 2nd, terrorists of the el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades carried out five attacks in various parts of the West Bank at almost the same time, and the organization’s headquarters took responsibility for the attacks in one press release. The attacks were as follows: the murder of Yair Har-Sinai at the settlement of Susya in the southern Hebron Hills, the murder of Rabbi Aharon Abidayan in Baka el-Sharkiya, shooting at an IDF position at the settlement of Beit El, the wounding of a settler at the settlement of Bracha near Nablus, and the ambush of an IDF force in the southern part of the village of Hawra near Nablus.

The el-Aksa Martyrs Brigades are also the base of a political force which is growing in importance and developing its own agenda. The Brigades receive wide support in the Palestinian public, almost a consensus. They represent those who led the Oslo process and now oppose it, like the vast majority of the Palestinian population. Whoever is crowned commander of the organization will have a strong power base for future political action.

This article ran in Yediot Aharonot, July 27th, 2001

Joint Statement of Israeli Peace Now and PLO

NO TO BLOODSHED, NO TO OCCUPATION
YES TO NEGOTIATIONS, YES TO PEACE

We, the undersigned Israelis and Palestinians, are meeting in the most difficult of circumstances for both our peoples. We come together to call for an end to bloodshed, an end to occupation, an urgent return to negotiations and the realization of peace between our peoples. We refuse to comply with the ongoing deterioration in our situation, with the growing list of victims, the suffering and the real possibility that we may all be drowned in a sea of mutual hostility.

We hereby raise our voices and implore all people of goodwill to return to sanity, to re-discover compassion, humanity, and critical judgment and to reject the unbearable ease of the descent into fear, hatred, and calls for revenge.

In spite of everything we still believe in the humanity of the other side, that we have a partner for peace and that a negotiated solution to the conflict between our peoples is possible. Mistakes have been made on all sides, the trading of accusations and pointing of fingers is not a policy and is no substitute for serious engagement.

The impression that exists in both communities that ‘time is on our side’ is illusory. The passage of time benefits only those who do not believe in peace. The longer we wait, the more innocent blood will be spilt, the greater will be the suffering and hope will be further eroded. We must move urgently to re-build our partnership, to end the de-humanization of the other, and to revive the option of a just peace that holds out promise for our respective futures.

The way forward lies in international legitimacy and the implementation of UNSCR 242 and 338 leading to a 2-State solution based on the 1967 borders, Israel and Palestine living side-by-side, with their respective capitals in Jerusalem. Solutions can be found to all outstanding issues that should be fair and just to both sides and should not undermine the sovereignty of the Palestinian and Israeli states as determined by their respective citizens, and embodying the aspirations to statehood of both peoples, Jewish and Palestinian. This solution should build on the progress made between November 1999 and January 2001.

The immediate need is for the full and accurate implementation of the Recommendations of the Mitchell Committee, including: the cessation of violence, a total freeze on settlement activity, the implementation of outstanding agreements and a return to negotiations. This process needs to be monitored by an objective third party.

We see it as our duty to work together and each of us in their own communities, to put a halt to the deterioration in our relations, to rebuild trust, belief and the hope for peace.

Palestinian signatories: Yasser Abed Rabbo, Minister of Culture and Information; Hisham Abdul-Razek, Minister of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs; Nabil Amr, Minister of Parliamentary Affairs; Dr. Hanan Ashrawi, PLC Member, Secretary-General of the Palestinian Initiative for Global Dialogue and Democracy ; Hakam Balawi, PLC Member; Dr. Sari Nuseibeh, President, Al-Quds University; Dr. Gabi Baramki, Bir Zeit University; Hafez al-Barghouti, Editor, al-Hayat al-Jadida Daily; Dr. Nazmi al-Ju’beh, Director-General, Riwaq; Dr. Salim Tamari, Director, Institute for Jerusalem Studies; Suleiman Mansour, Director, Al-Wasiti Art Center; Dr. Mahadi Abdul-Hadi, director PASSIA; George Ibrahim, Director, Al-Qasaba Theater; Sufian Abu-Zaideh, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Civil Affairs; Jamal Zaqout, Director-General, Ministry of Civil Affairs; Sama’an Khoury, Director-General, Palestine Media Center; Dr. Samir Abdallah, Director, Pal-Trade; Samir Hulieleh, Manager, Nassar Investment Co.; As’ad al-As’ad, Writer; Abdul-Rahman Awad, Writer; Samir Rantisi, Media Advisor to the Minister of Culture and Information; Nisreen Haj-Ahmad, Lawyer; Rami Shehaded, Lawyer; Ghaith Al-Omari, Lawyer

