Haaretz 15/09/2006
On Uri
By David Grossman
My dear Uri,
At 20 minutes to 3 in the morning, on the night between Saturday and Sunday, they rang our bell. On the intercom. They said they were from the army. Already three days in which every thought begins with "no." No, he won't come, no, we won't speak, no we won't laugh. No, this lad with the ironic expression and the maddening sense of humor won't be any more. No, the rare conjunction of determination and delicacy will no longer exist, no, there will no longer be Uri's boundless tenderness, nor the quiet with which he stabilizes every storm. And no, we will no longer watch "The Simpsons" and "Seinfeld" together, nor will we listen to Johnny Cash with you, and no, we will not feel your strong embrace and we will not see you walking and talking with Yonatan, gesticulating enthusiastically, and we won't see you hugging Ruthie, the darling of your heart.
My beloved Uri, during all of your short life we all learned from you. From your strength and your determination to follow your own path. To follow it even if there is no chance that you will succeed in it. We followed with wonder your battle to get accepted to a tank commanders' course. How you would not give in to your commanders, because you knew that you could be a good commander, and you were not prepared to be content with giving less than you are capable of giving. And when you succeeded, I thought, here is a person who knows his abilities in such a simple and intelligent way. In whom there is no pretense and no arrogance. Who is not influenced by what others say about him. Whose source of strength is within himself.
And you were like that from birth. A child who lives in harmony with himself and with those around him. A child who knows his place, who knows he is loved, who is aware of his limitations and knows his strengths. And truly, from the moment you bent the entire army to your will and became a commander, it was clear what kind of commander and human being you are. And today we are hearing from your friends and your soldiers about a commander and friend, who would wake up before everyone in order to organize everything, and go to sleep only after everyone had dozed off. And yesterday, at midnight, I looked at the house that was quite a mess after hundreds of people had visited and consoled us and I said, nu, now we need Uri to help get things organized.
You were the leftist in your battalion, and they respected you because you stood by your opinion without giving up any of your military tasks. When you went out to Lebanon, Mom said what she was most afraid of was your "Eliphelet syndrome." We were very much afraid that like Eliphelet in the song, if it became necessary to rescue someone who was wounded, you would run right into the line of fire, and you would be the first to volunteer to bring a supply of ammunition that had long run out. And just as you were your whole life, at home and at school and in your military service, and just as you always volunteered to give up a furlough because another soldier needed a furlough more than you, or because his household was in a more difficult situation - that is exactly how you would act there, too, in Lebanon, in face of the difficult fighting.
You were a son to me, and also a friend. And you were the same to Mom. Our soul is linked to yours. You were a person at peace with himself, a person with whom it was good to be. I cannot even say out loud how much you were someone to run with, for me. On every one of your furloughs you would say, "Dad, let's talk" and we would go somewhere together, usually to a restaurant, and sit and talk. You told me so much, Uri, and I felt pride that I had the good fortune to be your confidant. That a man like you chose me.
You lit up our life, Uri. Mom and I raised you with love. It was so easy to love you with all our hearts, and I know that life was good for you. That your short life was good. I hope that I was a father worthy of a child like you. But I know that being a child of Michal's means to grow up in endless generosity and kindness and love, and you received all of these in great abundance, and you knew how to appreciate and how to give thanks, and nothing that you received was taken for granted.
At this time I am not saying anything about the war in which you were killed. We, our family, have already lost in this war. The State of Israel will now make its own reckoning of conscience. We will huddle into our pain, surrounded by our good friends, wrapped in the tremendous love that we feel today from so many people, most of whom we do not know, and I thank them for their boundless support. I fervently hope that we will know how to give one another this love and solidarity at other times as well. This is perhaps our most unique national resource, our greatest national spiritual treasure.
I fervently hope that we will know how to be more tender toward one another. I fervently hope that we will succeed in extricating ourselves from the violence and hostility that have seeped so deeply into all aspects of our lives. I fervently hope that we will know how to straighten up and save ourselves now, at the very last minute, because very hard times still await us.
