Wrong, Reut

In its latest plan released in summary form, the Reut Institute demonstrates the validity of Umberto Eco’s analysis of Ur Fascism : ‘Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.’

By unceasing land grabs and burgeoning illegal settlements, demolitions, evictions, detainments, incarceration of Palestinian children, attacks on non-violent protestors, roughshod riding over court decisions, official condoning of racist laws, passing new racist laws, denial of rights to Palestinians, an overweaning, well-identified system of apartheid and decades of cruel Occupation, the Israeli entity delegitimises itself.

This week, Human Rights Watch released a 166 page report, “Separate and Unequal: Israel’s Discriminatory Treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories”, which ‘identifies discriminatory practices that have no legitimate security or other justification and calls on Israel, in addition to abiding by its international legal obligation to withdraw the settlements, to end these violations of Palestinians’ rights.’

Human Rights Watch reiterated its recommendation that the United States, which provides US$2.75 billion in aid to Israel annually, should suspend financing to Israel in an amount equivalent to the costs of Israel’s spending in support of settlements, which a 2003 study estimated at $1.4 billion. Similarly, based on numerous reports that US tax-exempt organizations provide substantial contributions to support settlements, the report urges the US to verify that such tax-exemptions are consistent with US obligations to ensure respect for international law, including prohibitions against discrimination.

Human Rights Watch called on the EU, a primary export market for settlement products, to ensure that it does not provide incentives for settlement exports through preferential tariff treatment, and to identify cases where discrimination against Palestinians has contributed to the production of goods. For example, the report documents how crops exported from settlements using water from Israeli-drilled wells have dried up nearby Palestinian wells, limiting Palestinians’ ability to cultivate their own lands and even their access to drinking water.

The report also describes cases in which businesses have contributed to or benefited directly from discrimination against Palestinians, for example through commercial activities on lands that were unlawfully confiscated from Palestinians without compensation for the benefit of settlers. These businesses also benefit from Israeli governmental subsidies, tax abatements, and discriminatory access to infrastructure, permits, and export channels. Human Rights Watch called on businesses to investigate, prevent and mitigate such violations, including ending any operations that cannot be separated from discriminatory Israeli practices.

Blundering blindfolded by bigotry at windmills of concocted ‘Red-Green’ alliances is likely to be counter-productive when the root of the problem lies with Israel’s own atrocious behaviour.

Nor does the Reut tilt at its bete noir, the worldwide Palestinian BDS movement, seem cogent, considering basic aims of BDS which are thoroughly supported in international law – for equal rights, an end to Israeli apartheid and occupation, and recognition of the right of Palestinian people to return to their lands. Since the US has abandoned its pretence of being able to stop Israeli land grabs and oppression, boycotts, divestments and sanctions remain a primary means chosen by Palestinians to attain their rights.

The Reut Institute perceives these reasonable goals as an existential threat – somehow if Palestinian people were not discriminated against, disenfranchised and ethnically cleansed, Israel would cease to exist. Yet what legitimacy does an entity have which relies for its continuance on tormenting those whom it has dispossessed and continues to dispossess of rights and land? Reut seeks to:

‘Prioritize delegitimizing the BDS Movement, which is among the most sophisticated tools in the attempt to undermine Israel’s legitimacy, and can be considered a mega-catalyst due to its influence in a number of arenas. As mentioned, the BDS Movement claims to promote human rights, international justice, and peace, while in practice, its organizers explicitly or implicitly reject Israel’s right to exist.’

Whereas the BDS network is a grassroots, decentralised global effort sustained from solidarity of its members from myriad cultures including jewish culture in principled demands for justice and rights for those who have neither, the obtuse Reut hasbaroids intend targeting London as a ‘delegitimisation hub’, aiming ‘to out, name and shame activists’ in a scurrilous witchhunt. That Reut considers human rights activists have something to be ashamed of is symptomatic of the above-mentioned malaise – and again political zionism is revealed as a radical, fascistic ideology, whose adherents obliviously project onto their quarries their own attributes – ‘anti-peace, anti-Semitic’ and ‘dishonest purveyors of double standards’. Political zionism is limited and eroded by its internal contradictions of addictive expansionism and consequent insecurity, syncretised mythologies of entitlement, victimhood and hubris.

Below is a video of the brutal realities which Israel inflicts upon Palestinians within the Green Line which Reut, I feel sure, would rather have us ignore as much as it would like us to forget Israel’s violations in the Occupied Territories. The story of how 67 members of the extended Abu Eid family were evicted summarily and their homes bulldozed last week is horrendous.

