31 mar 2016
US condemns UN call for list of firms operating in West Bank
The United States on Wednesday condemned a United Nations Human Rights Council resolution that calls for setting up a database of businesses operating in the occupied West Bank, a move that Israel has called a "blacklist."
The Geneva-based council, established 10 years ago and long accused by the United States and Israel of bias against the Jewish state, adopted the motion last week with 32 votes in favor, none against and 15, mostly European nations, abstaining.
The resolution, which calls for the database of enterprises to be updated annually, was passed under the Human Rights Council's agenda item seven, which covers the "human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories."
US State Department spokesman John Kirby criticized the motion at his daily briefing. "We continue to unequivocally oppose the very existence of that agenda item and therefore any resolutions ... that come from it," he said, accusing the body of "bias against Israel."
While repeating the US view that Israeli settlement building on occupied land erodes the chances of peace with the Palestinians, Kirby said the creation of a database would be an unprecedented step by the council and exceeded its authority.
The United States on Wednesday condemned a United Nations Human Rights Council resolution that calls for setting up a database of businesses operating in the occupied West Bank, a move that Israel has called a "blacklist."
The Geneva-based council, established 10 years ago and long accused by the United States and Israel of bias against the Jewish state, adopted the motion last week with 32 votes in favor, none against and 15, mostly European nations, abstaining.
The resolution, which calls for the database of enterprises to be updated annually, was passed under the Human Rights Council's agenda item seven, which covers the "human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories."
US State Department spokesman John Kirby criticized the motion at his daily briefing. "We continue to unequivocally oppose the very existence of that agenda item and therefore any resolutions ... that come from it," he said, accusing the body of "bias against Israel."
While repeating the US view that Israeli settlement building on occupied land erodes the chances of peace with the Palestinians, Kirby said the creation of a database would be an unprecedented step by the council and exceeded its authority.
23 mar 2016
By CJ Werleman
At this year's annual Israel Lobby (AIPAC) conference, Hillary Clinton warned, "Palestinian leaders must stop inciting violence, glorifying them as martyrs and stop paying rewards to their families”.
Her lies and distortions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict only got worse from there.
Clinton added that Israelis face “brutal terrorist stabbings, shootings and vehicle attacks at home,” but never once did she mention the three words at the centre of the conflict – occupation, colonisation, apartheid – and nor did they follow the phrase “resistance to”.
Clinton yet again reminded the world that the Palestinians are the only occupied people in history to be held responsible for the welfare of their occupier. “Israel’s security is non-negotiable,” thundered Clinton.
The implication being the security of the Palestinian people is a tradable commodity. The implication being Israel’s militaristic annexation of the Palestinian territories may continue to fly counter to multiple UN resolutions and the Geneva Convention, and if the Palestinians respond with violence, then they and only they are held responsible for Israel’s violations.
Clearly, Palestinian lives don’t matter, at least in the mind of the person who is favoured to become the United State’s 45th president.
“Parents worry about letting their children walk down the street. Families live in fear,” asserted Clinton. The subtext to what Clinton is saying is even clearer: pity the occupier. No pity, however, given to those who are occupied, besieged and caged. No pity for the more than 50 percent of Gazan children who have expressed no will to live.
No pity for the 50 percent of Gazan children who suffer from acute anemia, and no pity given for the 370,000 Gazan children who suffer post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of Israel’s 2014 siege of Gaza.
Instead of pity for the occupied, Clinton boasted how she had overseen a record level of arms sales to the occupier. She also promised to take the US-Israel alliance to the “next level,” adding, “I hope a new 10-year defence memorandum of understanding is concluded as soon as possible to meet Israel’s security needs far into the future.”
If ever the United States’ imperialistic business model could be encapsulated in a single promise, then surely this was it. Even more galling to objective observers of the conflict was Clinton’s praise of Israel as a “bastion of liberty,” which is right up there with “most moral army in the world” and “the Middle East’s greatest democracy” in terms of shameless mischaracterisations of the brutally oppressive, ethnocratic, apartheid state. A country that killed 17 journalists in 2014 is not a “bastion of liberty”.
A country that routinely detains journalists without trial or charge is not a “bastion of liberty”. A country that has imprisoned more than 150 Palestinians for nothing more than posting alleged “incitement” on Facebook is not a “bastion of liberty,” and a country that has legislated more than 50 laws that “discriminate against Palestinian citizens of Israel in all areas of life, including their rights to political participation, access to land, education, state budget resources, and criminal procedures” is not, as you can guess, a “bastion of liberty”.
When Clinton wasn’t obfuscating the reality of the conflict, she was passing off bold-faced lies.
Her claim that Hamas is in alliance with the Islamic State (IS) was not only an outrageous attempt to tie Palestinian national liberation cause with jihadism, but it’s simply untrue.
Hamas is at war with a number of extremists groups within the Gaza strip, not least IS. When Clinton talked about Hamas rockets fired out of Gaza, she didn’t mention the fact that Hamas have repeatedly proposed long term truces with Israel.
In 2007, Egypt brokered a peace agreement, but Israel refused to ease its blockade of Gaza. Nevertheless, Hamas upheld the truce. But on 4 November 2008, Israel violated the truce – killing six Palestinians.
Since the 2014 ceasefire agreement, Israel has violated the truce more than 150 times, and Hamas zero.
Richard Falk, who is Jewish and performed the role of UN special rapporteur for human rights in occupied Palestine, described Hamas’ rocket attacks, which come only as response to Israeli aggression, as a “crime of survival”. He said, “Israel has put the Gazans in a set of circumstances where they have to accept whatever is imposed on them or resist in any way available to them.
That is a horrible dilemma to impose upon a people.” Falk’s level of humanistic impartiality was notably absent from Clinton’s pro-Israel propagandised diatribe.
Even more concerning is Clinton’s promise to destroy the boycott, divest, sanction (BDS) movement, which she equated with anti-Semitism. As Haaretz contributor Haroon Moghul rightly noted, “If boycotting Israel is anti-Semitic, then economically sanctioning a Muslim country is Islamophobic”.
That Clinton wants to take from the Palestinians their last remaining non-violent tool for ending Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem means, in a roundabout way, Clinton encourages more bloodshed.
Even more implicitly, Clinton promised the United States would never, and should never remain “neutral” in its relationship with Israel and Palestine.
