Exiled Palestinian Arabs from Bethlehem Ran Two Year Reign of Terror

Bethlehem Residents of this biblical city are expressing relief at the exile to Cyprus last week of 13 hard-core Palestinian militants, who they said had imposed a two-year reign of terror that included rape, extortion and executions.

The 13 sent to Cyprus, as well as 26 others sent to the Gaza Strip, had taken shelter in the Church of the Nativity, triggering a 39-day siege that ended Friday.

Palestinians who live near the church described the group as a criminal gang that preyed especially on Palestinian Christians, demanding “protection money” from the main businesses, which make and sell religious artifacts.

According to Bethlehem residents, one of the group’s top leaders, Jihad Ja’ara, 29, traveled around town with an M-16 rifle, terrorizing the community.

“Finally the Christians can breathe freely,” said Helen, 50, a Christian mother of four. “We are so delighted that these criminals who have intimidated us for such a long time are now going away.”

Others feared new gunmen will capitalize on the group’s disappearance and the pullout of Israeli troops.

“Will new gangs come in?” asked Samer, 33, from the Christian suburb of Beit Jala in Bethlehem. “The gunmen will start taking revenge on the weak, desperate people.”

Residents also said that Mr. Ja’ara and another top leader, Ibrahim Abayat, took nine Muslims whom they suspected of collaborating with Israel into an apartment near Manger Square and fatally shot them.

The executions took place shortly before the April 2 gunbattle between Israeli troops and Palestinian fighters that sent more than 200 Palestinians fleeing into the church, where they remained for 39 days.

Abayat, in a phone interview from inside the church while the siege was under way, said he was personally responsible for the killings.

He said there was no need for a trial because “it was a well-known fact that these people were linked to Israel.”

Abayat and Mr. Ja’ara are now at a seaside hotel in Cyprus, waiting to be moved to an as-yet-unnamed European country, where many expect them to be set free.

The gang has said it is part of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a militia linked to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat that has claimed responsibility for several recent suicide bombings in Israel.

Zuhair Hamdan, founder of the Movement for Coexistence in Jerusalem, was sitting on a chair outside his corner shop near Bethlehem in November when an official Palestinian Authority car drew up with a squeal of brakes.

From the back window a gunman, who Mr. Hamdan says was a member of the gang, emptied 12 bullets from a M-16 rifle, hitting him five times in the abdomen, legs and neck.

Mr. Hamdan was so close to death in the hospital that he now jokes, “They took my body to the cemetery but the cemetery rejected me.”

Mr. Hamdan said seven members of the gang were involved. Five of the seven assailants have since died, at least one of them fatally shot by Israel during the recent church siege, he said.

“The remaining two gunmen are being kicked out of Bethlehem, but wherever they end up, someone will get to them and make them pay for all the awful things they’ve done,” he said.

The gang apparently used its ready access to guns and close ties with Mr. Arafat’s Palestinian security forces to extort money, run guns, smuggle drugs and even demand that young women separate from their husbands.

After one woman was reportedly raped by a gang member, the perpetrator was put in jail, but only briefly. His comrades reportedly forced the jailers to let him go.

The gang’s hostility toward Christians extended to a 17-year-old altar boy fatally shot during an Israeli incursion in October.

A small stone monument the family erected in Johnny Talgieh’s memory on the spot in Manger Square where he died was kicked and spat on by gang members, then toppled with ropes and cables and left smashed on the ground.

“They did not want to recognize that a Christian could be considered a [martyr],” said a family member, “even though having that statue there would have given the Palestinian cause a huge propaganda boost.

“They hate us Christians more than they love Palestine.”

Even during the recent siege, gang members who had not fled into the church continued to demand their regular 10 shekels (about $2) from each taxi driver going in and out of a parking lot close to the compound.

One who refused, saying he had no cash, was reportedly beaten up last month.

The gang apparently operated under the full protection of Mr. Arafat’s Fatah organization and Tanzim, its military wing.

During the 19-month uprising, they have often fired into the nearby Israeli suburb of Gilo from church grounds and the homes of Palestinian Christians in Beit Jala.

When Palestinian gunmen would show up at the door, Christian families often had no choice but to let their homes be used as sniper posts and face the consequences of Israeli retaliation.

Written by an Arab journalist under a pseudonym for the Washington Times on may 25, 2002

Campers Come Home to Roost: “Seeds For Peace” revisited

[“Seeds for Peace”, mentioned below, is directed by Mrs. Aaron Miller, whose husband, Aaron Miller, is one of the architects of the Oslo process… ]

Once again the camp, Seeds of Peace hits the news and who can argue with “peace?” Unfortunately the concept, more particularly the sponsoring organization, Seeds of Peace, has developed a glaring glitch. A Seeds of Peace graduate from Dearborn, Michigan, Huwaida Arraf was recently released from an Israeli jail. Ms. Arraf had bravely run into the Church of the Nazareth in order to aid the Palestinian Arab terrorists that escaped there to avoid Israeli arrest. She now lectures around the country on her harrowing experiences under Israeli arrest and the awful plight of her fellow Arabs.

There is also a cross-cultural part of the story that gives it some human interest. It turns out this Arab girl from Dearborn Michigan is marrying a Jewish boy from Brooklyn, New York named Adam Shapiro. They met in Jerusalem where they were both working for Seeds of Peace! Mr. Shapiro had been working for the camp for about four years and was the director of the project while she was a program coordinator.

Mr. Shapiro is now a hero in his own right among the Palestinian Arabs. He has an illustrious history. He took it upon himself to traverse an Israeli/Arab battlefield hidden in a Red Crescent Ambulance furnished to him by the PLO, in order that he might breakfast and show solidarity with his beleaguered hero, Yasser Arafat, and a coterie of his terrorist lieutenants in Arafat’s Israeli surrounded headquarters in Ramallah.