It is a scene being repeated across Israel with increasing frequency. Some 42,000 Arab homes built without required permits are threatened with demolition: 13,000 could be carried out at any time and 30,000 are at some stage in local courts, said Ameer Makhoul, director of Ittijah, a Palestinian civil society organization.

Palestine / Israel Links

Do Israelis “hate Obama’s guts”?
Shalit activists protest against Palestinian prisoners’ rights
VOTE! ‘Israeli War Crimes’ signs to go on Metro buses
Refugees’ flat torched in Ashdod
Racial discrimination – a tool of occupation

Belarus Links

Buzek on Belarussian presidential candidate being beaten up
Presidential Pseudo-Elections in Belarus 2010
Lukashenka Declared Belarus Victor After Clashes, Detentions
Crackdown mars Belarus elections
Belarus journalist beaten by police


WikiLeaks and OpenLeaks
2010-12-19 New Whistleblowing Sites
2010-12-16 FAIR: Media paint flattering picture of U.S. diplomacy
Brad Manning Has Rights!
Julian Assange to Launch Social Network for Diplomats, Twofacebook&tm;
China pays Nepal police to catch Tibet refugees: WikiLeaks
South Africa: Bloggers’ take on Wikileaks
Cover-ups, Coups, and Drones – A Holiday Sampler of What Wikileaks Reveals about the US
Spawn of WikiLeaks
Rap News 6 – Wikileaks’ Cablegate: the truth is out there
Secrecy, National Security and the Internet
Essential: voters support WikiLeaks and Assange, attack Gillard’s stance

Other Links

The tragedy of Algeria’s ‘disappeared’

4 Replies to “Wrong, Reut”

  1. The Reut Institute Update on Action and Impact
    January 2010

    ‘The National Security team’s efforts primarily focused on community engagement through Eran Shayshon’s trip to Orange County, CA. In this one week visit, Eran addressed community leaders, activists and other community members. In addition to maintaining ongoing efforts with the Israeli government, additional areas of focus advanced projects in the San Francisco Bay Area and Reut efforts to convene a
    conference bringing together an activist network to combat the assault on Israel’s legitimacy. ‘

  2. 07TELAVIV2652 2007-08-31 12:12

    The Under Secretary noted that the Middle East
    is now at the heart of American interests.

    Instability in
    Iran is driven by inflation and tension among ethnic
    minorities. This, Dagan said, presents unique opportunities,
    and Israelis and Americans might see a change in Iran in

    TEL AVIV 00002652 002 OF 005

    their lifetimes. As for Iraq, it may end up a weak, federal
    state comprised of three cantons or entities, one each
    belonging to the Kurds, Sunnis and Shias.

    ¶5. (S) Dagan said that the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia are
    concerned about the growing importance of Iran and its
    influence on them. They are taking precautions, trying to
    increase their own military defensive capabilities.
    Referring to the Gulf Security Dialogue (GSD), Dagan warned
    that these countries would not be able to cope with the
    amount of weapons systems they intend to acquire: “They do
    not use the weapons effectively.”

    Further afield, it looks at Turkey and sees
    Islamists gaining momentum there. The question, he asked, is
    how long Turkey’s military — viewing itself as the defender
    of Turkey’s secular identity — will remain quiet.

    ¶8. (S) Turning to the Gulf Security Dialogue (GSD), Dagan
    said that enhancing the capabilities of the Gulf states “is
    the right direction to go,” especially as they are afraid of
    Iran. Such a U.S. commitment will be a stabilizing factor in
    the region. Dagan clarified that he would not oppose U.S.
    security assistance to America’s Arab partners. He expressed
    concern, nevertheless, about the current policies of those
    partners — especially with regards to Syria and Iran. Dagan
    added that if those countries must choose between buying
    defensive systems from the U.S. or France, then he would
    prefer they buy systems from the U.S., as this would bring
    them closer to the U.S.

    ¶11. (S) Dagan described how the Israeli strategy consists of
    five pillars:

    A) Political Approach: Dagan praised efforts to bring Iran
    before the UNSC, and signaled his agreement with the pursuit
    of a third sanctions resolution. He acknowledged that
    pressure on Iran is building up, but said this approach alone
    will not resolve the crisis. He stressed that the timetable
    for political action is different than the nuclear project’s

    B) Covert Measures: Dagan and the Under Secretary agreed not
    to discuss this approach in the larger group setting.

    C) Counterproliferation: Dagan underscored the need to
    prevent know-how and technology from making their way to
    Iran, and said that more can be done in this area.

    D) Sanctions: Dagan said that the biggest successes had so
    far been in this area. Three Iranian banks are on the verge
    of collapse. The financial sanctions are having a nationwide
    impact. Iran’s regime can no longer just deal with the
    bankers themselves.