Uri was a very Israeli child; even his name is so Israeli and so Hebrew. He was the essence of Israeliness as I would want to see it. The Israeliness that has almost been forgotten. The Israeliness that is sometimes considered almost a curiosity. And he was a person with values. This word has been much eroded and hs been ridiculed in recent years, because in our crazy, cruel and cynical world it is not "cool" to be a person of values, or to be a humanist, or be truly sensitive to the other's distress, even if the other is your enemy on the field of battle. But I learned from Uri that it is indeed both possible and necessary. That we indeed need to preserve our soul. To defend ourselves in both senses: both to protect our life and to preserve our soul. To insist on defending it from simplistic might and simplistic thinking, from the corruption that lies in cynicism, from the pollution of the heart and the scorn for human beings that truly represent the biggest curse for everyone who lives his whole life in a disaster zone like ours.
Uri simply had the courage to be himself, always, in every situation. And finding his precise voice in everything he said and did is what protected him from the pollution, corruption and shriveling of the soul.
On the night between Saturday and Sunday, at 20 minutes to 3 in the morning, they rang at our door. Over the intercom they said that they were from the army, and went to open the door and I thought to myself - this is it, life is over. But five hours later, when Michal and I went into Ruthie's room and woke her up to tell her the terrible news, Ruthie, after the first tears, said: "But we will live, right? We will live and we will go on trips like before and I want to keep on singing in the choir and we will keep on laughing like always and I want to learn to play the guitar." And we hugged her and told her that we would live.
We will draw our strength from Uri; he had strengths that will suffice us for many years. He had such a strong aura of life, of vitality and of warmth and love, and its light will continue to shine on us, even if the star that generated it is extinguished. Our beloved, we had the great privilege of living with you. Thank you for every moment you were ours.
Mom and Dad, Yonatan and Ruthie
What did we learn from the war? - Peace Now - August 2006
Peace Now staff from Israel answer activists questions
The war against Hezbollah reminded each of us, whether on the right or left, that the Middle East is a dangerous and unpredictable place and that at any moment Israel could find itself fighting for its very existence. This last summer we all witnessed an extremist Islamic front forming against Israel headed by Iran, which has made it its goal to completely destroy the country and put an end to the Zionist dream. In these circumstances, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Israeli Syrian conflict play into Iran's hands and serve as fertile ground for expanding resistance to Israel and the Middle East, in the Arab world and in the whole world. The war also showed us that with force alone we cannot defeat the dangers that face us even by a small guerrilla organization. To that end diplomatic action is required.
So what should we do?
Only peace agreements with the Palestinians and with Syria can isolate fundamentalist Islam and lead to final and absolute recognition by the Arab world of Israel's status and right to exist.
Who is the partner?
In the Palestinian Authority Israel should speak to Chairman Abu Mazen and strengthen him against the extremist elements. We must not remain indifferent to the internal struggles inside Palestinian society and must seriously examine Hamas's intentions to stop fighting Israel and enter diplomatic negotiations. Time is not working in Israel's favor and with each day despair in the territories increases and the extremists strengthen. The chance to renew negotiations and reach an agreement with Abu Mazen could be a last chance that will not recur for years.
And what about Syria?
The failure of Israel and Syria to reach a peace agreement at Shepherdstown ultimately led to the withdrawal from Lebanon without agreement into the reality of Hezbollah fortifying on the border. Resolution of the conflicts with Syria and Lebanon is a strategic necessity that will allow Israel to withstand the increasing threats from Iran and the extremist Islamic movements that want to destroy Israel.
Experience shows that despite the difficulties and the "cold" peace, our relations with Egypt and Jordan remain stable and constitute a very important strategic asset.
And what if there is no peace agreement?
The confrontation in the West Bank and Gaza will go on, including the Qassam rockets and the terror attacks, as will the conflict with Syria and Hezbollah. Israel could find itself suffering further bloodshed, fatal damage to its economy and social fortitude, loss of its international status and a weakening of its ability to withstand existential threats such as the Iranian threat.
With each day, voices in the Arab world, who believe the only way to deal with Israel is in the battlefield and that Israel can be destroyed militarily, get louder. The absence of a political process will lead to radicalization and a dangerous conflagration in the entire region.
Peace Now's position regarding the fighting against Hezbollah is complex. On the one hand, the movement supports Israel's right to react to Hezbollah assaults, and certainly to an attack on Israeli territory. On the other hand, we believe that wallowing in the Lebanese mud is not in Israel's interest. Therefore we called upon the Israeli government to act to end the conflict through political means.