Other credits for Mr. Shapiro include that he is also the co-founder with Ms. Arraf of a PLO front organization called the International Solidarity Movement. The credentials of this organization were accepted by Yasser Arafat, himself, at a group meeting December 18, 2001. The movement has a web site in which they proclaim the following goals:

  • Raise awareness of the Palestinian struggle for freedom and an end to Israeli occupation.
  • Recognize the Palestinian right to resist Israeli violence and occupation via armed struggle.
  • Right of Return of Palestinian Refugees and the Palestinian capitol to be in Jerusalem.
  • Immediate compliance by Israel with international law, (as interpreted by the Arab” judiciary.”)
  • Expose Israel’s lack of respect for Palestinian human rights and human life.

All these goals right out of Yasser Arafat’s manifesto!

Unfortunately, this incident is not our first revelation relative to Seeds of Peace. Listed among the international camp sponsors are Saeb Erekat, long time senior advisor and Arab propagandist Terry Ahwal, also from Dearborn, Michigan. Included on the honorary committee sponsoring the camp are Congressmen David Bonior, John Conyers and John Dingell – all well recognized as members of the Arab Hall of Fame for voting most consistently against all measures favoring the State of Israel.

Nationwide fund raising events sponsored by the camp have had as their primary speakers former Ambassador to Egypt, Edward S. Walker Jr. who is now president of the Middle East Institute. Walker’s numerous writings and opinions can easily be found on the Internet. Currently they revolve around how Saudi Arabia is maligned by the American press and the Saudi government is truly a great friend of the United States. His position is also that if the United States would stop and had stopped their favoritism toward Israel, the World Trade Center disaster would likely never have occurred and the Arabs would now happily join the newest coalition against Saddam Hussein! Other speakers have included Martin Indyk past U.S. ambassador to Israel and the Middle East who was famous for consistently taking the Arab side in any dispute with Israel. Other speakers have been Abed Rabbo, Yasser Arafat’s Minister for Information and Culture and Yossi Beilin, known as Peres’ poodle and now a marginal member of his own Labor party and one of the authors of the now irrelevant and justly maligned Oslo Peace Accords.

With this formidable bunch of supporters, one can’t help but wonder what are Jews doing involved as monetary contributors and even worse, sending their kids to the camp? Are the kids to come out with the ideology of director Adam Shapiro and his program coordinator Arab bride? Do parents think the above cast of characters really has the well being of the State of Israel in mind? Do these Seeds of Peace supporters think of Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people and as a sanctuary for Jews fleeing from persecution once again rampant all over the world? What do they teach the kids in that camp or is it all just canoeing and camp songs? Perhaps those donating to the camp and the parents of the children involved should answer those questions themselves?

Mofaz: “Scope of Terror Attacks Due to Increase”

“We cannot go back to the situation that existed before seder night. If the security measures don’t work, we may have to carry out a deeper and broader operation,” said Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Shaul Mofaz yesterday.

Mofaz said that the scope of existing warnings has still not reached a level similar to that of before Operation Protective Wall, since the level of terrorism today is “five times less” compared to the situation that existed in Israel two months ago. However, he emphasized, the scope of attempted terror attacks is expected to increase, since the “nucleus that can restore the terrorist infrastructure [still exists], and we need to fight it as much as possible.” He said that there is now an accelerated process of rehabilitation of terrorist infrastructures in Bethlehem, Ramallah, Nablus, and Jenin, and that most of the IDF’s present operations are directed against it.

The IDF, Mofaz said, means to continue to operate in PA territory, mainly on the basis of intelligence information. “The operations are meant to prevent terror attacks and arrest terrorists, and we will act anywhere we deem appropriate.” At present, the operations are brief in duration, since longer operations do not obtain the desired results.

Yesterday, the IDF continued operating in PA territory, with infantry and Armored Corps operating in Tulkarm and Kalkilya. Last night, the IDF also planned to continue operating in several sectors at the same time.

Mofaz said that if there is an increase in the scope of terror attacks, the IDF might have to carry out a broader operation in the PA. However, at this stage there is no talk of a broad ground operation in the Gaza Strip, where “the IDF is taking a posture of aggressive defense, during which about 50 terrorists were hit and bombing attacks against communities and IDF outposts were stopped.” Mofaz said that at present there is no intention of calling up more reservists. That will be done “only if there is no other choice. A larger call-up will depend on the security situation.” [… ]

This article ran in Maariv on May 27th, 2002

The PA Condemnation Scam

Israeli television and radio reported Thursday morning that the Palestinian Authority had strongly condemned the terror attack on sidewalk mall in the Israeli city of Rishon Le-Tziyyon, killing two and wounding more than 40.

But in fact, the Palestinian Authority once again used a familiar combination of tactics to give the impression to the Western world that it had condemned the attack, while signaling a more mild form of disapproval to its citizens.

“The Leadership considers such actions harmful to the Palestinians and their cause, especially at a time when the Israelis are escalating their attacks and aggression, re-occupying our populated places and imposing curfews, isolating our cities, towns, villages and refugee camps, justifying their crimes with the alleged reason of fighting the terror that targets the Israeli civilians.”

That was the only part of the of the Palestinian “condemnation” of the Rishon terror attack that Voice of Palestine radio anchorman Khaled Al-Qassem read to his Palestinian radio audience.

“Six new martyrs in assassination by occupation forces,” declared anchorman Al-Qassem, describing all the Israeli actions as “jara’im”-crimes, in Arabic.

The attack in Rishon was not called a “crime” or “terror,” but only “harmful” during the radio report.

It was also not accidental that the news of the Rishon bombing, with the accompanying tepid rebuke about “harmful actions,” was offered as the seventh item in the morning news line-up.

The morning news was full of harsh Palestinian leadership condemnations, but they all concerned Israeli attacks on Palestinian terrorists and bomb factories in Nablus, which were described as “cowardly assassinations.”