Israeli signatories: Dr. Janet Aviad, Peace Now; Chaim Oron, former Minister, Meretz; Prof. Arie Arnon, Peace Now; Yossi Beilin, former Minister, Labor; Prof. Menachem Brienker, Hebrew University; Prof. Galia Golan, Peace Now; David Grossman, author; Dr. Yossi Dahan; Prof. Moshe Halberthal, Hebrew University; AB Yehoshua, author; Prof. Yirmyahu Yovel, Hebrew University; Prof. Dan Yaacobson, Tel Aviv University; Prof. Ephi Ya’ar, Steinmatz Institute for Peace; Daniel Levy, ECF; Ronit Matalon, author; Prof. Avishai Margalit, Hebrew University; S. Yizhar, author; Prof. Sami Samuha, Haifa University; Amos Oz, author; Ron Pundak, ECF, Peres Peace Center; Yair Tsaban, Former Minister, Meretz; Dr. Nissim Calderon; Prof. Ephraim Kleinman; Dr. Menachem Klein, Bar Ilan University; Dr. Aviad Kleinberg; Adv. Tzali Reshef, Peace Now; Prof. Yuli Tamir, former Minister, Labor

What is Happening on the Temple Mount – Tisha B’av 5761?

Members of the “Committee to Prevent Archaeological Destruction on the Temple Mount” include A. B. Yehoshua, Amos Oz and S. Yizhar, former justices Meir Shamgar and Miriam Ben-Porat, as well as many archaeologists.

The committee constantly passes on reports about a continuing destruction of antiquities on the mount. Some of the reports have been confirmed, police have denied others, and some that police denied in the past have been proved true subsequently.

The politicians – neither in the days of the Barak administration nor in the current one, have taken no steps to halt waqf construction activity. Most of this is done without permission and all of it without archaeological supervision.

Antiquities Authority archaeologists were first kept away from the Temple Mount in September 1996 after the opening of the northern entrance to the Hasmonean Tunnel by the Netanyahu government. For a few months in 1999,the Barak government managed to get some supervision by the Antiquities Authority back onto the mount, but that was halted in October 2000 when the Intifada broke out.

Since last Rosh Hashana, the Temple Mount has been closed to both Antiquities Authority people and indeed to anyone who is not Muslim, except for the Israeli police, which continue to patrol the area at various levels of intensity. It is not clear if the police are conducting ongoing systematic surveillance of the underground construction work by the waqf and the Israeli Islamic Movement. The only significant difference that came following the election of the Sharon government is that the decision to prevent Muslims from bringing additional construction material onto the mount is generally being enforced.

The opposition to Israel’s policy of ignoring what is happening on the mount with regard to the destruction of antiquities comes from both within the establishment and from outside it. Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein, who in the past called the activity on the mount “a kick at the history of the Jewish people,” sent some vociferous letters to former prime minister Ehud Barak and has made his views known to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

The Antiquities Authority occasionally protests about the construction work. The former director general of the authority, Amir Drori, called the work in the Solomon’s Stables area “an archaeological crime.” But the positions taken by both Rubinstein and Drori have been rejected time and again.

The main worry at the political level is of a confrontation between the security forces and thousands of Muslims, which would spread to far beyond the Temple Mount – to Jerusalem, the territories and possibly to other Arab states. But there are those in both the police and Shin Bet who are skeptical of those concerns.

Various petitions to the High Court, both by the public committee and the various veteran Temple Mount organizations, have been rejected. The court has made clear that the issue is the responsibility of the politicians and it has no intention of intervening. The court usually refrains from getting into the details of the controversy between the police and the Temple Mount organizations.