    E) Force Regime Change: Dagan said that more should be done
    to foment regime change in Iran, possibly with the support of
    student democracy movements, and ethnic groups (e.g., Azeris,
    Kurds, Baluchs) opposed to the ruling regime.

    ¶12. (S) Dagan clarified that the U.S., Israel and like-minded
    countries must push on all five pillars at the same time.
    Some are bearing fruit now; others would bear fruit in due
    time, especially if more attention were placed on them.
    Dagan urged more attention on regime change, asserting that
    more could be done to develop the identities of ethnic
    minorities in Iran. He said he was sure that Israel and the
    U.S. could “change the ruling regime in Iran, and its
    attitude towards backing terror regimes.” He added, “We
    could also get them to delay their nuclear project. Iran
    could become a normal state.”

    ¶13. (S) Dagan stressed that Iran has weak spots that can be
    exploited. According to his information, unemployment
    exceeds 30 percent nationwide, with some towns and villages
    experiencing 50 percent unemployment, especially among 17-30
    year olds. Inflation averages more than 40 percent, and
    people are criticizing the government for investing in and
    sponsoring Hamas, saying that they government should invest
    in Iran itself. “The economy is hurting,” he said, “and this
    is provoking a real crisis among Iran’s leaders.” He added
    that Iran’s minorities are “raising their heads, and are
    tempted to resort to violence.”

    09TELAVIV936 2009-04-28 08:08

    Netanyahu said he wants to show the
    Palestinians the benefits of peace, but with the proviso that
    if Iran goes nuclear, peace will fail.

    Netanyahu said he plans to engage
    the Palestinian Authority quickly and will not tie political
    talks with the Palestinians to developments with Iran.

    The only
    limits on Palestinian sovereignty would be elements that
    affect Israel’s security. A Palestinian state must be
    demilitarized, without control over its air space and
    electro-magnetic field, and without the power to enter into
    treaties or control its borders. Netanyahu concluded that he
    and opposition leader Tzipi Livni “only disagree about the
    name,” i.e. the two-state solution.

    Economic development would not be a
    substitute for a political settlement, but it would change
    the environment and show Palestinians the benefits of peace.
    Israel has been trying to “build a roof without a foundation”
    and it has not worked. Netanyahu said there was one proviso:
    If Iran gets a nuke, peace efforts will fail.

    09TELAVIV1184 2009-06-02 13:01

    Netanyahu said he
    had told President Obama that while he would not condition
    negotiations with the Palestinians on halting Iran’s progress
    toward a nuclear weapon, if Iran obtained such a weapon it
    would destroy any progress made toward peace. He added that
    Egyptian President Mubarak and Jordanian King Abdullah were
    in complete agreement with him on that point.

    ¶3. (S) For the sake of both security and peace, the first
    task is to stop Iran’s nuclear program.

    Netanyahu said he was prepared for
    “arrangements” with the Palestinians that would entail some
    limits on their sovereignty such as no Palestinian army, and
    Israeli control over borders, airspace, and the
    electromagnetic spectrum. Netanyahu asserted that seventy to
    eighty percent of Israelis are ready to make concessions for
    peace but they do not believe they have a Palestinian partner
    since Hamas is in control of Gaza and Iran has a base on
    Israel’s border. How can there be peace without a new
    situation in Gaza, he asked.

    He commented that Iran might try
    to use the talks with the U.S. to continue or accelerate
    their enrichment process. Netanyahu cautioned that he was
    skeptical of the idea that the Iranian leadership could
    change. They have a dangerous worldview, a violent
    theocracy, but it may be possible to move them if they find
    the U.S. strong and determined. Iran, he commented, is bent
    on becoming a global and not just a regional power.

    09TELAVIV1688 2009-07-30 10:10

    ¶24. (C) MFA Export Control Director Roey Gilad reiterated
    that the GOI in no way desires to compromise U.S. national
    interests with respect to exports to China. He noted,
    however, that the U.S. Department of Commerce created in 2007
    a list of exemptions for certain items if sent to validated
    end users in China. Gilad questioned whether the same
    exemptions might be possible for Israel. As it currently
    stands, the GOI must pursue any export to China through the
    bilateral statement of understanding with the United States.
    While the statement calls for expeditious resolution of any
    requests to export to China, it often takes up to 80 days to
    obtain approval. By that time, Gilad said, China has often
    found the item through another supplier. Moreover, the
    Israeli export control system requires a 20-working day
    turn-around on all export license requests — which is not
    possible, given the length of time required to obtain an
    answer from the United States. A/S Shapiro offered to raise
    the issue in Washington.

Comments are closed.