“Israeli tanks assassinated three of the cadres of the Brigades of the martyrs of Al-Aqsa,” declared number-two announcer Muhammad Sanouri.

The Voice of Palestine coverage, which is determined by Yasser Arafat and his appointees, has previously used the tactic of reading only part of a “condemnation statement,” using only the most moderate language for internal Palestinian consumption.

The harsher text-in English, Arabic and Hebrew-sent abroad on the internet by the Palestinian news agency WAFA, is meant for Western and Israeli consumption.

“The Palestinian Leadership furiously condemned the operation in Rishon Letsiyon,” read the headline of the official statement as it appeared on the WAFA website.

The lead paragraph, which was also not read on radio, said, “The Palestinian Leadership strongly condemns the operation in the Israeli City of Rishon Letsiyon targeting Israeli civilians.”

The Right of Return: Through Conjugal Negotiatons

Ibrahim Idris was born in 1967, the year the city of his birth, Nablus, was conquered. In 1994, when the Palestinian Authority returned to the territories, Idris made a significant change in his life: in March of that year, he received the status of permanent resident in Israel and was given an Israeli ID card.

Thanks to his marriage to an Israeli Arab woman, a resident of Umm el-Fahm, Idris enjoyed a bureaucratic-humanitarian process known as “family unification.” In his case, like in thousands of other cases, the wife did not follow her husband to his home in territories, as customary in Moslem tradition, but rather the husband followed his wife to her home in Israel.

In the first year of the current Intifada, which the Palestinians call a “war of independence,” Idris closed a circle. For him, this was an entirely natural closing. His blue ID card had never made him part of Israeli society. Israel had given him economic security, but his eyes, his heart and his ties remained in Nablus.

Ibrahim’s brother, Isama Idris, a senior activist in the Hamas military wing, who was eventually killed by the IDF in Nablus, recruited him to a cell that he set up. Ibrahim Idris’s blue ID card ensured him freedom of movement inside Israel and between Israel and the West Bank. His long residence inside Israel made it easy for him to recruit, so it is suspected, other activists from among Israeli Arabs to the same cell. The plan was for Idris to place bombs in various places. When questioned by the GSS, he admitted to these activities.

Idris is not alone. This phenomenon of bearers of blue ID cards, who have merged into Israeli Arab society thanks to family unification and who opted to deal in terror, is well known to the GSS and to the Israel police. Already back in ‘ 98, the GSS arrested Ibrahim Ugabi, an Israeli citizen and a resident of Lod thanks to family unification, who admitted to recruiting Israeli Arabs into the Hamas military wing. Ugabi was handled by the leader of the Hamas military wing in Gaza, Mohammed Deif, and was to have led a group of suicide bombers from the Gaza Strip into Israel, give them shelter and lead them to the sites of attacks.

For long years Israeli security officials have cried out against this, and warned of a process of Palestinian-ization in Arab villages and of nationalist radicalization among the Negev Bedouin sector as a result of family unification — but the political echelons, the establishment, opted to ignore this, was scared to deal with it.

The public became aware of this issue only after the terror attack at the Matza restaurant in Haifa. The mother of the suicide bomber, Shadi Tubasi, is an Israeli citizen from the village of Mukabla. In 1973 she married a Jenin resident and moved to live in Jenin, but did not give up her Israeli ID card. In 1994, she returned to Mukabla and registered her son Shadi, born in Jenin, as an Israeli citizen. Shadi had absolutely no connection to Israel, except for the technical fact that he was eligible to receive an Israeli ID cards thanks to his mother. Jenin continued to be the Tubasi family’s life center and that is also where the terror attack in the Matza restaurant was planned.

The Fighting Family

The family unification process, which was the result of natural humanitarian needs, has become forfeit. The supervision over the process is inefficient and can be described as being purely a formality. The “gate keepers” of Israel have neglected their job throughout the years. The numbers the Interior Ministry provides are official numbers that do not reflect the real thing. The number of illegal residents who have come to Israel thanks to family unification is unknown to the Interior Ministry.

From 1967 until 1993, there was no precise registration of requests and of implementation of family unification. A cautious estimate by security officials is that since 1967 to this today, about a quarter of a million people have entered Israel thanks to Palestinian family unification.

Since 1993 and until a month ago, around 22,000 requests for family unification were submitted, of which around 16,000 were given a positive reply (the others are not deported, but rather continue to live here). The number of people who came here from the territories since 1993, officially and legally, is around 97,000 people. How many illegal relatives came along with them, live here, and are waiting for permits and certificates in the future? We can only guess.

There is nobody practicing any enforcement in this matter. Not only that, the study of the requests for family unification is one big farce. Ostensibly, the moment an Israeli citizen invites their Palestinian spouse to live with them, a complicated bureaucratic practice is meant to begin, but in practice, no thorough checks are made and only the clerks and bureaucratic red tape made the process lengthy.

The Palestinian comes here with a permit to visit. Then begins the handling of a temporary or permanent permit. At this stage, the Interior Ministry begins to check out the permits: is he really getting married, with who and where. The Palestinians have learned that they don’t have to tell the truth because rarely does anybody check these forms. Who will bother checking, for example, if he is not already married, how many wives and how many children he has. Those whose requests are not answered, can, after a few months, submit their request again. There are also some petitions to the High Court of Justice.

At the same time, the request is passed on to be checked by the police: does the person have a criminal record or any reservation expressed about him by police intelligence. The GSS also checks if it has security information about the person. Since 1996 the GSS has checked 11,000 requests, out of which it rejected only some 5%. If the person’s name does not appear in GSS computers, if he has not been questioned in the past for security reasons, there is no chance that an in-depth investigation will be carried out to discover who the new citizen is whom we are about to absorb.

The GSS does not have the manpower for these checks and they are not high on its list of priorities. This kind of treatment has results on the ground: of the dozens of Arab Israelis who were arrested in the past year and who admitted to terrorist activity, one of five received his Israeli citizenship thanks to family unification.