Remember this the next time the United States claims to be an “honest broker” for peace in the Middle East.
In many ways, Clinton’s AIPAC is a reminder that so-called liberals in America have forgotten what it means to be a liberal. To be a liberal, as Norman Finkelstein noted, means to “believe in the rule of law. It means to believe in international institutions. It means to believe in human rights…. It is impossible to be both liberal and defend Israeli policy.”
Finkelstein is a Jewish American who lost both his grandparents in the Holocaust. It would do Clinton well to learn from those who understand both the nature of the Israel-Palestinian conflict and the meaning of liberalism. Until that lesson is learnt, however, expect Clinton to carry forth the lie “Israel is a bastion of liberty.”
CJ Werleman is the author of Crucifying America (2013), God Hates You. Hate Him Back (2009), and Koran Curious (2011), and he is the host of Foreign Object.
At this year's annual Israel Lobby (AIPAC) conference, Hillary Clinton warned, "Palestinian leaders must stop inciting violence, glorifying them as martyrs and stop paying rewards to their families”.
Her lies and distortions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict only got worse from there.
Clinton added that Israelis face “brutal terrorist stabbings, shootings and vehicle attacks at home,” but never once did she mention the three words at the centre of the conflict – occupation, colonisation, apartheid – and nor did they follow the phrase “resistance to”.
Clinton yet again reminded the world that the Palestinians are the only occupied people in history to be held responsible for the welfare of their occupier. “Israel’s security is non-negotiable,” thundered Clinton.
The implication being the security of the Palestinian people is a tradable commodity. The implication being Israel’s militaristic annexation of the Palestinian territories may continue to fly counter to multiple UN resolutions and the Geneva Convention, and if the Palestinians respond with violence, then they and only they are held responsible for Israel’s violations.
Clearly, Palestinian lives don’t matter, at least in the mind of the person who is favoured to become the United State’s 45th president.
“Parents worry about letting their children walk down the street. Families live in fear,” asserted Clinton. The subtext to what Clinton is saying is even clearer: pity the occupier. No pity, however, given to those who are occupied, besieged and caged. No pity for the more than 50 percent of Gazan children who have expressed no will to live.
No pity for the 50 percent of Gazan children who suffer from acute anemia, and no pity given for the 370,000 Gazan children who suffer post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of Israel’s 2014 siege of Gaza.
Instead of pity for the occupied, Clinton boasted how she had overseen a record level of arms sales to the occupier. She also promised to take the US-Israel alliance to the “next level,” adding, “I hope a new 10-year defence memorandum of understanding is concluded as soon as possible to meet Israel’s security needs far into the future.”
If ever the United States’ imperialistic business model could be encapsulated in a single promise, then surely this was it. Even more galling to objective observers of the conflict was Clinton’s praise of Israel as a “bastion of liberty,” which is right up there with “most moral army in the world” and “the Middle East’s greatest democracy” in terms of shameless mischaracterisations of the brutally oppressive, ethnocratic, apartheid state. A country that killed 17 journalists in 2014 is not a “bastion of liberty”.
A country that routinely detains journalists without trial or charge is not a “bastion of liberty”. A country that has imprisoned more than 150 Palestinians for nothing more than posting alleged “incitement” on Facebook is not a “bastion of liberty,” and a country that has legislated more than 50 laws that “discriminate against Palestinian citizens of Israel in all areas of life, including their rights to political participation, access to land, education, state budget resources, and criminal procedures” is not, as you can guess, a “bastion of liberty”.
When Clinton wasn’t obfuscating the reality of the conflict, she was passing off bold-faced lies.
Her claim that Hamas is in alliance with the Islamic State (IS) was not only an outrageous attempt to tie Palestinian national liberation cause with jihadism, but it’s simply untrue.
Hamas is at war with a number of extremists groups within the Gaza strip, not least IS. When Clinton talked about Hamas rockets fired out of Gaza, she didn’t mention the fact that Hamas have repeatedly proposed long term truces with Israel.
In 2007, Egypt brokered a peace agreement, but Israel refused to ease its blockade of Gaza. Nevertheless, Hamas upheld the truce. But on 4 November 2008, Israel violated the truce – killing six Palestinians.
Since the 2014 ceasefire agreement, Israel has violated the truce more than 150 times, and Hamas zero.
Richard Falk, who is Jewish and performed the role of UN special rapporteur for human rights in occupied Palestine, described Hamas’ rocket attacks, which come only as response to Israeli aggression, as a “crime of survival”. He said, “Israel has put the Gazans in a set of circumstances where they have to accept whatever is imposed on them or resist in any way available to them.
That is a horrible dilemma to impose upon a people.” Falk’s level of humanistic impartiality was notably absent from Clinton’s pro-Israel propagandised diatribe.
Even more concerning is Clinton’s promise to destroy the boycott, divest, sanction (BDS) movement, which she equated with anti-Semitism. As Haaretz contributor Haroon Moghul rightly noted, “If boycotting Israel is anti-Semitic, then economically sanctioning a Muslim country is Islamophobic”.
That Clinton wants to take from the Palestinians their last remaining non-violent tool for ending Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem means, in a roundabout way, Clinton encourages more bloodshed.
Even more implicitly, Clinton promised the United States would never, and should never remain “neutral” in its relationship with Israel and Palestine.
Remember this the next time the United States claims to be an “honest broker” for peace in the Middle East.
In many ways, Clinton’s AIPAC is a reminder that so-called liberals in America have forgotten what it means to be a liberal. To be a liberal, as Norman Finkelstein noted, means to “believe in the rule of law. It means to believe in international institutions. It means to believe in human rights…. It is impossible to be both liberal and defend Israeli policy.”
Finkelstein is a Jewish American who lost both his grandparents in the Holocaust. It would do Clinton well to learn from those who understand both the nature of the Israel-Palestinian conflict and the meaning of liberalism. Until that lesson is learnt, however, expect Clinton to carry forth the lie “Israel is a bastion of liberty.”
CJ Werleman is the author of Crucifying America (2013), God Hates You. Hate Him Back (2009), and Koran Curious (2011), and he is the host of Foreign Object.
Hamas on Wednesday condemned US presidential candidates for their unabashedly pro-Israel speeches before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee this week.