No Blank Check
by
Tzaly Reshef
Yediot Aharonot July 18, 2006
War is death. It's bereavement. It's mothers lamenting their children. It's devastation. It's destruction. It's an ugly human phenomenon. War encompasses feelings of hate, revenge, nationalism. It brings out the worst in mankind. War is the opposite of the desire to live, to love, to raise children, to create.
Since Israel was founded we've lived this. It is already difficult to count all the wars, military interventions, and military operations of different sorts. For almost sixty years already we have been living by the sword. Even so, the Israeli public believes that our nation seeks peace, that our hand is always outstretched for peace, and that only our bloodthirsty enemies force wars on us. Theoretically, it's true: there is not a single Israeli who won't swear that he seeks peace. In practice, our self examination reveals blood.
Too many times we have entered war because of a lack of will to talk to the other side, because of a lack of readiness to speak at all, because of our faith that we could coerce solutions with force. Too many strategists already planned wars which involve a speculative political plan. This is how we tried to create a new order in Lebanon. And this is how we're attempting to topple the Hamas government in the Palestinian Authority. Israeli politicians improved upon the saying of Von Clausewitz that war is the continuation of politics by other means. Too many times we've turned to war because we were scared to talk, to compromise. We turned to war out of political weakness, out of a fixation on our relationship with the other side.
Olmert's government is also guilty of committing this ancient sin. Olmert entered the prime minister's office and announced far-reaching political programs based on the desire to end to the occupation. Before he managed to warm his seat, he found an elected government in the Palestinian Authority headed by Hamas.
Instead of seeing an opportunity to check out the possibility of negotiations with the Palestinian hard liners, Olmert chose first to boycott the PA. Second, Olmert put together an international coalition to shove the PA into the corner, from which the path to the use of force is short: force by Palestinians, Kassam fire, a strong response by us, assassinations, the killing of many dozens of civilians, and from here – the Hamas attack, the killing of our soldiers and the abduction of Gilad Shalit. Again we were short-sighted. Again we believed that we could coerce solutions by using force. The military operation in Gaza will bring more death, more destruction, more bereavement, but it won't stop the actions of hate and it won't return Gilad.
In Lebanon, after countless mistakes and the loss of over one thousand soldiers, we made the correct decision six years ago. We ended the occupation in the south, we withdrew to the last centimeter and received international legitimacy. Despite this, a fundamentalist terrorist group, motivated by Iranian forces of destruction, killing, and devastation and with Syrian backing continued preparing for war against us, continued to arouse us, to challenge our very existence as a state. Military action against Hezbollah became unavoidable. The question was only when and how.
I'm not a pacifist. At certain times, in certain conditions, and without other options, in order to protect your life, your security, your future, your right to live in peace, there is no alternative but to fight. In Lebanon this situation came to be. But will the war, which as I said is justified, continue to be justified without thought to the amount of force used? Is the destruction of an entire neighborhood in Beirut justified? When lacking clear military targets, is it justified to choose targets without distinction? The answer is no. Even when war is necessary, it justifies only the violence needed. It requires caution with the lives of civilians and the avoidance of unnecessary destruction. The pictures that are broadcast nightly from Beirut raise doubts: Is proportionality being maintained? Are we taking only the necessary, justified steps that with minimum impact eliminate the threat of Hezbollah? Or at the same opportunity, because of a desire to increase our deterrence, are we acting like the mad neighbor to be feared?
As time passes and we escalate our activities in Lebanon, more and more people in Israel and the world will express reservations, and the original justification for force will lose its validity. It is our right to fight to eliminate the threat to our civilians. It is our right to chase out Hezbollah and to demand Lebanese and international responsibility for quiet on our northern border. But this right is not a blank check for unlimited military action.
Attorney Tzaly Reshef, a founder of PeaceNow, served in the 15th Knesset, representing the Labor Party.
Professor Galia Golan, a founder member of Shalom Achshav, made the
following comments in reply to an interview with Akiva Eldar of Haaretz:
"I favor honoring international borders and of course we have a right to protect that border and to respond to attack. The question is how one responds. And in the matter of a guerilla operation into Israel and the kidnapping of soldiers - something that has happened in the past as well, certainly, the response has not been commeasurate with the provocation.