For the past two years no journalists have been allowed on the mount except for those whom the waqf approves as sympathetic to the waqf’s cause. Visits to the mount are nearly impossible and photography is strictly forbidden.

This article ran in HaAretz on July 29, 2001

Will US Military Observers Return in Body Bags?

During US Secretary of State Colin Powell’s June 28th visit to Israel, Powell announced that the US would dispatch military “observers” to oversee implementation of US-brokered accords between Israel and the PLO. On July 27th, two days before the Tisha B’Av fast that marks the conquest and destruction of Jerusalem, the new US ambassador, a Jewish American,. Daniel Kurtzer, was reported to be in the final stages of preparing the final draft for the deployment of US troops in Israel.

These US troops would patrol Jerusalem and Judea, also known as the west bank, all defined by the US as “occupied” by Israel.

Since US state department policy makers have determined that Jews have no sovereignty in Jerusalem or the west bank, US observers would be expected to show little respect for the concerns of Jews who live in these areas.

All this follows confirmed reports that the US has been training the security forces of the PLO, even at a time when the PLO has declared war on the state and people of Israel, soldiers and civilians alike, especially in Jerusalem and Judea.

US troops, even in the form of “observers”, would be an invading army, following in the footsteps of the British, who were awarded a mandate over Palestine by the League of Nations in the 1920’s and expelled by the new Jewish state during its War of Independence. 1945-1948

To the surprise of many, the US does recognize any part of Jerusalem as part of Israel, west or east. Any birth certificate, passport or legal document issued by the US Consul in Jerusalem reads “Jerusalem”, with no designated nation state mentioned.

The US state department maintains the policy that it adopted in 1948, which is that the Jerusalem -Bethlehem region must become an international city, when it was slated to be administered by the US under a UN trusteeship

Indeed, UN negotiator Count Folk Bernadotte was shot to death by Israeli Jews in September, 1948 in Jerusalem, he was in the final stages of negotiating that American plan to transfer ‘”greater Jerusalem” to a US trusteeship. The US had already selected a Mayor for Jerusalem, a Quaker prelate from Philadelphia.

The Swedes have never forgiven Israelis for killing Bernadotte.

Luck would have it that Bernadotte was not a US diplomat.

The US never abandoned the plan that Bernadotte was negotiating for Jerusalem when he was killed.

While Jewish religious law forbids Jews to raise a hand against an Israeli soldier, Jewish religious law would not forbid a Jew from resisting a soldier from a foreign army in Jerusalem or Judea.

Jewish Americans, amongst others, would be in for quite a shock if US troops fall at the hands of Israeli resistance fighters.

It is not too late for US public opinion to reconsider the idea of dispatching US military “observers” to Israel.

40 Palestinian Authority Organizations Attack Bi’tselem

40 Palestinian Authority Organizations condemn “B’Tselem biased position towards Settlements & Settlers in the Occupied Territories”: July 3rd, 2001

On 21.6.01 B’Tselem issued a press release entitled ‘B’Tselem condemns Palestinian statements supporting attacks against settlers’. As Palestinian organizations, we believe that the timing of this release, which coincides with an intense and misleading media campaign in support of illegal settlement by the Israeli Occupation Authorities, is inopportune and only serves to give the impression that settlers are “civilians” on par with the indigenous Palestinian population. Moreover, the release came as a response to the settlers’ appeals for Israeli human rights organizations to take a position against the killing of “innocent” and “civilian” settlers, and to issue a statement condemning the positions and statements of the PNA officials regarding attacks on settlers.

Instead of rushing behind the security establishment and responding to the settlers’ pressure, we believe that B’Tselem should focus its attention on the ongoing gross human rights violations that are occurring in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and should remain independent by maintaining an honest and unbiased position based on international humanitarian law and human rights principles.