Hamas condemns the racist statements made by American presidential candidates that sanctify the Israeli occupation at the expense of Palestinian rights, the group’s spokesman, Sami Abu Zuhri, said in a statement.
“The state of frantic competition between the American candidates supports the occupation and the enemies of the Palestinian people, and represents a true disgrace for the American political system and a provocation against the feelings of our Palestinian people and our Arab and Islamic nations,” he added.
Republican front-runner Donald Trump said he is Israel’s first ally and that there is nobody more pro-Israel than he is. He added that in case he is elected he will move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Occupied Jerusalem.
Earlier Monday, Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton slammed Trump's position on Israel.
He came under fire for previously saying he is "neutral" in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, though he has repeatedly said he supports Israel. "We need steady minds and hands.
Not a president who says he is neutral on Monday, pro-Israel on Tuesday and who knows what on Wednesday because everything is negotiable," Clinton said in a clear shot at the Republican front-runner.
Republican candidate Marco Rubio also lashed out at Trump before he withdrew from the electoral race. Rubio is notorious for his pro-Israel position.
Upon more than one occasion he dubbed the Palestinians terrorists and murderers in an attempt to gain Israeli support in the electoral race.
Hamas condemns the racist statements made by American presidential candidates that sanctify the Israeli occupation at the expense of Palestinian rights, the group’s spokesman, Sami Abu Zuhri, said in a statement.
“The state of frantic competition between the American candidates supports the occupation and the enemies of the Palestinian people, and represents a true disgrace for the American political system and a provocation against the feelings of our Palestinian people and our Arab and Islamic nations,” he added.
Republican front-runner Donald Trump said he is Israel’s first ally and that there is nobody more pro-Israel than he is. He added that in case he is elected he will move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Occupied Jerusalem.
Earlier Monday, Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton slammed Trump's position on Israel.
He came under fire for previously saying he is "neutral" in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, though he has repeatedly said he supports Israel. "We need steady minds and hands.
Not a president who says he is neutral on Monday, pro-Israel on Tuesday and who knows what on Wednesday because everything is negotiable," Clinton said in a clear shot at the Republican front-runner.
Republican candidate Marco Rubio also lashed out at Trump before he withdrew from the electoral race. Rubio is notorious for his pro-Israel position.
Upon more than one occasion he dubbed the Palestinians terrorists and murderers in an attempt to gain Israeli support in the electoral race.
21 mar 2016
By CJ Werleman
While there hasn’t been a single question about US support for Israel in any of the dozen or so Democratic presidential debates, the Israel-Palestinian conflict has returned to centre stage on the Republican side of the 2016 presidential race. The reason the conflict has again become relevant to US conservatives, consuming as much time as other any topic during any of the past few GOP debates, is Donald Trump promised to be a “neutral” broker for peace.
Trump’s promise has given his GOP presidential rivals an opportunity to attack him from the right, which means Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich have dusted off their very best Israel Lobby generated talking points. Chief among them is the one that posits all Palestinians as maniacal suicide-bombers in waiting. “The notion of neutrality is based upon the Left buying into this moral relativism that is often pitched in the media.
Listen, it is not equivalent. When you have terrorists strapping dynamite around their chests, exploding and murdering innocent women and children, they are not equivalent to the IDF officers protecting Israel. And I will not pretend that they are,” thundered Trump’s nearest rival Cruz. In mainstream US political discourse, Palestinians are presented as blood-lustful Jew killers, living alongside an Israeli state that is portrayed as a “Fort Apache,” surrounded by indigenous savages who don’t want peace.
“The Palestinian Authority has walked away from multiple efforts to make peace - very generous offers from the Israelis,” Rubio asserted. "Instead, here's what the Palestinians do: They teach their four-year-old children that killing Jews is a glorious thing.
Here's what Hamas does: They launch rockets and terrorist attacks against Israel on an ongoing basis.” Thus the pro-Israel one-two punch: Palestinians are “bloodthirsty desperados” and wish for conflict over peace. “The bottom line is, a deal between Israel and the Palestinians - given the current makeup of the Palestinians - is not possible,” says Rubio.
This Israeli narrative is often wrapped up with the failed 2000 Camp David peace talks, which falsely accuses Yasser Arafat of walking away from a deal that offered Palestinians 90 percent of what they want. “It is a terrible myth that Arafat and only Arafat caused this catastrophic failure. All three parties made mistakes, and in such complex negotiations everyone is bound to…No one is to blame,” a US special envoy to Jerusalem told The New York Times. Even Israel’s lead negotiator, Shlomo Ben-Ami, remarked, “Camp David was not the missed opportunity for the Palestinians, and if I were a Palestinian I would have rejected Camp David as well.”
If Palestinians don’t wish for peace, explain how polls show two-thirds of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are in favour of peace negotiations with Israel? You can’t. And why wouldn’t Palestinians seek peace? It’s not like Palestinians possess a navy, air force, or an army. It’s not like the Palestinian liberation cause is backed by a major military superpower, and it’s not like Palestine occupies Israel. The Palestinian Authority urged the United States to kick-start multilateral peace talks as recently as November 2015.
“Netanyahu wants to convince Obama and the world that the issue is Palestinian hatred of Israel,” said Husam Zomlot, a senior aide to PA president Mahmoud Abbas. “Palestinians, like all others, hate injustice, occupation and decades-long denial of their basic rights.” The Palestinian request was denied by Israeli Prime Minister and ignored by the US. The wave of recent Palestinian violence is underwritten by a post-Oslo generation that justifiably sees no hope in the peace process.
Three decades of US brokered “peace talks” have done nothing to not only create an autonomous and contiguous Palestinian state, but also have done nothing to put a halt to Israel’s occupation and colonisation of the Palestinian territories. Since Oslo, the number of Israeli settlers living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem has increased from 250,000 to 750,000. Clearly, it’s the Israelis who reject peace, not the Palestinians. A new Pew poll found that nearly 50 percent of Israelis believe Arabs should be expelled from Israel, which, by some definitions, means nearly half of Jewish Israelis support ethnic cleansing.
In 2008, another poll found that 64 percent of Jews expressed high levels of hatred toward Palestinians, bearing in mind this poll was taken three years after the end of the Second Intifada, and three years without a terrorist attack.
