Nandy calls for UK import ban on Israel settlements over annexations: Report

Labour hardens stance to apply import ban if Israel's West Bank plans go ahead amid mounting international opposition

NOW THAT SOCIALIST CORBYN IS GONE WILL THE RIGHT WING ZIONIST LOBBY STOP CLAIMING LABOUR IS ANTI-SEMITIC

Move would require "courage that so far ministers have not 

been willing to show", UK's shadow foreign secretary 

Lisa Nandy says (AFP/File photo)

By MEE staff 27 June 2020 

The UK must ban the imports from illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank if Israel presses ahead with annexation plans, said Lisa Nandy, the shadow foreign secretary, the Guardian reported.

The move would be a "major step" and require "courage that so far ministers have not been willing to show", she said. But "such a blatant breach of international law must have consequences".

Nandy's proposal, backed by party leader Keir Starmer, is a significant toughening of Labour's policy on Israel. In its 2019 manifesto, the party merely called for a diplomatic solution, the Guardian noted.

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, has said Israel will "apply sovereignty" to as much as 30 percent of the occupied West Bank as early as Wednesday, despite mounting international opposition and warnings that annexation would kill off a future Palestinian state.



Kushner tells Netanyahu to 'greatly slow' annexation processRead More »

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres earlier this week called on Israel to abandon its plan to annex large parts of the occupied West Bank and Jordan Valley, saying it would violate international law and "grievously harm" the prospect of a two-state solution. The warning was echoed by other world leaders, including the Arab League, which said Israel's actions may trigger a major escalation of conflict in the region.

On Wednesday, more than 1,000 European legislators from 25 countries urged their leaders to stop Israel's annexation plans, AFP reported. In a letter published in newspapers and sent to European foreign ministers, the parliamentarians, including 240 UK signatories, said they were "deeply worried about the precedent this would set for international relations".

On Friday, the Belgian Chamber of Representatives voted to create a list of potential "counter-measures" that could be implemented should Israel go forward with its West Bank annexation plans.

In February, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the UK government's position on Israel-Palestine was unchanged in the wake of Donald Trump's proposals for the region, but the US president's plan should be given "genuine and fair consideration". Trump's so-called "deal of the century" is widely seen as a one-sided blueprint for Israeli annexation.

The Trump administration’s support for Netanyahu's plan might discourage UK action for fear of jeopardising a UK-US trade deal, Nandy said. But Britain has a "unique moral responsibility and must step up. Should we fail to do so, the world will pay the price for a long time to come.

"It is a shameful proposition to which the UK cannot be a silent witness. Across the world, concern is growing... So far, the UK government has been conspicuously absent from this global response," the Guardian quoted Nandy as saying.

"This is now urgent. The government must be clear with the Israeli coalition government that concrete action will follow, including a ban on goods entering Britain from the illegal settlements in the West Bank. This is a major step, but such a blatant breach of international law must have consequences. It will take a level of courage that so far ministers have not been willing to sho

Will the world finally stand up to Israel over West Bank annexation?
If Israel goes ahead with annexation, it will mean the definitive end of the two-state solution, and leave the current single state as the only reality

A man waves a Palestinian flag during a protest to mark Nakba Day (AFP)

On 15 May it will be 72 years since Israel's establishment and the Palestinian Nakba it led to.

The consequences of this seminal event for Palestinians have been with us to this day: six to eight million refugees dispersed in camps or in exile inside and outside the original homeland; a previously whole country now fragmented into a series of territories ruled by Israel but of unequal status; and what looks like a grim future.

None of this was inevitable. Had it not been for the protected status accorded to Israel by Western states that has shielded it from sanction no matter what it did, the course of Palestine's modern history would have been wholly different.
An exceptional state

That exceptionalism has existed from the time of the Balfour Declaration in 1917 which led to the creation of the Israeli state in 1948. The Zionist project behind the establishment of Israel and its subsequent policies was consistently encouraged and supported by Western powers.

If Israel had been a normal state, it would not have been allowed to expel the natives of Palestine, refuse their return, acquire their territory by force, or subjugate and besiege them

If Israel had been a normal state, accountable for its conduct and subject to punishment and sanction, it would not have been allowed to expel the natives of Palestine, or refuse their return, or acquire their territory by force, or subjugate and besiege them, or the myriad other crimes it has committed against them.

There would have been no Nakba to commemorate on 15 May and no refugees, and Gaza would be free.

Thanks to Western indulgence, however, today Israel is a regional superpower, invincible on the world stage, and wielding power and influence far beyond its size and capabilities. There is little doubt that Israel only attained this dominant position through the guaranteed impunity from sanction it enjoys.

As the experience of Israel's 72 years of existence has shown, no infringement of international law, egregious crime against defenceless Palestinians, or even disloyalty to its American patron has succeeded in eroding this impunity.
The appropriate response

There were times in the history of the conflict when international outrage at Israel's behaviour could have sparked an appropriate response.

The dire situation of Gaza is a case in point: a draconian, purposeless, 13-year old siege that violates every aspect of human rights; Israel's repeated military assaults on Gaza's helpless population, the worst in 2014; and the Israeli sniper fire against unarmed Gaza protesters, that have prompted questions about Israeli war crimes.