Coming on the heels of the attack at Kerem Shalom, Israel "snapped" (like a rubber band that breaks when strained). The army said "enough" (indeed they were insulted) and believed, genuinely, that Israel's deterrant power must be recovered. Bombing Beirut airport and other sites led to the rapid escalation, and restoring deterrant power became punishing the civilian population so that they would vomit out Hizbollah. Two objectives that have proved totally useless in the past, there and elsewhere.
We never seem to succeed in securing deterrance with the Arabs (remember the army pressed to go to war in 1967 for just that purpose), and god knows we certainly have punished Arab/Palestinian populations through war and killings enough times to grasp that it breeds anti-Israel solidarity, not "surrender."
Also, beware of the arguments that the world is with us, viz even the moderate Arab states' opposition to Hizbollah and their refusal, therefore, to convene the Arab League. This will not last - we are complicating their policy tremendously, for how long can they maintain a moderate position, favoring negotiations with Israel (via the Arab League Resolution of 2002) while the Lebanese civilian population and infrastructure are being attacked massively and relentlessly by Israel."
THE FIRST MIDDLE EAST WAR OF THE 21ST CENTURY
A summary by Paul Usiskin, Chair of Peace Now UK
Serving soldiers and officers of the IDF founded Shalom Achshav -Peace Now Israel - after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, reflecting their frustration at the lack of an Israeli political horizon in the aftermath of that shocking war. The feeling of those founders was that there needed to be new initiatives by Israel to create relationships with her neighbours which in the late 70s was not forthcoming from Jerusalem .
Many may ask what has changed since then? There are no simple answers and today Israel finds herself at war again. Those of us who care for and love Israel thought that we had seen the worst of the abuse of Israel 's undeniable military power in 1982 in Operation Peace in the Galilee . Israel fought that as a war of choice, not one that had been foisted on it. And then Israel settled itself into the quicksand of S. Lebanon for eighteen years. The parallels between 1982 and the current circumstances are - as with everything to do with the Middle East's conflicts involving Israel - quixotic to say the least. The outcome of 1982 is the one that the current Government of Israel yearns for. But the removal of the PLO's threat to Israel ultimately proved temporary and into the vacuum many years later stepped Hezbollah. Lebanese Premier Siniora has admitted that S. Lebanon under Hezbollah as a state-within-a-state yet again.
Yassir Arafat returned from his exile in Tunis after his 1982 ouster to become Palestinian president. Is Sheikh Nasrallah likely to become Lebanon 's next leader?
According to Brigadier General Shlomo Brom, a seasoned former negotiator, active supporter of the Geneva Accords and former Chief of Strategic Planning for the IDF General Staff, the IDF will be unable to achieve with Hezbollah what was achieved with the PLO (* see transcript below ) . In Brom's view the IDF's aims are limited, despite the deployment of massive force. This is necessary in order to enable a diplomatic solution. What emerges is that the IDF will not seek to occupy Southern Lebanon but will instead identify, isolate and destroy major Hezbollah positions and then seek the diplomatic framework with which to ensure that the border with Lebanon is no longer occupied by a threatening force.
In the previous Lebanon war, Israel was not simultaneously seeking to crush the Palestinian leadership in Gaza and the Israel-Palestine conflict will still be there when the bloodshed in S. Lebanon is over. Would a miraculous deal on Gaza three weeks ago and the return of Gilad Shalit, have denied Hezbollah its excuse for its aggression against Israel ? Probably not, but those who see Hezbollah championing the Palestinian cause need to know that Hezbollah has done little or nothing to serve Palestine - Hezbollah is Shi'ite, Hamas and the Palestinians are Sunni.
Over the last three weeks we have witnessed major statements in the UK press by two Israeli peace activists, both of them novelists. David Grossman and Amos Oz offered different perspectives from two different generations. Grossman's piece provided the framework for a letter from PNUK's chairman in the Jewish Chronicle (*see below). Do their different views suggest a split amongst the many involved in Israel 's peace camp? The answer is that as ever, this camp is a broad synagogue. Oz reflects a fairly straightforward and uncompromising stance which also echoes the majority of Israeli public opinion. Grossman, whose career path as a journalist has given him a different perspective, clearly states that violence achieves nothing. In one sense he is saying what Shlomo Brom said - that military action alone provides no solution. What causes deep concern in the Peace Camp is the brutal use of Israeli force in both Gaza and S. Lebanon with its concomitant humanitarian crises, and the fear that the Lebanese quicksand will once again suck Israel in to a long term S. Lebanese presence.