Pushed ever further right by a growing and more politically active settler demographic, the Israeli government speaks increasingly in a language that is hostile towards peace. Netanyahu has said that a two-state solution will never happen on his watch. Naftali Bennett, Israel’s education minister, has said the time has come for Israel to officially “annex the West Bank”, and Israel’s justice minister has called for a genocide on the Palestinians.
Padraig O’Malley, who helped negotiate a peace in Northern Ireland and authored The Two State Delusion, notes that Israel’s changing demographics suggest “a coming Israel will be a more anti-Palestinian Israeli, with a disturbing propensity to express expressions of hatred; more ultra-nationalistic; more suspicious of the Arab world, more right wing; less committed to democratic values; less tolerant and will have little trust in most institutions other than the defense forces.”
Following the failed Camp David talks, Yossi Ginossar, a member of the Israeli delegation and former Shin Bet official, said Israelis are unable to think about a peaceful resolution to the conflict because Israel society has so effectively dehumanised the Palestinians. “I have believed that until Israelis humanise Palestinians as a society and as individuals, and thus also rationalise the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the conflict will not be ripe for the conclusion of any peace agreement. [Our governments have] failed to humanise Palestinian society in the eyes of the Israeli public and make Israelis see Palestinians as normal society…
As a society we must learn to treat Palestinians as human beings who have the same authenticity that we ascribe to ourselves… I believe we are not yet ready to do so,” remarked Ginossar. An easy to way to determine which side genuinely seeks peace is to ask which side benefits from maintaining the status quo, and it doesn't take a high level of sophisticated enquiry to know 1.8 million Palestinians do not benefit, economically or socially, by being imprisoned in Gaza’s cage, nor do the nearly 2 million Palestinians living behind the West Bank’s apartheid barrier.
In Israel’s mind, peace talks are a threat to the status quo, for peace talks bring into question Israel’s commitment to peace, and no Israeli government has shown a willingness to end either the occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, or the blockade of Gaza. And while Americans continue to believe the lies GOP presidential candidates tell about both the Palestinians and the nature of the conflict, there will never be enough political pressure on a US president to act as an honest broker for peace.
- CJ Werleman is the author of several books. His article was published in the Middle East Eye website.
While there hasn’t been a single question about US support for Israel in any of the dozen or so Democratic presidential debates, the Israel-Palestinian conflict has returned to centre stage on the Republican side of the 2016 presidential race. The reason the conflict has again become relevant to US conservatives, consuming as much time as other any topic during any of the past few GOP debates, is Donald Trump promised to be a “neutral” broker for peace.
Trump’s promise has given his GOP presidential rivals an opportunity to attack him from the right, which means Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich have dusted off their very best Israel Lobby generated talking points. Chief among them is the one that posits all Palestinians as maniacal suicide-bombers in waiting. “The notion of neutrality is based upon the Left buying into this moral relativism that is often pitched in the media.
Listen, it is not equivalent. When you have terrorists strapping dynamite around their chests, exploding and murdering innocent women and children, they are not equivalent to the IDF officers protecting Israel. And I will not pretend that they are,” thundered Trump’s nearest rival Cruz. In mainstream US political discourse, Palestinians are presented as blood-lustful Jew killers, living alongside an Israeli state that is portrayed as a “Fort Apache,” surrounded by indigenous savages who don’t want peace.
“The Palestinian Authority has walked away from multiple efforts to make peace - very generous offers from the Israelis,” Rubio asserted. "Instead, here's what the Palestinians do: They teach their four-year-old children that killing Jews is a glorious thing.
Here's what Hamas does: They launch rockets and terrorist attacks against Israel on an ongoing basis.” Thus the pro-Israel one-two punch: Palestinians are “bloodthirsty desperados” and wish for conflict over peace. “The bottom line is, a deal between Israel and the Palestinians - given the current makeup of the Palestinians - is not possible,” says Rubio.
This Israeli narrative is often wrapped up with the failed 2000 Camp David peace talks, which falsely accuses Yasser Arafat of walking away from a deal that offered Palestinians 90 percent of what they want. “It is a terrible myth that Arafat and only Arafat caused this catastrophic failure. All three parties made mistakes, and in such complex negotiations everyone is bound to…No one is to blame,” a US special envoy to Jerusalem told The New York Times. Even Israel’s lead negotiator, Shlomo Ben-Ami, remarked, “Camp David was not the missed opportunity for the Palestinians, and if I were a Palestinian I would have rejected Camp David as well.”
If Palestinians don’t wish for peace, explain how polls show two-thirds of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are in favour of peace negotiations with Israel? You can’t. And why wouldn’t Palestinians seek peace? It’s not like Palestinians possess a navy, air force, or an army. It’s not like the Palestinian liberation cause is backed by a major military superpower, and it’s not like Palestine occupies Israel. The Palestinian Authority urged the United States to kick-start multilateral peace talks as recently as November 2015.
“Netanyahu wants to convince Obama and the world that the issue is Palestinian hatred of Israel,” said Husam Zomlot, a senior aide to PA president Mahmoud Abbas. “Palestinians, like all others, hate injustice, occupation and decades-long denial of their basic rights.” The Palestinian request was denied by Israeli Prime Minister and ignored by the US. The wave of recent Palestinian violence is underwritten by a post-Oslo generation that justifiably sees no hope in the peace process.
Three decades of US brokered “peace talks” have done nothing to not only create an autonomous and contiguous Palestinian state, but also have done nothing to put a halt to Israel’s occupation and colonisation of the Palestinian territories. Since Oslo, the number of Israeli settlers living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem has increased from 250,000 to 750,000. Clearly, it’s the Israelis who reject peace, not the Palestinians. A new Pew poll found that nearly 50 percent of Israelis believe Arabs should be expelled from Israel, which, by some definitions, means nearly half of Jewish Israelis support ethnic cleansing.
In 2008, another poll found that 64 percent of Jews expressed high levels of hatred toward Palestinians, bearing in mind this poll was taken three years after the end of the Second Intifada, and three years without a terrorist attack.
Pushed ever further right by a growing and more politically active settler demographic, the Israeli government speaks increasingly in a language that is hostile towards peace. Netanyahu has said that a two-state solution will never happen on his watch. Naftali Bennett, Israel’s education minister, has said the time has come for Israel to officially “annex the West Bank”, and Israel’s justice minister has called for a genocide on the Palestinians.