A clear major problem with this release is the way in which it divides the issues of the illegality of settlements, settler violence, and settlers illegal status from the issue of violence against settlers, and how its wording plays with the legal provisions of international law. The press release effectively places the blame for current violence on Palestinians who are the victims of the settlements and settlers’ acts. The release does say that settlements are illegal, but qualifies this by stating that, “the settlers have no right to settle there permanently”. This in effect legitimized the settlers “temporary” presence in the Occupied Territories and does not pay attention to the relevant legal provisions. B’Tselem should explicitly declare that international law bans the occupied country from transferring its citizens to the occupied territory, and must state that the presence of settlers in the occupied territories is illegal, even for an interim period. Consequently, B’Tselem should take responsibility towards Israeli society by addressing it in brave and clear language that reveals the illegality of settlements and the agony they cause to the Palestinian people. Contrary to all legal conventions the press release also says that, “the demand to evacuate the settlements in the context of an Israeli-Palestinian agreement is legitimate.” No qualifications should be placed upon the right to demand the removal of settlements. They are blatantly illegal under international law and B’Tselem should demand that the Israeli Occupation Authorities dismantle the settlements and return the settlers to Israel even without an agreement. Until this is done, all settlers should be held liable for their crimes, which include the act of settlement, committed in the occupied territories, and must bear the consequences of their actions, which include Palestinian acts taken in self defense against their illegal aggression.

If B’Tselem had lain down the various “legal” and “human rights” it would be clear that the relationship between the law and its provisions and the issue of settlers and settlements can not be divided. By leave all legal provisions out of the content its release and dividing the illegality of settlers’ actions from the consequences of these actions, B’Tselem indicates two things. First, they indicate either a failure to understand or a disregard for the legal provisions that relate to settlement, and second, they seem to be attempting to turn around the relevant provisions by stripping them of their content disregarding their objectives. In this case, B’Tselem’s release in effect, “legalizes” the “illegal” settlements, and justifies the Interim presence of settlers in the Occupied Territories, in effect giving settlers an open door to continue to commit crimes and undertake illegal acts against Palestinians.

In our attempt to further explain our dismay over this release, and the political implications of the language used in the release, we will primarily depend on humanitarian law and international human rights standards to indicate the potential risks that are inherent in the B’Tselem release. The rules and the provisions of humanitarian international law are set forth through the following legal standards:

First Article 49 (6) of the 4th Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in time of War states that “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies”. Under this explicitly clear provision all steps that have been taken by the Israeli Occupation Authorities in relation to the transfer and settlement of its citizens to the Palestinian Occupied Territories are illegal. Actions taken in contravention of this Article have resulted in severe violations of the rights of the Palestinian residents of the Occupied Territories. These violations include, but are not limited to the confiscation of Palestinian natural resources, including land and water, for use by settlers. These actions are also in violation of International Law and the provisions of international humanitarian law, which prohibit the confiscation of property and resources for reasons other than security. Consequently, the presence of settlers in the occupied territories, and all forms of settlement are illegal.

Second: The Israeli Occupation Authorities have used all means within their power to illegally take possession of Palestinian owned lands, to build settlements, and to transfer settlers to these locations. The land acquired by Israel for the building of settlements was often confiscated after being declared “government property”, “absentee property”, or after being sealed for use as closed military zones. In most cases the Israeli government then built military posts on these lands, as with the so called “MAHAZ”, “MAHOLA B” and “Warrior Youth Pioneer”. These posts often later evolved into settlements. An example of this is the expropriation of the lands surrounding “Beit El” military post, following the Supreme Court decision in case No. 606/78. These lands were later turned into a large civil settlement, which swallowed much of the surrounding Palestinian territory. Additionally, settlements are considered an integral part of the “territorial defense” system, the Hagana Merhavat, in Hebrew, and often serve both military and civilian functions. Settlements, and therefore settlers cannot be viewed as truly “civilian”.

In view of the above, we the undersigned Palestinian organizations, condemn B’Tselem’s position that ignores the fact that all forms of settlement are illegal and qualify as war crimes. We also reiterate the Palestinians People’s right to resist the occupation and its consequences by all available legal means guaranteed by international customs and conventions.