The police also only check in the files that they have at present, and the police do not know all of the thieves and certainly not all those involved in terrorism. Officially, the police are supposed to deal with illegals. Every day the Border Police rounds up from 300 to 500 illegals in the Galilee and the north, takes them in trucks to an area between Megiddo and Jenin, and from there sends them back to the territories. An hour later, in theory and in practice, they are all back here.

“Every security organization in Israel depends on the check being carried out by the other organizations, and so there is not even one serious check,” says one security source.

Indeed, no one bothers to take fingerprints, photograph them, not to mention put them on trial; they prefer not to deal with them. The result is that when an illegal requests family unification, nobody has any record of him. He can live in Israel as an illegal resident for years, be involved in crime, and the police will have no clue. He will not appear in any archive, not even in the medical records of an HMO. In effect, the illegal resident is a person who does not exist. They exist only in one place, the category of police statistics for unsolved crimes. A large percentage of crimes in Israel were committed by “ghosts.” And so, when a Palestinian requests family unification, he needs to be a really big thief for the police to know of him and the Interior Ministry would turn him down.

After receiving the approval of the Interior Ministry, the Palestinian lives here as a temporary resident. Afterwards he renews his request to become a permanent resident. Once again, the triple check is carried out — Interior Ministry, police, and GSS — and five years after the beginning of the process, he becomes a full citizen. [… ]

Police estimate that there are between 50-80,000 Palestinians and Arabs in Israel illegally, including more than 15,000 citizens of neighboring Arab countries, like Jordan and Egypt, who have settled here. [… ]

During 1999 police caught some 122,000 illegals. How many were tried? Only 350 of them. In 2000, 90,000 illegals were caught, and only 291 were put on trial. The ratio between the number of arrests and the number of people tried has not changed despite the dramatic shift in the security situation. [… ]

Last week the government decided to freeze treatment of family unification requests until the Knesset ratifies the bill relating to illegals and the family unification policy. The bill involves stricter inspection, yearly quotas, turning down those who had already stayed in Israel illegally etc. But it is clear to all: this will not be enough. If the number of illegals is not cut by tens of percentage points within a reasonable period of time, as a national project on the part of the security forces, then every shekel spent invested in the establishment of a separation fence will be wasted.

One Settler’s Response to David Newman’s Much Abridged History of Jewish Settlements

This is one “settler’s” impromptu responses to David Newman’s piece on “How the Settler Suburbs Grew” (New York Times, 21 May 2002).

I am a resident of Alon Shevut in Gush Etzion, a “settlement,” really a town of 5,000 Jews located about 20 minutes south of Jerusalem.

Alon Shevut was established in 1970 by a group of young Yeshiva students and their families associated with what became the world famous Har Etzion Yeshiva run by Rabbis Amital and Liechtenstein. Alon Shevut, like Kfar Etzion, Rosh Tzurim, Migdal Oz, Neve Daniel and Bat Ayin are built on land that was bought and paid for by the Jewish People long before the Jewish State was formed in 1948.

Its original inhabitants, many of whom were Holocaust survivors, and some of whom were members of the left-wing pioneering movement, Hashomer Ha-tzair, were attacked by Palestinian irregulars and the Transjordanian Arab Legion in the months that preceded the establishment of the State of Israel in May, 1948.

Kfar Etzion was captured by Arab forces on May 14, 1948, the day before the State was declared and the major part of its 200 defenders were gunned down in cold blood after surrendering to Arab forces. The remaining inhabitants and defenders of the “settlements” of Gush Etzion were taken into capitivity in Jordan and were released only in 1950.

After the capture of the “settlements” of Gush Etzion, the Arabs systematically destroyed every trace of Jewish life here, including uprooting thousands of fruit trees planted by the “settlers” who had reclaimed the barren hills and established a viable agricultural economy. In their place, the Jordanian army built an army base and various encampments that for 19 years had a commanding view of the entire Israeli coast from Ashkelon to Hadera.

For 19 years Jews were not allowed to set foot on their land and were left to viewing it from what became known as the John F. Kennedy Memorial Forest on the outskirts of Jerusalem. On other portions of the Jewish land in Gush Etzion, the Jordanians built a Palestinian refugee camp, Daheisha; it is to this day registered in the name of the Jewish National Fund. The Jordanians proceeded to annex the entire “West Bank” (a euphemism invented by the Hashemite regime to describe its newly annexed province and what had theretofore been known throughout time immemorial as Judea and Samaria).

The Jordanian annexation was condemned by the entire international community, save the UK and Pakistan, and the entire Arab world and was consequently, illegal ab initio. No Palestinian Arab state in the area was ever established or proclaimed as the Arab world had rejected the 1947 UN General Assembly partition resolution (No. 181), electing instead to invade the Palestinian mandate and destroy the nascent Jewish State and its “settlements” from the Galilee to the Negev.

In 1967 after being attacked without provocation by Jordanian troops in Jerusalem and elsewhere in the “West Bank,” Israeli troops acting in self-defense re-entered Gush Etzion and other areas of Judea and Samaria and expelled the Jordanian forces. Three months after Judea and Samaria were liberated, the children of the original inhabitants of Kfar Etzion petitioned the Government of Israel to return to the site of their kibbutz in Gush Etzion and received permission. Thus began the restoration of Jewish life in Gush Etzion.

Today, there are some 15 communities in the “Gush” administered by a Regional Council. In addition there is a sizeable town called Efrat founded by Rabbi Shlomo Riskin in the 1980s that numbers some 10,000 souls and the soon to be city of Beitar Illit with some 20,000 inhabitants. To the south of Gush Etzion is the town of Kiryat Arba with some 10,000 residents adjacent to the city of Hebron which too has seen its ancient Jewish community restored after repeated attempts by the Arabs to destroy it before 1948.