Padraig O’Malley, who helped negotiate a peace in Northern Ireland and authored The Two State Delusion, notes that Israel’s changing demographics suggest “a coming Israel will be a more anti-Palestinian Israeli, with a disturbing propensity to express expressions of hatred; more ultra-nationalistic; more suspicious of the Arab world, more right wing; less committed to democratic values; less tolerant and will have little trust in most institutions other than the defense forces.”
Following the failed Camp David talks, Yossi Ginossar, a member of the Israeli delegation and former Shin Bet official, said Israelis are unable to think about a peaceful resolution to the conflict because Israel society has so effectively dehumanised the Palestinians. “I have believed that until Israelis humanise Palestinians as a society and as individuals, and thus also rationalise the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the conflict will not be ripe for the conclusion of any peace agreement. [Our governments have] failed to humanise Palestinian society in the eyes of the Israeli public and make Israelis see Palestinians as normal society…
As a society we must learn to treat Palestinians as human beings who have the same authenticity that we ascribe to ourselves… I believe we are not yet ready to do so,” remarked Ginossar. An easy to way to determine which side genuinely seeks peace is to ask which side benefits from maintaining the status quo, and it doesn't take a high level of sophisticated enquiry to know 1.8 million Palestinians do not benefit, economically or socially, by being imprisoned in Gaza’s cage, nor do the nearly 2 million Palestinians living behind the West Bank’s apartheid barrier.
In Israel’s mind, peace talks are a threat to the status quo, for peace talks bring into question Israel’s commitment to peace, and no Israeli government has shown a willingness to end either the occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, or the blockade of Gaza. And while Americans continue to believe the lies GOP presidential candidates tell about both the Palestinians and the nature of the conflict, there will never be enough political pressure on a US president to act as an honest broker for peace.
- CJ Werleman is the author of several books. His article was published in the Middle East Eye website.
|
|
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton told America's largest pro-Israel lobby on Monday she would "vigorously oppose" any attempts by outside parties to "impose" a peaceful solution between Israel and Palestinians if elected president.
Speaking at AIPAC's annual policy conference, Clinton condemned Palestinian acts of violence as "terrorism" and the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement as "anti-Semitic," while making almost no mention of Israeli policies in the occupied Palestinian territory. The former US Secretary of State said she would only support peace brought about through "direct negotiations," and would "vigorously oppose any attempt by outside parties to impose a solution, including by the UN Security Council." Reiterating her "unwavering, unshakable commitment" to Israel, she said the US-Israeli alliance was based on both nations having a shared "story of all people who struggle for freedom and self-determination." "We marvel that such a bastion of liberty exists in a region so plagued by intolerance," she said. "We see the vigorous, even raucous debate in Israeli politics, and feel right at home." Much of her efforts were aimed at presenting herself as a candidate far more amenable to Israel than President Barack Obama, whose relations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have been notoriously bad during his time in office. She said that inviting Netanyahu to the White House would be "one of the first things I'll do in office" -- recalling a recent snub by Netanyahu when he declined such an invitation from Obama during a visit to the US just two weeks ago. Clinton said it was vital the US and Israel stood together at a time when Israelis faced "brutal terrorist stabbings, shootings and vehicle attacks at home," citing in particular a Palestinian attack in Jaffa this month that left an American tourist dead and nine others wounded, mostly Israelis. She accused the Palestinian leadership of "inciting violence" and "celebrating terrorists as martyrs." |
But with the exception of one passing mention of Israel's settlements, the presidential candidate made no mention of the key Israeli policies in the occupied Palestinian territory the Obama administration has repeatedly condemned in recent months.
Taking US-Israel alliance 'to next level'
Since December, US Secretary of State John Kerry, US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro, and US State Department spokesperson John Kirby have all issued grave condemnations of Israeli policies, saying they were undermining the two-state solution and prospects for peace.
However, Clinton called for the US and Israel to take their alliance "to the next level," expressing hope that an agreement would be reached soon on the next 10 years' worth of US military assistance to Israel, which already totals $3 billion a year.
"We will never allow Israel’s adversaries to think a wedge can be driven between us," Clinton said.
She drew attention to what she said was the "alarming" BDS movement, suggesting it was "anti-Semitic" and part of efforts to "malign, isolate, and undermine Israel and the Jewish people."
"I’ve been sounding the alarm for a while now," the presidential hopeful said. "We have to be united in fighting back against BDS."
She added: "To all the college students who may have encountered this on campus, I hope you stay strong. Keep speaking out. Don't let anyone silence you, bully you or try to shut down debate."
She said of Israel's conflict with the Palestinians: "We can't be neutral when rockets rain down on residential neighborhoods, when civilians are stabbed in the street, when suicide bombers target the innocent. Some things aren't negotiable."
Speaking of other threats faced by Israel, Clinton also sharply criticized Iran, saying that while the recent nuclear deal in part brokered by the Obama administration may have resulted in a safer world, "it's not good enough to trust and verify. Our approach must be distrust and verify."
She said: "Tehran's fingerprints are on nearly every conflict across the Middle East, from Syria to Lebanon to Yemen." She alleged that Iran was also funding "Palestinian terrorists."
Clinton concluded by expressing hope that Israel and the US would stay true to the "shared democratic values that have always been at the heart of our relationship."
She said both nations were "built on principles of equality, tolerance and pluralism. At our best, both Israel and America are seen as a light unto the nations because of those values."
Taking US-Israel alliance 'to next level'
Since December, US Secretary of State John Kerry, US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro, and US State Department spokesperson John Kirby have all issued grave condemnations of Israeli policies, saying they were undermining the two-state solution and prospects for peace.
However, Clinton called for the US and Israel to take their alliance "to the next level," expressing hope that an agreement would be reached soon on the next 10 years' worth of US military assistance to Israel, which already totals $3 billion a year.
"We will never allow Israel’s adversaries to think a wedge can be driven between us," Clinton said.
She drew attention to what she said was the "alarming" BDS movement, suggesting it was "anti-Semitic" and part of efforts to "malign, isolate, and undermine Israel and the Jewish people."
"I’ve been sounding the alarm for a while now," the presidential hopeful said. "We have to be united in fighting back against BDS."