The current IDF Chief of Staff has said that Lebanon would be set back 20 years. The Commander of Northern Command said that this is not the time to count bodies, this is war. Israel 's Prime Minister talked about 'purification'. This bespeaks a blindness in Israel 's top echelons to the costs of war and the limits of Israel 's military power. Indeed they reflect a position that Israel can do unto Lebanon what it tries to do unto Gaza . If this is the policy, it will not succeed. Shlomo Brom's analysis echoes again and we are left wondering whether the military men's previous comments are just war spin to encourage the troops. To issue such threats about Lebanon, to ignore the potential for death, is to pretend that what is going on is just a little local Middle Eastern difficulty with no ramifications for anybody else. That may have been true in the days when Lyndon Johnson described Israel in far-away terms as "that little democracy in the Mid-East." And though George Bush Jnr seems, as Americans For Peace Now (APN) has suggested, to be missing from the region and this war, this is now, and the list of those involved seems endless: Syria and Iran, Egypt Jordan and Saudi Arabia, the Shiite world, the G8, the EU, the UK and the USA together.
APN's press release expresses a view on Lebanon with which many in the Peace Now family identify (*see excerpt below.)
In the UK Israel does not have the same public assent that it appears to enjoy from the Blair Government. A comment on a BBC radio programme by a veteran British journalist equating the IDF's actions in S. Lebanon to those of the Nazis in Europe received rapturous audience applause. (*See below PNUK's Vice Chairman's broadcast response.)
There were a number of demonstrations against and for Israel 's current Lebanese operations. One in central London , featured an extraordinary line-up: The Palestine Solidarity Campaign with its links to the Socialist Workers Party and the Respect Party; the Moslem Association of Britain which is a fundamentalist and anti-Israel organisation whose leadership cannot countenance even a one-state solution; and support from Jews for Justice for the Palestinians. What they all fail to achieve in their various garbs is the liberation of one grain of Palestinian sand, the alleviation of the suffering of one single Palestinian and most important of all, as a consequence of all their activity, not one minute of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians leading to end of conflict and peace.
The Jewish community's rally for Israel "Yes to Peace - No to Terror" at the JFS School , featured the President of the Board of Deputies, the Israel Ambassador, the President of the UJIA and the Chief Rabbi. The most comprehensive speech came from the head of the leading Israel fund-raising charity, the UJIA. Some of my comments above would not have been welcome in that context. But the many Israelis present welcomed the sight of the Peace Now banner.
However, the tenor and much of the contents of the Chief Rabbi's speech are to be welcomed. His references to the suffering of Lebanese and Palestinians as well as that of Israelis is commendable. Many in the Peace camp welcome the fact that he was able to comment on this, when even Israel television is refusing to refer to the deaths of children on the other side. Those who would have wanted to hear more strident bellicose words would have been disappointed.
In Tel Aviv, Israel 's democracy enables Israelis to demonstrate and publicly voice their anxieties at the death and damage being wrought in Israel 's air campaign, whilst supporting Israel 's basic right to defend itself from attack, even as Katyushas are killing Israeli civilians and soldiers are dying in the country's defence. In Diaspora this is not acceptable and the distance from the realities forces black and white conclusions.
Peace Now UK supports the people of Israel as they face yet another war and urges its Government and its army to reduce to the absolute minimum the suffering and loss of life of any and all non-combatants. It urges the Government of Israel to pursue with the same voraciousness it employs to remove the threat its citizens are facing from Hezbollah, diplomatic initiatives to end this conflict. Perhaps before monuments to the dead from this latest chapter of bloodshed in the Middle East are erected there can be steps towards a different relationship between Israel and its neighbours. There is an urgency in this. Those who preach a fundamentalist Islamic credo against Israel have many supporters and it is with neighbouring governments, especially those of Lebanon and Syria , that Israel must seek new and different arrangements.