Statement signed by:

  1. The Palestinian Hydrology Group
  2. The Union of Agricultural Work Committees
  3. The Loving Care Patient Society
  4. Rawat Al Zuhur Society
  5. Center for Citizen’s Rights
  6. Defence for Children International “DCI”/Palestine
  7. First Ramallah Group
  8. Popular Art Center
  9. Science and Cultural Center
  10. Young Women’s Christian Association (YWCA)
  11. The Educational Network
  12. Teacher Creativity Center (TCC)
  13. Tamar Institute for Community Education
  14. Dur Al-Salam Hospital
  15. Union Of Health Work Committee
  16. Ad Dammar Association for Human Rights
  17. The Palestinian Center for Peace and Democracy
  18. Al-Manhal Cultural Center
  19. Arab Thought Forum
  20. The Citizens Rights Center
  21. Besan Center for Research and Development
  22. The Development Center: “Ma’an”
  23. Muwaita: The Palestinian Institute for the Study of Democracy
  24. The General Committee for the Defence of the Land
  25. The Palestinian Counseling Center
  26. Democracy and Worker’s Rights Center
  27. The Palestinian Society for the Study of International Affairs
  28. The Palestinian Society for Consumer Protection
  29. The Palestinian Women’s Society for Development
  30. Women’s Affairs Center
  31. Al Huda Women’s Association
  32. Almajd Women’s Assn.
  33. Al Magazzi Cultural Center
  34. Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center
  35. Women’s Studie Centre
  36. Al-Hannan Association for Mother and Child
  37. The Arab Center for Agricultural Development
  38. The National Society for Rehabilitation
  39. The Union of Palestinian Medical Relief Committees
  40. The Palestinian Center for Microsprojects Development.

Text of Knesset Members Letter to EU Complaining of Interference With Israeli Internal Affairs

The Knesset
Jerusalem, 6 Tamuz, 5761
27 June, 2001

To: PM Guy Verhofstadt
President of the European Union

It has been made public in Israel that the European Union has been providing financial support to Israeli groups/institutions/organizations that are all partisan and political in nature. This is a blatant attempt at interfering in the internal affairs of the State of Israel. Attached is a list of these organizations.

The European Union represents democratic states. Its democratic character is an inherent part of its nature. As such, it should refrain from any attempt to influence the internal democratic process of another democratic state.

We, the undersigned members of the Israeli Knesset, would like to express our shock and outrage at this attempt at achieving political purposes by extending financial support to Israeli citizens and groups.

As the elected representatives of a democratic, free society, we strongly oppose such attempts at influencing our state’s domestic politics and the policies of our government, by financial means.

In light of the gravity of these activities, we expect the European Union to take the following measures:

Discontinue the financial support to Israeli non-profit organizations that are politically oriented;

Publicly disclose the list of Israeli groups/institutions/organizations which receive financial support from the European Union. The citizens of Israel will thus be informed as to those organizations that are influenced by, or are serving foreign interests, and EU member-states will be apprised of the objectives of the of the expenditure of their money.

Considering that the European Union is a democratic institution, that represents free and democratic nations, we are certain that it will act out of similar respect for the sovereignty and freedom of the State of Israel.