She added: "To all the college students who may have encountered this on campus, I hope you stay strong. Keep speaking out. Don't let anyone silence you, bully you or try to shut down debate."
She said of Israel's conflict with the Palestinians: "We can't be neutral when rockets rain down on residential neighborhoods, when civilians are stabbed in the street, when suicide bombers target the innocent. Some things aren't negotiable."
Speaking of other threats faced by Israel, Clinton also sharply criticized Iran, saying that while the recent nuclear deal in part brokered by the Obama administration may have resulted in a safer world, "it's not good enough to trust and verify. Our approach must be distrust and verify."
She said: "Tehran's fingerprints are on nearly every conflict across the Middle East, from Syria to Lebanon to Yemen." She alleged that Iran was also funding "Palestinian terrorists."
Clinton concluded by expressing hope that Israel and the US would stay true to the "shared democratic values that have always been at the heart of our relationship."
She said both nations were "built on principles of equality, tolerance and pluralism. At our best, both Israel and America are seen as a light unto the nations because of those values."
20 mar 2016
|
|
Members of the United States Congress are delaying a payment of $159 million in aid allocated for the Palestinian Authority in effort to pressure the PA to relaunch negotiations with Israel, the PLO ambassador to Washington said Saturday.
Maen Erekat confirmed earlier reports that the US Congress was blocking the payment at the request of House Republican Kay Granger, the Chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State-Foreign Operations, under the pretext that the PA supports “terrorism.” The Obama administration allocated $440 million in aid to |
Palestinians for 2015, including $131 million for economic and development projects by USAID and $70 million for PA agencies and security agencies, while $80 million in aid was deducted following Israeli criticism of "incitement" by the PA last October.
Erekat added that some “pro-Israel” congress members are continuing to pressure the PA to relaunch diplomatic negotiations with Israel, and prevent Palestinians from joining international organizations and conventions.
The PA last year officially requested to join 15 international conventions, including membership in the International Criminal Court, which would allow war crimes complaints to be filed against Israel.
US congress members previously attempted to block aid for Palestinians in 2011 in response to the PA bid for full UN membership, but the hold was eventually lifted.
On March 12, PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi conducted a series of meetings in Washington, D.C., during which she discussed peace negotiations with Israel and urged US Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley to pressure House Republicans to release the $159 million in aid.
The White House is considering backing a UN Security Council resolution outlining parameters for future peace negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leadership before Obama leaves office in January 2017, The Wall Street Journal reported this month.
US Vice President Joe Biden also visited Tel Aviv earlier this month, just as multiple attacks were carried out by Palestinian individuals in Israel and occupied Palestinian territory, one of which left an American tourist dead.
During his visit, Biden said Israel could not stop violent acts carried out by Palestinians solely through physical force.
The vice president also condemned the attacks -- as well as the failure by Palestinian leadership to condemn the attacks -- during a joint press conference, according to AP.
While US-Israel relations have seen a series of diplomatic disputes during Obama’s administration, Israel remains the number one long-time recipient of US military aid, and discussions regarding a new aid agreement have been ongoing.
Erekat added that some “pro-Israel” congress members are continuing to pressure the PA to relaunch diplomatic negotiations with Israel, and prevent Palestinians from joining international organizations and conventions.
The PA last year officially requested to join 15 international conventions, including membership in the International Criminal Court, which would allow war crimes complaints to be filed against Israel.
US congress members previously attempted to block aid for Palestinians in 2011 in response to the PA bid for full UN membership, but the hold was eventually lifted.
On March 12, PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi conducted a series of meetings in Washington, D.C., during which she discussed peace negotiations with Israel and urged US Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley to pressure House Republicans to release the $159 million in aid.
The White House is considering backing a UN Security Council resolution outlining parameters for future peace negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leadership before Obama leaves office in January 2017, The Wall Street Journal reported this month.
US Vice President Joe Biden also visited Tel Aviv earlier this month, just as multiple attacks were carried out by Palestinian individuals in Israel and occupied Palestinian territory, one of which left an American tourist dead.
During his visit, Biden said Israel could not stop violent acts carried out by Palestinians solely through physical force.
The vice president also condemned the attacks -- as well as the failure by Palestinian leadership to condemn the attacks -- during a joint press conference, according to AP.
While US-Israel relations have seen a series of diplomatic disputes during Obama’s administration, Israel remains the number one long-time recipient of US military aid, and discussions regarding a new aid agreement have been ongoing.
8 mar 2016
A group of Palestinians and Palestinian-Americans who have been victims of Israeli settlement construction filed a lawsuit this week to demand financial compensation from some of the companies, individuals and organizations responsible for funding the construction.
Israeli settlement construction takes place on illegally seized Palestinian land, and is considered a flagrant violation of international law and Israel's responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention as an occupying power.
The U.S. Government has also condemned Israeli settlement construction – although a bill being considered by the U.S. Congress right now would make it illegal to boycott Israeli products that come from these illegal settlements.
In fact, U.S. Law currently allows U.S. Citizens to donate to the Israeli military directly – the only military on earth that U.S. Citizens are allowed to directly donate to. In addition, U.S. Citizens and groups are permitted to give tax-deductible donations to Israeli settlement construction project – despite the fact that doing so directly violates U.S. Stated policy.
The lawsuit launched this week names Washington lobbyist and multi-millionaire Sheldon Adelson, investor Irving Moskowitz, right-wing mega-church pastor John Hagee and other individuals who have funneled millions of dollars into Israeli colonial settlement construction.
In addition, a number of organizations are named in the lawsuit, including 'Christian Friends of Israeli Communities', Israel Chemicals Limited, the controversial Dead Sea cosmetics company Ahava, and security firm G4S.
Martin McMahon, one of the lawyers representing the complainants in the lawsuit, told reporters from Al Jazeera, "It's about time that the world woke up to the fact that Palestinians are being murdered every day with US taxpayer dollars."
In addition to charging the defendants with funding illegal settlement construction, the lawsuit also charges five counts of conspiracy, war crimes, aggravated trespass, pillage and racketeering.
The lawsuit was filed Monday in the U.S. District Court in Washington DC.
Israeli settlement construction takes place on illegally seized Palestinian land, and is considered a flagrant violation of international law and Israel's responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention as an occupying power.