There are the first positive signs of an emerging diplomatic initiative on both fronts as this is being written. Hezbollah have said they are willing for the Lebanese government to be the intermediary in a cease-fire and Prime Minister Olmert has described Lebanese Premier Siniora as a partner for dialogue. Syria is reported to be involved in seeking a prisoner exchange. Fateh sources have meanwhile confirmed that Hamas is willing to enter a cease fire deal. There is a long way to go and it will take time for any of these developments to bear fruit, but 'jaw jaw' is always preferable to 'war war'.
Shlomo Brom Transcript 20 July 2006 BBC World Tonight
Announcer The Israeli Government has made no secret of the fact that it doesn't just want its soldiers back, it wants Hezbollah dealt with once and for all, it wants disarmed, disbanded and cut off from support from outside. But is that a realistic aim?
Former Brigadier General Shlomo Brom is a former Chief of Strategic Planning in the Israeli Army's General Staff.
Brom: No I don't think so; the maximum we can hope for is to reach a kind of arrangement that will decrease the risk that Hezbollah is posing, but not more than that in my opinion.
Announcer: So do you think it was a mistake to start this big air campaign?
Brom: Not necessarily, because to achieve even a more modest objective there is a need to use much force because it is not easy to convince Hezbollah to agree to arrangements that will limit the threat that it poses to Israel .
Announcer: So what are the arrangements you think Israel might have to end up with?
Brom: I think that what we can hope for is arrangements that will put a distance between Israel and Hezbollah, by not allowing a deployment of armed elements of Hezbollah in South Lebanon and deploying in South Lebanon instead of Hezbollah some combination of Lebanese Armed Forces and international force.
Announcer: Do you think that is what the Government's aim has been all along?
Brom: I am not sure that this was their aim all along, but I have the impression that eventually they will get there.
Announcer: But at some point in the next few days or weeks you think there will come a point where the Government or the IDF just decide we've achieved enough?
Brom: I think that Mr Olmert's Government is in a situation in which it cannot afford to stop it unless the minimal objectives are achieved.
Announcer: So all the diplomacy we're now hearing about, the conversations at the UN, the plan to send the American Secretary for State, that's really meaningless then?
Brom: No. On the opposite. This is the key. Because this is the only way military achievements can be translated to realisations of the objective, because when I was talking about changing the situation on the border, the meaning was not changing it militarily but reaching arrangements that will be accepted by Lebanon, that will be accepted by the international community, with some kind of guarantees that are manifested by the presence of an international force for example, that Hezbollah will not return to this area.
Announcer: Do you then create a situation on the ground that allows you to go on with the diplomacy? Is that what's happening at the moment?
Brom: This is exactly the idea. On the ground and generally by weakening Hezbollah, by eroding its capabilities, you prepare the background for this kind of arrangements that can be achieved only through diplomacy.
JC Letters 21 st July 2006
David Grossman (JC 7th July) could have been describing subsequent events in Lebanon when describing the cycle of violence after the awful kidnap of Gilad Shalit. In the space of 3 weeks we've gone from one "crucial moment" to another - and as each has passed, Grossman's obvious truth "that we cannot achieve anything through violent acts" confronts us all. Both Hezbollah and Hamas cynically calculated collateral damage amongst innocent Lebanese and Palestinians. Ordinary Israelis lose their lives. I mourn them all. Zvi Stauber former Israel UK Ambassador (JC 14th July) ex Mossad chief Efraim HaLevy and former Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben Ami all called for negotiations to release the now 3 captured IDF soldiers, and echoed Grossman's reflections on the limits of Israel's power. It would not be weakness if Israel sought talks for this. How else to ensure their release?
APN Press Release excerpt 21 st July 2006
" Israel has a right to defend its territory and citizens. In doing so,
Israel must ensure that its military goals are defined and achievable,
and the means used to achieve them minimize harm to innocent civilians.
Failing this, Israel risks enraging the civilian populations,
mobilizing additional support for militants, and miring Israeli forces
in a long-term conflict with no exit strategy. Hamas and Hezbollah
cannot avoid responsibility for their reckless and provocative acts,
which triggered the current escalating violence. And as in any
conflict, the immediate trigger is not the whole story. "
Comment broadcast on BBC Radio 4's Any Answers 22 nd July 2006
It is incumbent upon men who have accumulated years of expertise as journalists to behave responsibility.