To give you some historical perspective, the modern Jewish communities of Gush Etzion are themselves successors to a virtually unbroken chain of Jewish “settlement” in Judea that began in the time of Abraham, two thousand years before the first Arab settled here. The Jewish village of Tekoa, established in 1977 adjacent to the Arab village of the same name and the home of the prophet Amos (“and they build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof’ They shall make gardeof their land which I have given them, saith the Lord thy G-d”). Towering high over Tekoa is the ancient Hasmonean and Herodian citadel known as Herodion with its magnificent archeolgical excavations. From the top of the Herodion one can see clearly the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the Dead Sea and the mountains of Moab, now in Jordan. One can also see a vast plain dotted today by dozens of Arab villages, none of which existed before 1967. These Arab “settlements” were established (without international protest) when Bedouin nomads attracted by the economic boom generated by the return of Jewish life to Gush Etzion decided to “settle” down and earn good livings from the construction trade and related businesses. Just east of the Herodion on a site adjacent to the Dead Sea, there is a place called Qumran where the first of the famous Dead Sea Scrolls, written by Jewish “settlers” some 2000 years ago, were discovere d by one of those Arab Bedouins in 1947. Just to the west of Herodion, a few meters outside modern Tekoa is another cave, where 13-year old Kobi Mandell and his friend, were brutally murdered and mutilated last year by a descendant of the same Arab Bedouin “settlers” who now populate the plain below Herodion. And just around the bend from there was where my friend and fellow immigrant Aharon Gurov was gunned down in cold blood just a few weeks ago.

We have a custom here in Gush Etzion to climb up to the Herodion every year on the Ninth of Ab and commemorate that solemn day with prayers under candlelight from the ancient synagogue there. On that very site and on that very day in the year 70CE those other earlier Jewish “settlers” of Gush Etzion watched with horror as the Second Temple was engulfed by flames and reduced to rubble by Roman armies in Jerusalem just a few hilltops away.

Further to the west in Gush Etzion, just a few hundred meters from my home in Alon Shevut, there is a road leading to the newest of Gush Etzion communities at Bat Ayin built on or near the site of the pre-1948 kibbutz of Ma’asuot Yitzhak, named after the late Chief Rabbi of Israel and former Irish Chief Rabbi, Yitzhak Herzog (father of Israeli President Chaim Herzog).

In 1990 when the first Jewish pioneers returned to that site, I used to do guard duty throughout the night to help the new “settlers” get started and helped them make their first prayer minyanim. Today there are probably 100 families living there in homes they built with their own hands. When the Jews of Bat Ayin were building the road that would link them to Kfar Etzion and the rest of the Gush, they stumbled upon some stones that appeared to have a deeper significance. After a few days of excavation by the regional archeological team, they found the remains of another Jewish “settlement” built during the time of the Second Temple. In this ancient Jewish town, they found a mikva, or ritual bath, and at the bottom, a rusted key… of the same type known to have been used by the Jews of another ancient Jewish “settlement” known as Jerusalem.

Indeed, it now appears that some of the residents of this ancient Jewish town in Gush Etzion were refugees from the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in the year 70 CE. One of them brought with him or her, this momento from their former home, which is today just a 20 minute drive north by car. In 1990 the newest Jewish residents of this spot brought with them another “momento,” the Torah scroll that was taken into Jordanian captivity by their predecessors when the Gush fell to the Arabs in 1948.

Forgive me for having taken so much of your time to read these few lines. But I wanted to give you a perspective that the articulate and well-known left-wing activist David Newman saw fit to overlook. The Jews of Gush Etzion are not interlopers or trespassers; just as their counterparts all over Judea, Samaria and Gaza are not. They are the “Indians” (Native Americans) who have returned to their ancient home. They are part of the long and unending chain of Jewish “settlers” who have been part of this landscape since the time of Abraham to this very day.

Some day I might relate to you the story of Judah Maccabee’s connection with Alon Shevut and the battle that King Jehosophat fought in the valley below Kfar Etzion, just outside my window. Even the name of our people, the Jews, is taken from the tribe, region, province, Kingdom of Yehuda (Judah/Judea), whose heartland encompassed these very hills of Gush Etzion and Hebron for millenia. So it goes on and on and on….

It is therefore with amazement that I read David Newman’s piece and hundreds of others like it as well as the statements of some (but not most) of my own countrymen who look upon these no longer barren hills and these fluorishing Jewish villages, towns and cities in ancient Judea and Samaria as “colonies” and “obstacles.” I ask myself what kind of peace can there be if the Jews cannot live and build in Judea. Has the world gone completely mad when it sees the descendants of the Jews of ancient Tekoa and Hebron and that newly discovered Jewish Second Temple period town in Gush Etzion as “trespassers?” I say to the world that if you deny the legitimacy of our habitations in the hills of Gush Etzion and Judea (and Samaria and Gaza), you deny the legitimacy of the entire Jewish State… more than that: you deny our very legitimacy as a People on this G-d given Earth. Understand this and you will understand why the Arabs of Eretz Israel are relentless in their campaign to expunge the “West Bank” and Gaza of its Jews; to make Judea “Judenrein.” Understand this and you will understand why David Newman and his ideological soulmates are tragically wrong.

How the Settler Suburbs Grew

Beer Sheva, Israel – There is nothing that causes as much heated debate in Israel as the future of the settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. It is now clear to most Israelis that if there is ever going to be a final political agreement with the Palestinians, it will require that some, if not necessarily all, of the settlements be dislodged and evacuated. A permanent plan would have to create a Palestinian state that is compact and continuous – unlike the disconnected wedges and enclaves of Palestinian autonomy areas that were created by the Oslo accord and that have left the settlements in place. Although this reality is undeniable, the practicality of settlement removal has largely been avoided by all Israeli governments, including those of the left, even as that avoidance makes the eventual uprooting of the growing settler population more difficult.