The U.S. Government has also condemned Israeli settlement construction – although a bill being considered by the U.S. Congress right now would make it illegal to boycott Israeli products that come from these illegal settlements.
In fact, U.S. Law currently allows U.S. Citizens to donate to the Israeli military directly – the only military on earth that U.S. Citizens are allowed to directly donate to. In addition, U.S. Citizens and groups are permitted to give tax-deductible donations to Israeli settlement construction project – despite the fact that doing so directly violates U.S. Stated policy.
The lawsuit launched this week names Washington lobbyist and multi-millionaire Sheldon Adelson, investor Irving Moskowitz, right-wing mega-church pastor John Hagee and other individuals who have funneled millions of dollars into Israeli colonial settlement construction.
In addition, a number of organizations are named in the lawsuit, including 'Christian Friends of Israeli Communities', Israel Chemicals Limited, the controversial Dead Sea cosmetics company Ahava, and security firm G4S.
Martin McMahon, one of the lawyers representing the complainants in the lawsuit, told reporters from Al Jazeera, "It's about time that the world woke up to the fact that Palestinians are being murdered every day with US taxpayer dollars."
In addition to charging the defendants with funding illegal settlement construction, the lawsuit also charges five counts of conspiracy, war crimes, aggravated trespass, pillage and racketeering.
The lawsuit was filed Monday in the U.S. District Court in Washington DC.
7 mar 2016
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, during the weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday, has said that US Vice President Joe Biden’s upcoming visit to Israel is an expression of great relations between the two countries.
“This visit is an expression of the great relations between Israel and our ally, the United States,” Netanyahu said.
He then confirmed, according to the PNN, that the relationship is great and will not collapse as some “have already envisioned a collapse to these relations.”
“Our relationship (with the US) is great in all areas, even in the face of the challenges we face together in our region, which I will of course discuss with the Vice President during his visit,” he said.
Biden departed from Washington on Saturday, March 5, for his five-day visit to the region that will focus on the situation in Iran and Syria, as well as U.S. economic and energy interests. On March 8, he is expected to meet with Netanyahu and, later on, with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
Netanyahu’s statement came even though a senior White House official told reporters, Friday, that Biden would not make any major recommendations on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, but would focus on increasing cooperation on a number of issues, including the fight against the Islamic State and the Syrian conflict.
The White House said Biden’s itinerary included stops in the United Arab Emirates and Jordan.
“This visit is an expression of the great relations between Israel and our ally, the United States,” Netanyahu said.
He then confirmed, according to the PNN, that the relationship is great and will not collapse as some “have already envisioned a collapse to these relations.”
“Our relationship (with the US) is great in all areas, even in the face of the challenges we face together in our region, which I will of course discuss with the Vice President during his visit,” he said.
Biden departed from Washington on Saturday, March 5, for his five-day visit to the region that will focus on the situation in Iran and Syria, as well as U.S. economic and energy interests. On March 8, he is expected to meet with Netanyahu and, later on, with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
Netanyahu’s statement came even though a senior White House official told reporters, Friday, that Biden would not make any major recommendations on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, but would focus on increasing cooperation on a number of issues, including the fight against the Islamic State and the Syrian conflict.
The White House said Biden’s itinerary included stops in the United Arab Emirates and Jordan.
3 mar 2016
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden is expected to pop in Israel on Tuesday for a two-day stopover.
The visit is set to discuss possible ways to increase U.S. military funds to Israel.
Over recent days, the U.S. administration expressed concern over the projected announcement, during Biden’s stopover, of new Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and in Eastern Occupied Jerusalem, as was the case in a similar visit by Biden some six years ago.
The visit is set to discuss possible ways to increase U.S. military funds to Israel.
Over recent days, the U.S. administration expressed concern over the projected announcement, during Biden’s stopover, of new Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and in Eastern Occupied Jerusalem, as was the case in a similar visit by Biden some six years ago.
29 feb 2016
Avaaz international human rights organization called on Hollywood's Oscar nominees to visit Palestinian children in Israeli jails and to speak up for their infringed rights.
“This week’s Oscars are our chance to draw attention to the 500 Palestinian children who are suffering out of sight in Israeli prisons right now,” Avaaz said.
“Israel aims to get good publicity by offering a paid trip for all Oscar winners. But if enough of us come together now, we can publicly invite the stars to visit imprisoned Palestinian children too, and get that story all over the world’s media.”
According to the organization, more than 500 Palestinian children are imprisoned by Israel right now and many of them endure terrible abuse like beatings and harassment. “Most people around the world don’t know anything about their plight. But we have a rare opportunity to tell the world about Palestine’s imprisoned stars — its children,” it added.
The group warned that the Israeli government is offering a $55,000 trip to Israel for Oscar winners, trying to use celebrities’ fame to whitewash its image in the eyes of the world. “But if thousands of us invite the stars to visit Palestine as well to learn about our child prisoners, then we can make this the story and create a media storm in Hollywood,” Avaaz further stated.
The organization said Israel wants to use the endorsement of some of the world’s biggest celebrities to restore its international clout. “They want to hide the ugly face of the occupation behind photos of Hollywood stars on Tel Aviv beaches. The stars will be given an all expenses paid journey so that they can paint a rosy picture of Israel — and Palestinians will be hidden from sight,” Avaaz said.
“This propaganda trip could become a win for the struggle for freedom and dignity in Palestine. We can show the world what happens to Palestine’s future stars, the children, who have their dreams shattered by Israel’s imprisonment policies. It’s impossible to see a child in prison and think they deserve their long sentence, or meet their family and remain indifferent,” the statement further read.
“A free Palestine is within sight, but like the fight against Apartheid in South Africa, it will take international pressure to win,” Avaaz concluded as it urged activists around the world to sign an online petition to urge Hollywood stars to pop in the occupied Palestinian territories.
“This week’s Oscars are our chance to draw attention to the 500 Palestinian children who are suffering out of sight in Israeli prisons right now,” Avaaz said.
“Israel aims to get good publicity by offering a paid trip for all Oscar winners. But if enough of us come together now, we can publicly invite the stars to visit imprisoned Palestinian children too, and get that story all over the world’s media.”
According to the organization, more than 500 Palestinian children are imprisoned by Israel right now and many of them endure terrible abuse like beatings and harassment. “Most people around the world don’t know anything about their plight. But we have a rare opportunity to tell the world about Palestine’s imprisoned stars — its children,” it added.