Respectfully yours,

No./Title/Name/Faction in the Knesset

  1. Minister Nissim Dahan-Shas
  2. Minister Uzi Landau-Likud
  3. Minister Avigdor Liberman-National Union-Israel Beiteinu
  4. Minister Limor Livnat-Likud
  5. Minister Reuven Rivlin-Likud
  6. Minister Natan Sharansky-Israel Ba’aliya
  7. Minister Eliyahu Suissa-Shas
  8. Minister Rehavam Ze’evy-National Union-Israel Beiteinu
  9. Deputy Minister David Azoulay-Shas
  10. Deputy Minister Naomi Blumentha-lLikud
  11. Deputy Minister Yitzhak Cohen-Shas
  12. Deputy Minister Yuli-Yoel Edelstein-Israel Ba’aliya
  13. Deputy Minister Gideon Ezra-Likud
  14. Deputy Minister Meshulam Nahari-Shas
  15. Deputy Minister Abraham Ravitz-Yahadut Hatora
  16. Deputy Minister Yuri Shtern-National Union-Israel Beiteinu
  17. Deputy Minister Yitzhak Vaknin-Shas
  18. MK Moshe Arens-Likud
  19. MK Yigal Bibi-National Religious Party
  20. MK Ze’ev Boim-Likud
  21. MK Amnon Cohen-Shas
  22. MK Eliezer Cohen-National Union-Israel Beiteinu
  23. MK Haim Druckman-National Religious Party
  24. MK Michael Eitan-Likud
  25. MK Binyamin Elon-National Union-Israel Beiteinu
  26. MK Moshe Gafni-Yahadut Hatora
  27. MK Yitzhak Gagula-Shas
  28. MK Arieh Gamliel-Shas
  29. MK Shmuel Halpert-Yahadut Hatora
  30. MK Zvi Hendel-National Union-Israel Beiteinu
  31. MK Abraham Hirchzon-Likud
  32. MK Ofer Hugi-Shas
  33. MK Ayoob Kara-Likud
  34. MK Haim Katz-Am Echad
  35. MK Michael Kleiner-Herut
  36. MK Yechiel Lasry-Merkaz
  37. MK Maxim Levy-Gesher
  38. MK Yakov Litzman-Yahadut Hatora
  39. MK David Magen-Merkaz
  40. MK Rahamim Melloul-Shas
  41. MK Mordechai Mishani-Gesher
  42. MK Michael Nudelman-National Union-Israel Beiteinu
  43. MK Zevulun Orlev-National Religious Party
  44. MK Yair Peretz-Shas
  45. MK Meir Porush-Yahadut Hatora
  46. MK Ganady Riger-Israel Ba’aliya
  47. MK Itchak Saban-Shas
  48. MK Yuval Shteinitz-Likud
  49. MK Marina Solodkin-Israel Ba’aliya
  50. MK David Tal-Shas
  51. MK Shaul Yahalom-National Religious Party
  52. MK Nissim Zeev-Shas

Iranian airlift sends more arms to Hezbollah – via Damascus Int’l Airport

Iran has transfered hundreds of tons of weapons, ammunition and other materials to the Hezbollah through Syria in recent days, according to reliable sources. The deliveries were airlifted in by giant Antonov 124 transport planes that landed at Damascus International Airport.

The equipment was then transported to the storage facilities of the Revolutionary Guards in Lebanon, and to the Hezbollah. Security experts estimate that some of the equipment will be smuggled to Palestinian organizations in the territories.

Iranian assistance via Hezbollah to Palestinian organizations that attack Israel, is increasing. In addition to extensive efforts to smuggle equipment, weapons and ammunition, the Hezbollah has also started training Palestinian guerrillas in Hezbollah bases in the Beka’a Valley in Lebanon.

Intelligence also shows that the Hezbollah had direct links with Palestinian cells operating in the territories – in addition to the ties it cultivates with Fatah. One center for such links is the city of Nablus in the West Bank.

It is thought that the guerrilla infrastructure the Hezbollah is setting up in the territories is intended to be deployed to disrupt any future cease-fire agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

The large airlift is believed to be a response to the urgent need of the Revolutionary Guards and the Hezbollah for additional equipment in Lebanon.

The previous route used by the Iranians to airlift equipment to the Hezbollah in Lebanon crossed over Turkey. However, following a request by Ankara that Iranian flights over Turkey en route to Damascus declare the nature of their cargo, the flights were stopped. The current airlift is believed to have crossed over Saudi Arabian and Jordanian airspace on its way to Syria.

The pace of weapons transfers to the Hezbollah in Lebanon was shown in the past to be dictated by security developments in Lebanon. Following the withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces from south Lebanon in May last year, Iran sought to replenish the military stores of the Hezbollah and the Revolutionary Guards stationed in Lebanon

According to Israeli estimates, the Hezbollah has some 7,000 Katyusha rockets.

This essay appeared in Ha’aretz on July 17, 2001

Official Palestine News Agency terms Orient House “the Palestine Liberation Organization’s headquarters in East Jerusalem”

Jerusalem – July 17 Wafa (Official Palestine News Agency) – Dozens of Israeli occupation police force surrounded “The Orient House”, the Palestine Liberation Organization’s headquarters in East Jerusalem and banned a memorial ceremony for the Martyr Faisal Husseini was to have been held.