There are today approximately 200,000 Jewish settlers living in a variety of West Bank and Gaza communities. They have arrived in those areas continually over the past 35 years, ever since Israel’s occupation of the region after its victory in the 1967 war. For the first 10 years, settlement was limited to the eastern edges of the Jordan Valley by the Labor governments of Levi Eshkol, Golda Meir and Yitzhak Rabin. They did not allow settlements in the densely populated Palestinian upland areas, assuming that this area would eventually become an autonomous Palestinian region linked to Jordan.

It was only after the Yom Kippur war of 1973 and, more important, the rise of Israel’s first right-wing Likud governments, led by Menachem Begin from 1977 to 1983, that settlement policy was extended to include the whole of the West Bank region. Spurred on by the religious settler movement Gush Emunim, settlements began to sprout up throughout the mountainous interior as well as in close proximity to the “green line” boundary between Israel and the West Bank, with their inhabitants hoping to prevent any future Israeli withdrawal from those areas. Gush Emunim supporters believed that the land conquered in 1967 had been returned to its rightful owners as promised to their biblical ancestors by God. Hence, they were not interested in such practical problems as demography, security or the political rights of another people. And they set out to make it as difficult as possible for any government to relinquish the land in a future political agreement.

From 1984 onward, Israel was governed by several national coalition governments – perhaps more adequately described as governments of national paralysis – consisting of the left-wing Labor and right-wing Likud parties. In each instance, the coalition agreements included a clause freezing all further settlement activity. And yet from 1984 to 2002 the settler population increased from a mere 30,000 to approximately 200,000 (not including another 200,000 living in East Jerusalem, which Israelis do not consider part of the West Bank).

Even under Labor governments, settlement activity did not cease. Few new settlements were constructed, but all the existing settlements underwent consolidation and expansion as new neighborhoods were built, new settlers arrived, and a second generation of settler families grew up and made their homes in these places.

In fact, the so-called settlement freeze proved to be a lifesaver for the many small communities that had been established under the Likud governments. Preventing the construction of additional settlements allowed small ones to grow to sizes that made them viable as functioning communities.

The Likud governments, eager to keep the West Bank as part of Israel, actively promoted the growth of the settler population through large subsidies – cheap land, low- interest mortgages and lower income tax rates for individuals, as well as subsidies to local government councils. (Labor governments attempted to cut back on these subsidies but often met with political opposition from their coalition partners.) Israelis moving to the West Bank side of the green line could exchange a small three- or four-room apartment in a crowded Israeli town for a bigger house in a low-density community, with government benefits not available to people living just a few miles away inside Israel proper. It was basically a case of suburban colonization.

The settlements, like communities inside Israel, are governed by municipal and regional councils that provide public services and control land use planning and development. A recent study by B’tselem, an Israeli human rights organization, shows that while the built-up areas of the settlements take up only 1.7 percent of the land in the West Bank, the area encompassed within the municipal boundaries of the settlements takes up 6.8 percent of the land. Regional councils, which provide services to smaller, scattered communities through a regional authority, govern an additional 35.1 percent. Together, these settlement councils effectively control 41.9 percent of the area in the West Bank.

After decades of growth, these settlements have created a completely new landscape. They are no longer outposts on exposed hills, but are fully developed communities with schools, commercial centers, industrial zones and municipal services all created for the settler population – needless to say, the Palestinian neighbors who occupy the same geographical space do not share in these benefits.

The very solidity of these planned developments makes it almost impossible to remove all of the settler population. Instead, the debate, even among left-wing Israelis who oppose the settlements, is over how to redraw the future border between Israel and a Palestinian state in such a way as to retain as large a number of settlers and settlements on as little territory as possible. This would probably require transfer of an equal amount of territory from within Israel itself – some have suggested the expansion of the Gaza Strip region – as compensation for the settlement territory that would be formally annexed to Israel.

But even if such a territorial solution were to be acceptable to both sides, this still leaves around 35 percent to 40 percent of the settler population living in areas farther east, into the West Bank, who would have to be evacuated. Israelis left and right already fear a day when the government will have to send the army in to move these settlements if the settlers refuse to go. Even the best outcome would probably mean violent demonstrations of the type seen in the early 1980’s when the Northern Sinai settlements were dismantled as part of the implementation of the Israeli-Egyptian peace agreement; a worst case would involve armed confrontation between soldiers and settlers. This is a major reason why even the Labor governments that negotiated and supported the Oslo accords did not stop settlement growth and instead allowed population expansion even at the cost of creating further resentment among the Palestinians.

Now, however, public support of the settlements is declining. Recent surveys show that a majority of Israelis believe that eventually there will be a Palestinian state and that the settlements will have to move (and this regardless of the recent vote by the Likud Party to oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state). Early in the development of the settlements, settlers argued that their towns contributed to Israel’s security. That is not accepted by most Israelis now, and in fact the settlements are seen for what they are, namely a security burden. Public support is likely to decline further if they are also perceived as the main obstacle on the way to a final peace agreement.

Unlike other matters that will need to be negotiated with the Palestinians, the settlement problem, created and expanded by successive Israeli governments, will have to be resolved by Israel itself. For Israelis who have lived in the West Bank for more than 25 years, for those who were born there, there will be heartbreak, even if the government can give them housing elsewhere. That is one price they and Israeli society will have to pay for a stable peace.

This article ran in the New York Times on May 21, 2002
www.NYTimes.com/2002/05/21/opinion/21NEWM.html?ex=1023003347&ei=1&en=806b296cbb361e61

Prof. David Newman is Chairman of the Department of Politics, Ben Gurion University, Beersheva

Dr. Newman’s Settlement Myths

Dr. David Newman, writing in the New York Times on May 21, “How the Settlements Grew”, gives credence to the myths concerning Israel’s Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

Dr. Newman mistakenly states that these communities have been placed in “the densely populated Palestinian upland areas”, without mentioning that only one Israeli Jewish Settlement lies inside a densely populated Palestinian Arab area – the Jewish community in Hebron, which is constructed on Jewish owned property inside Hebron.