The group warned that the Israeli government is offering a $55,000 trip to Israel for Oscar winners, trying to use celebrities’ fame to whitewash its image in the eyes of the world. “But if thousands of us invite the stars to visit Palestine as well to learn about our child prisoners, then we can make this the story and create a media storm in Hollywood,” Avaaz further stated.
The organization said Israel wants to use the endorsement of some of the world’s biggest celebrities to restore its international clout. “They want to hide the ugly face of the occupation behind photos of Hollywood stars on Tel Aviv beaches. The stars will be given an all expenses paid journey so that they can paint a rosy picture of Israel — and Palestinians will be hidden from sight,” Avaaz said.
“This propaganda trip could become a win for the struggle for freedom and dignity in Palestine. We can show the world what happens to Palestine’s future stars, the children, who have their dreams shattered by Israel’s imprisonment policies. It’s impossible to see a child in prison and think they deserve their long sentence, or meet their family and remain indifferent,” the statement further read.
“A free Palestine is within sight, but like the fight against Apartheid in South Africa, it will take international pressure to win,” Avaaz concluded as it urged activists around the world to sign an online petition to urge Hollywood stars to pop in the occupied Palestinian territories.
28 feb 2016
The U.S. administration decided to increase its annual military aid to Israel by as much as $800 million, on top of the millions of dollars and war arsenal dispatched to Israel per every single year, an Israeli newspaper reported Sunday.
The Israel Hayom newspaper quoted political sources as saying that the U.S. administration approved an Israeli request to provide Tel Aviv with four billion dollars in military aid for ten years, with an increase of $800 million from last year.
Israeli news outlets said the move came following the recently-struck U.S.-Iran nuclear deal. Israeli news outlets said there is a striking gap between the Israeli and U.S. positions as regards the increase in military aid as of the end of 2018.
The Israel Hayom newspaper quoted political sources as saying that the U.S. administration approved an Israeli request to provide Tel Aviv with four billion dollars in military aid for ten years, with an increase of $800 million from last year.
Israeli news outlets said the move came following the recently-struck U.S.-Iran nuclear deal. Israeli news outlets said there is a striking gap between the Israeli and U.S. positions as regards the increase in military aid as of the end of 2018.
27 feb 2016
US President Barack Obama this week signed into law a sweeping trade agreement that protects Israel from boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) by countries who oppose the ongoing military occupation of Palestinians.
The agreement -- H.R. 644: Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 -- was passed 75-20 in the Senate on Feb. 11 and later signed into law by the president on Feb. 24.
The agreement reiterates that US Congress “opposes politically motivated actions that penalize or otherwise limit commercial relations specifically with Israel,” referring directly to BDS activities.
The act also cites that congress “supports efforts” to prevent international organizations or governments from carrying out investigation or prosecution of US citizens who do business with “Israel, with Israeli entities, or in any territory controlled by Israel.”
The provision in effect allows US citizens immunity from conducting trade with illegal Israeli settlements, while its terminology fails to distinguish Israeli settlements from the state of Israel.
This terminology violates the US’ official line against settlements in occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank. But, the White House earlier this month said: “As with any bipartisan compromise legislation, there are provisions in this bill that we do not support.”
Despite the contravention, the White House said that Obama would sign the agreement into law “to help strengthen enforcement of the rules and level the playing field for American workers and businesses.”
The US government opposes the BDS movement against Israel, and while US law requires that products made in illegal Israeli settlements may not be labeled “Made in Israel,” the law is rarely enforced.
The BDS movement aims to exert political and economic pressure over Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories in a bid to repeat the success of the campaign which ended apartheid in South Africa.
Israel has been struggling to tackle a growing Palestinian-led boycott campaign which has had a number of high-profile successes abroad.
Moves inside the US -- Israel’s longstanding ally and number one provider of military aid -- to criminalize BDS have been slammed by human rights defenders as a violation of free speech.
A similar trend ran through the UK earlier this month following British proposals to forbid a boycott of Israeli settlement goods by publicly-funded British institutions.
Rafeef Ziadah, a spokesperson for the UK branch of the Palestinian BDS National Committee, slammed Britain's proposed regulation.
"By undermining local democracy in service of Israel, David Cameron is standing on the wrong side of history, just as Margaret Thatcher did with her support for apartheid South Africa," Ziadah said.
The agreement -- H.R. 644: Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 -- was passed 75-20 in the Senate on Feb. 11 and later signed into law by the president on Feb. 24.
The agreement reiterates that US Congress “opposes politically motivated actions that penalize or otherwise limit commercial relations specifically with Israel,” referring directly to BDS activities.
The act also cites that congress “supports efforts” to prevent international organizations or governments from carrying out investigation or prosecution of US citizens who do business with “Israel, with Israeli entities, or in any territory controlled by Israel.”
The provision in effect allows US citizens immunity from conducting trade with illegal Israeli settlements, while its terminology fails to distinguish Israeli settlements from the state of Israel.
This terminology violates the US’ official line against settlements in occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank. But, the White House earlier this month said: “As with any bipartisan compromise legislation, there are provisions in this bill that we do not support.”
Despite the contravention, the White House said that Obama would sign the agreement into law “to help strengthen enforcement of the rules and level the playing field for American workers and businesses.”
The US government opposes the BDS movement against Israel, and while US law requires that products made in illegal Israeli settlements may not be labeled “Made in Israel,” the law is rarely enforced.
The BDS movement aims to exert political and economic pressure over Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories in a bid to repeat the success of the campaign which ended apartheid in South Africa.
Israel has been struggling to tackle a growing Palestinian-led boycott campaign which has had a number of high-profile successes abroad.
Moves inside the US -- Israel’s longstanding ally and number one provider of military aid -- to criminalize BDS have been slammed by human rights defenders as a violation of free speech.
A similar trend ran through the UK earlier this month following British proposals to forbid a boycott of Israeli settlement goods by publicly-funded British institutions.
Rafeef Ziadah, a spokesperson for the UK branch of the Palestinian BDS National Committee, slammed Britain's proposed regulation.
"By undermining local democracy in service of Israel, David Cameron is standing on the wrong side of history, just as Margaret Thatcher did with her support for apartheid South Africa," Ziadah said.