Israel has a right to defend itself against a terrorist aggressor that ultimately wants to destroy it. And whilst there is hardly any question that innocent lives are needlessly being lost as Israel seeks to fulfil its aim of destroying as much of Hezbollah as possible, to compare it to the Nazi Regime is as irresponsible as it is inaccurate.
Israel is not occupying S Lebanon and doesn't seek to, and Israel's actions there and in Palestine are not comparable to the Nazi's systematic murder of millions of Jews, Homosexuals and Gypsies, Poles and Russians.
APN Blasts Bush for Ignoring Middle East Crisis;
Circulates a Satirical Image of the President on a Milk Carton
Washington, D.C July 21st 2006 —Americans for Peace Now (APN) today blasted President Bush’s inaction during the ongoing Middle East crisis by releasing an original satirical image. The image showed a picture of President Bush on the side of a milk carton that bears the headline, “Missing?” APN is a Jewish, Zionist organization dedicated to enhancing Israel’s security through peace and to supporting the Israeli Peace Now movement.
The image is the centerpiece of an online advertising campaign and has been emailed to thousands of APN activists. The text accompanying the campaign notes that "no president in history has stood by idly while Israeli-Arab violence raged unchecked...The time has long passed for President Bush to take real action to restore order and to pursue a political process capable of ending violence and terror. Simply issuing stiff statements is not sufficient."
“President Bush’s inaction during the current crisis is inexcusable,” said Debra DeLee, APN President and CEO. “Responsible American policy would have President Bush or a senior envoy actively working to turn this dangerous crisis into an opportunity to achieve real security and stability on Israel’s borders.”
The image is available at here
PEACE NOW and Yesh Gvul publish Open Letter to Defense Minister Peretz
OPEN LETTER TO DEFENCE MINISTER PERETZ published in Haaretz on June 14th 2006
Dear Defence Minister Peretz
At this difficult time, responsibility for the security of the citizens of Israel is yours. It is both the right and duty of Israel to defend herself against Kassam rocket attacks on her population centres and to combat murderous suicide bombers.
However not all the means are appropriate to achieve these aims. As the Minister with overall control of our country’s defence, it is your task to determine, unequivocally, the dividing line between legitimate self defence and the bloodshed of the innocent.
We urge you to order a complete cease-fire of IDF artillery fire into the Gaza Strip. Without linking this in any way to whether such fire caused the death of innocents on Gaza Beach (9th June 2006), the use of artillery fire has and will continue to cause the death of innocent citizens. Even targetted killings of murderers as a defensive act has to be carried out within clear limits and with maximum effort to avoid casualties amongst passers-by. It is your responsibility to promise that this duty of care will be adhered to by the IDF.
The distinction between a justified attack on combatants and protecting the lives of non-combatants, must guide all security activities – at check-points , whilst issuing work permits, in the provision of economic support. Pressurising the Palestinian population as a means of fighting terror and collective punishments are ethically unacceptable, politically inefficient and result in greater support for violence and terror. Erosion of these ethical pillars, which separate a justified struggle and the indiscriminate spilling of blood, will stain the image of Israeli society. It is our sincerest wish that you will protect both Israel and her ethical image. Do not dissappoint us.
|
 |
Janet Aviad |
Yeremiyahu Yovel Edna Maziah Sami Mikhael Avishai Margalit Amos Oz Yair Tzaban Aviezer Ravitzky Ze’ev Shternhal Meir Shalev |
The Amona Outpost Precedent
The dismantling of the illegal outpost of Amona on February 2006 was a turning point in the history of the settlements, not least because some 200 stone-throwing Israeli protesters were injured during clashes with Israeli police forces and Army. Unlike the gentle and restrained tactics employed by the Israel Defence Forces in the Gaza pullout, this was the first time Israeli settlers were subjected to anything resembling the tactics used against Palestinians.
Settlements in Focus: Amona Redux - February 2006
What is the timeline of legal decisions that led up to the recent demolitions at the illegal outpost of Amona?
The illegal outpost of Amona was first constructed in late 1995. Demolition orders for nine structures at Amona – all built illegally on land that is privately owned by (and appropriately registered to) Palestinians – were issued in October 2004 by the Civil Administration. Read more...