While correctly reporting that Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin that expanded Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, Katif and the Golan, Dr. Newman neglects to mention that Begin established another principle, which was that no Israeli community would displace any Arab village.

Begin’s policy was different from Israeli policy that followed the 1948 war, when Arab villages such as Bir Is Seiba were overran by the Israeli army and replaced with the city of Beer Sheva, where Dr. Newman lives and teaches today.

Dr. Newman neglects to mention that Beer Sheva is defined as an “illegal Israeli settlement” on all maps issued by the Palestinian Authority. It would be instructive to know if Dr. Newman would be prepared to forfeit his home in Beer Sheva for peace.

Dr. Newman neglects to mention that the PLO and the PA have never called on Israel to remove Israeli settlements on areas taken during the 1967 war in exchange for a peace treaty, as Egypt did in during its negotiations with Israel, 1977-1982.

The position of the PLO and the PA is consistent, demanding that Israel relinquish all areas acquired in 1967 AND in 1948, under the premise, promise and illusion of the “right of return”, as the PLO and PA understand it.

Taking Exception: Stop Blaming Europe

It came as more than a shock to open The Post over breakfast on a brief visit to the American capital last week, and to read in the column of a respected conservative journalist that having murdered Jews by the millions in the 1930s and ’40s, Europe now practiced “anti-Semitism without Jews” and was playing its part in the “second — and final? — phase of the struggle for a ‘final solution to the Jewish question’ ” [George F. Will, op-ed, May 2].

How could someone I had previously regarded as well-informed and sane write this obscenely offensive rubbish? Questioned on the point, a Washington-based colleague responded that it was a pretty typical piece. He had seen plenty more like it, and there was similar muttering on Capitol Hill. So what is going on?

A few facts first. The Holocaust is one of the darkest stains on Europe’s history, a crime against humanity that heads too long a list of totalitarian barbarities in the last century. The rise of its Nazi perpetrators was resisted by some, but there were others, including a distinguished American ambassador to London who fathered a president, who looked the other way.

My own father, like so many others, spent six years of his life fighting this wickedness; my wife’s father was killed after D-Day. America’s intervention in the war was decisive. Evil was repelled. And afterward, British servicemen continued to do what they believed to be their duty, fulfilling the United Nations mandate in Palestine, where many were killed by terrorists who were not Palestinian.

Since then, Europe has rebuilt democratic societies based on pluralist values and the rule of law. With the collapse of the Berlin Wall we have extended democracy across our continent. That democracy has occasionally been challenged by xenophobic extremism — anti-immigrant, anti-outsider and doubtless sometimes anti-Semitic. Like the politics of Jean-Marie Le Pen in France. Any attack on a synagogue is outrageous. But there have also been many attacks on the symbols and followers of Islam. Mr. Le Pen appeals to those who are hostile to North African immigrants. To regard this bigot’s success principally as a recrudescence of anti-Semitism is ill-informed.

Anyway, what should we conclude about Europe from this pustulation? When a couple of years back there was an outbreak of arson attacks against African American churches in the United States, should we have leaped to the conclusion that the Ku Klux Klan was heading for the White House?

Anti-American prejudice in Europe is repugnant. It comes as a shock to me to find in a country I love and admire the mirror-image of this — a visceral contempt for Europe. Hunting for reasons for this, do we have to come back to poor Israel? A senior Democratic senator told a visiting European the other day: “All of us here are members of Likud now.” So any criticism of the policies and philosophy of Likud condemns one as an anti-Semite?

There will be no settlement in the Middle East without the creation of a viable Palestinian state and an Israel that can live secure within recognized borders. Israel must have the assurance that it will not be overwhelmed by returning refugees. The terrible suicide bombings must end; they are wicked acts, and it is a disgrace that they have not been more strongly condemned by Arab leaders. But a Palestinian state will require a return to the 1967 borders, or something very close to them, and it cannot be holed by settlements like a Swiss cheese. Without such an outcome the madness will continue, children will be murdered, blood will flow. And the blame will not be all on one side. Much hangs on the international conference that Colin Powell announced at the end of last week.

As a British minister I used to try to persuade American congressmen to take a tougher line on the funding of Irish terrorism. I would argue — usually to polite disagreement, I recall ruefully — that terrorist acts were always wrong. I would begin my set piece by saying that the beginning of wisdom in Ireland was to recognize that there were two authentic cries of pain and rage. Well I still believe it. And the same applies in the Middle East.

It is not anti-Semitic to say that, any more than it is to suggest that we will do our common campaign against terrorism irreparable damage if we allow it to be hijacked by Likud. Heaven help Israel, heaven help Palestine, heaven help all of us, if this mad and grotesque assault on reasoned debate continues. But heaven, I fear, will have its work cut out.

This piece ran in the Washington Post on May 7, 2002

The Continuing Peres Center Scandal in Norway: A Look at Norwegian Media Coverage

5/15/02: “However, Dagbladet has learned that [Norway’s] Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik is backing Mr Petersen’s efforts to ‘clear up’ the [Roed-Larsen/Juul] situation. This could mean public hearings involving the questioning of former Foreign Ministers.”
odin.dep.no/odin/engelsk/nytt/nyheter/032091-991471/index-dok000-b-n-a.html.

Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oslo – Press Division – Norway Daily 5/15/02

Tight-lipped Mona Juul back in Tel Aviv (Aftenposten)

After two days of meetings with her Foreign Ministry superiors, a tired Mona Juul returned to Israel yesterday evening. She has been telling senior officials at the Foreign Ministry about the prize money she received from the Peres Foundation in Israel in 1999. Concluding the meetings both sides signed a protocol of dispute in accordance with section 18 of the Civil Service Act. Section 18 covers the procedures to be used if a civil servant is to be reprimanded, given the sack or dismissed without notice. It is now up to Foreign Minister January Petersen to make up his mind. Ambassador Mona Juul yesterday declined to comment on the substance of her meetings. “I explained my point of view, which I have previously done in writing, and that is all I can say on the matter,” said Ms Juul to NRK before returning to Israel.

Stoltenberg defends Juul appointment (Dagsavisen)

Labour deputy leader Jens Stoltenberg has said he sees nothing wrong in Mona Juul being appointed Ambassador to Israel during his term as Prime Minister, despite the fact that she was a State Secretary in the government which appointed her. Ms Juul’s appointment has recently been attacked both because a number of Foreign Ministry officials claim she received the attractive ambassadorship ‘out of turn’, and because she was part of the same political leadership which appointed her. In addition, the post was not advertised internally. Yesterday the Storting’s Scrutiny and Constitutional Affairs Committee sent a number of questions to the Foreign Ministry regarding the appointment. The Committee wants to know if the appointment followed normal procedures.

Petersen: Juul’s job as safe as anyone’s (Dagsavisen)

“Ambassador Mona Juul is in exactly the same position as any other ambassador when it comes to job security,” said Foreign Minister January Petersen to Dagsavisen. Mr Petersen is thought to have been incensed by an article in yesterday’s Aftenposten claiming he was about to ask Ms Juul to seek another post within the Foreign Ministry. The leaks will be dealt with internally within the Ministry, whose political leadership now intends to insist that employees toe the line.

Full investigation into peace process spending (Dagbladet)

The Storting’s Scrutiny and Constitutional Affairs Committee has called for a full investigation into the way Norwegian cash was spent in connection with the Middle East peace process. This gives Foreign Minister January Petersen a welcome opportunity to dismantle what he has called the Labour network in Norwegian foreign policy. Former Foreign Minister Thorbjørn Jagland reacted strongly to Mr Petersen’s comments about the Labour network during the Conservative Party’s annual conference, though his public statement on the issue was subdued. However, Dagbladet has learned that Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik is backing Mr Petersen’s efforts to ‘clear up’ the situation. This could mean public hearings involving the questioning of former Foreign Ministers.

Worth Noting

Progress Party chairman Carl I. Hagen has launched a fierce attack on Foreign Minister January Petersen for his handling of the ‘peace prize affair’. “In my opinion Mr Petersen has handled this matter badly and will find his reputation tarnished as a result.” (Dagavisen) Ambassador Mona Juul does not need to pay the prize money back to the Peres Centre or hand it over to the Foreign Ministry, regardless of the final outcome of the affair. The Foreign Ministry’s legal advisers have reached this conclusion after considering whether Mona Juul should be required to repay the NOK 450,000 she received from the Peres Centre in 1999. (Verdens Gang)
http://odin.dep.no/odin/engelsk/nytt/nyheter/032091-210236/index-dok000-b-n-a.html.

Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oslo – Press Division – Norway Daily 5/10/02

Declined a seat on the Peres board (Dabladet)

Former State Secretary at the Foreign Ministry January Egeland declined the offer of a seat on the international board of the Peres Peace Centre in Israel. Mr Egeland felt it was not proper to involve himself in an institution which was, at the same time, receiving large grants of money from Norway. Thorbjørn Jagland and Terje Rød-Larsen on the other hand both accepted Shimon Peres’s invitation.
http://odin.dep.no/odin/engelsk/nytt/nyheter/032091-210237/index-dok000-b-n-a.html

Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oslo – Press Division – Norway Daily – 5/13/02

Norway donated millions to Peres Centre after peace prize award (Dagsavisen/Saturday)

A fortnight after Mona Juul and her husband Terje Rød-Larsen had received their peace prizes, the Peres Centre was promised almost NOK 4 million by the Norwegian Foreign Ministry. The donation, NOK 3,750,000, is by far the largest single amount which the Norwegian authorities have ever granted to the Peres Centre. The money was promised despite an internal Foreign Ministry memo which warned about the uncritical nature of the grants made to the Centre, and despite the fact that the Foreign Ministry had not received an auditor’s report or any other satisfactory reports about what the Norwegian money was being spent on.

Lønning believes Mona Juul will get the sack (Dagbladet/Saturday)

Mona Juul’s tenure as Norway’s Ambassador to Israel could soon be over, according to Inge Lønning, the Conservative Party’s foreign policy spokesman. Mr Lønning has also confirmed that he has discussed Ms Juul’s role with Foreign Minister January Petersen. “As I see it, in the long term we would not be best served to have an ambassador who is so controversial,” said Mr Lønning.

Mona Juul summoned home to explain herself (Verdens Gang/Sunday) The Foreign Ministry has decided it wants Norway’s Ambassador to Israel, Mona Juul, to return to Oslo to answer a growing list of questions regarding the peace prize worth NOK 450,000 which she received from the Peres Centre. “The need to have a serious chat with her has grown over the past few days,” confirmed a Foreign Ministry source. Behind the move is, among other things, VG’s revelations that Mona Juul was central in handling a series of requests for money from the Peres Centre in 1997 and 1998, before she and her husband Terje Rød-Larsen received a prize from the Centre in January 1999.
odin.dep.no/odin/engelsk/nytt/nyheter/032091-991468/index-dok000-b-n-a.html.

Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oslo – Press Division – Norway Daily 5/8/02

The Progress Party wants a full account of travel, car, office, entertainment and other expenses covered by Norwegian contributions to the Peres Centre for Peace. In a draft letter reeking of distrust of Terje Rød-Larsen and his wife, Mona Juul, Carl I. Hagen is asking the Storting’s Standing Committee on Scrutiny and Constitutional Affairs to take up the matter with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (Aftenposten)