Husseini, who held the portfolio for Jerusalem in the PLO, died in Kuwait of a heart attack about 40 days ago.

The Orient House issued a statement calling the occupation banning order “a provocation and a slander against the legacy of peace and tolerance represented by the late Faisal al-Husseini”. It said it would defy the ban and go ahead with the memorial ceremony.

The late Husseni, was the man who symbolized the Palestinian hopes of making the holy city the capital of a future state of Palestine, was buried at Haram al-Sharif.

This release was issued on July 17, 2001.

Israel Internal Security Chief Avi Dichter: ‘Israeli Arab demos prompted Intifada’

Israeli Arab demonstrations after then-opposition leader Ariel Sharon went to the Temple Mount last September prompted the Palestinian Intifada, Shin Bet Chief Avi Dichter told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee yesterday.

In his semi-annual briefing to the MKs, the head of Israel’s secret service said that the deaths of Israeli Arab demonstrators and subsequent incitement by the leadership of Israeli Arabs brought about the outbreak of the hostilities in the territories.

He said that there is a “worrisome” separatist movement growing in the Israeli Arab community, for both religious and nationalist reasons. According to Dichter, MK Azmi Bishara is one of the key leaders of the nationalist movement.

He said that most Israeli Arabs regard the events of last September and October as a mistake, but there is a growing emotional identification – within legal means – with the Palestinian Authority among Israeli Arabs.

Dichter gave the MKs a tour d’horizon of the state of the Palestinian organizations involved in hostilities against Israel. He said that Tawfik Tirawi’s General Intelligence force “co-opted” the Tanzim and Force 17, which were responsible for dozens of terror attacks against targets in the West Bank and inside Israel proper. But since last month’s cease-fire arrangements brokered by CIA chief George Tenet, Tirawi’s groups have ceased their terror activities, Dichter said. Tirawi’s people have begun taking preventive action, except that they don’t put suspects in jail but rather in “hotel-like” conditions. Furthermore, he said, the Palestinians are not conducting interrogations or investigations, which means there’s a limited intelligence picture about planned terror attacks.

By April 2000, there were indications that trouble was already brewing, he said, when some rank and file members of Palestinian security organizations, such as Mohammed Dahlan’s Preventive Security force in Gaza, began conducting terrorist activity. Eventually, Dahlan began commanding those operations. But since the Tenet agreement, he said, Dahlan’s organizations has ceased involvement, except for a few individuals.

A similar phenomenon took place with regard to the Tanzim, Fatah-related youth movement, which Dichter said was under the complete command of Yasser Arafat. Two organizations that have not taken part in any of the terror activity against Israel have been Jibril Rajoub’s Preventive Security force in the West Bank and the National Security force.

Dichter surprised the committee by saying that he favored a fence between Israel and the West Bank, similar to the one between Israel and Gaza.

A Jewish terror cell, not an underground

A Jewish terror cell is already operating in the territories, Dichter told the MKs, but he refrained from referring to it as a Jewish underground similar to the 27-member conspiracy that existed in the early 1980s and was eventually arrested by the Shin Bet.

He said that the cell has committed three shooting attacks on Palestinians in the Ramallah and Halhoul areas. One Palestinian was killed and four others wounded, he said.

Up until a few months ago there was a large measure of self-restraint on the part of Jews in the territories, but there has been an upsurge of anti-Palestinian activity, mostly in the form of vandalism, he said. The violent line in the settlement movement is led by members of Kach and Kahane Hai, as well as others in the radical right.

Dichter said that he handed over to the police the investigation into the explosion in Kach activist Noam Federman’s car, after reaching the conclusion that there were no “strategic” arms involved. The weapons found in the car on Monday were mostly “the type of equipment reservists who don’t respect the law take home from the army,” including smoke grenades, stun grenades and flares. He said the explosion was probably the result of poor handling of the material.

Grim numbers

Dichter summed up the Intifada’s statistics for the MKs, telling them that since the outbreak of the Intifada 136 Jews have been killed and 1,308 wounded by attacks, while 531 Palestinians have died, with 68 of them under the age of 16. This article ran in HaAretz on July 18, 2001