There were times in the history of the conflict when international outrage at Israel's behaviour could have sparked an appropriate response

An international community determined to bring Israel to heel could have countered these abuses in many ways. World markets could have been closed to Israeli settlement produce, relations with Israel suspended, past agreements with it reviewed or not renewed, and, in the last resort, economic or diplomatic sanctions imposed.

Yet, apart from verbal censure and exhortations to amend its behaviour, Israel has suffered no ill effects. By contrast, Russia's 2014 "annexation" of Crimea, not agreed by everyone as annexation, was unequivocally rejected and condemned. The US and EU punished Russia for its "illegal invasion and annexation" by imposing restrictive and wide-ranging sanctions, still in force.
End of special impunity?

Might these sanctions become a precedent for similar action against Israel's proposed West Bank annexation? And could that mark the beginning of the end of Israel's special impunity?

The plan recently announced by Israel's unity coalition government aims to initiate the process of annexing the Jordan Valley and the 128 Jewish settlements on 1 July.

A Palestinian woman argues with a member of the Israeli occupation forces as they disperse a demonstration outside the Damascus Gate in the Old City of Jerusalem on 15 May 2018 (AFP)

That amounts to 30-40 percent of the West Bank, which, after annexation, will become subject to Israeli sovereignty. This has elicited international opposition, but in reality, it will make little difference.

The actual status of these areas, which have been administered under Israeli civil law, and regarded as de facto part of Israel since 1967, will hardly change.

Despite that, the Palestinian president has threatened to tear up all agreements with Israel and America if the annexation goes ahead. An advertisement in Israeli newspapers last month signed by 220 retired Israeli army generals and security officials called for blocking the plan.

The EU, Arab League, and Egypt and Jordan, the two Arab states which have peace treaties with Israel, have all condemned it.

Eleven members of the US Congress have called on Israel to halt the annexation. In an unprecedented move, the US House of Representatives passed a resolution opposing Israel's West Bank annexation.
A step too far

As against that, Israel's 53 years of occupation of the 1967 territories has been tolerated by the international community, but this latest move seems a step too far.

It is true that annexation was outlawed by the UN Charter in 1945, and the "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force" was the basis of Security Council Resolution 242 which is still on the statute books.

Netanyahu's annexation plan will kill Israel Read More »

Annexation will also starkly expose the apartheid system Israel operates in the Palestinian territories. In the past Israel has always managed to camouflage its most egregious crimes by clever PR, but such flagrant breaches of international law cannot be disguised.

They demand a response. Without it, the West, the Arab states, and the Palestinian leadership will be glaringly exposed as toothless weaklings. In a long history of capitulation to Israel's wishes, even they fear they cannot allow this annexation to pass, if only to save face.

Does that mean they will sanction Israel, as has happened with Russia? On past evidence it is unlikely, and Israel will still manage to find a formula to mollify their opposition.

On the other hand, if Israel goes ahead with the annexation plan, it might not be a bad thing for the Palestinians. It will mean the definitive end of the two-state solution, and leave the current single state as the only reality.

The Jewish Israelis and Palestinians who live there are now unequal. But with more Palestinians demanding equal citizenship in the annexed areas, as Daniel Pipes, ardent US supporter of Israel, fears, that will change.

And the Nakba commemoration this month might well be the last.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Ghada Karmi is a former research Fellow at the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies, University of Exeter. She was born in Jerusalem and was forced to leave her home with her family as a result of Israel’s creation in 1948. The family moved to England, where she grew up and was educated. Karmi practised as a doctor for many years working as a specialist in the health of migrants and refugees. From 1999 to 2001 Karmi was an Associate Fellow of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, where she led a major project on Israel-Palestinian reconciliation.

Netanyahu's annexation plan is a sham. Apartheid has been decades in the making

Richard Silverstein
24 June 2020 

Proposed annexation is a red herring, relieving liberal Zionists of responsibility for Israel's broader apartheid system and ongoing Palestinian suffering

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends the weekly cabinet meeting on 14 June (Reuters)


Annexation is a sham.

Don’t get me wrong: this doesn’t mean that Israel’s proposed annexation of the Jordan Valley won’t further dispossess Palestinians. Israel will be stealing 30 percent of the land set aside for a Palestinian state under previous, failed peace proposals, causing further suffering to Palestinians.

But this particular annexation proposal, to which the new Israeli government agreed in its coalition deal, is a red herring - a distraction from the systemic nature of Israel’s dispossession of Palestinians. It permits liberal Zionists and the international community to focus their attention on undoing this particular evil, relieving them of responsibility for the entire apartheid system Israel has developed, both inside and outside the green line.
Religious intolerance

Statements from British Jewish leaders, US Congress members, European Union officials and human rights experts have warned of the consequences of annexation. They have targeted the soft, “moderate” underbelly of the governing coalition, Blue and White MKs, telling them how badly the world would look upon Israel if this proposal was enacted.

But all of this liberal whining avoids a far greater evil: a Judeo-supremacist regime built on religious intolerance and ethnic cleansing.


The present Israeli regime has as much, or more, in common with Iran's Islamic republic, Saudi Arabia's Islamic protectorate, or the Afghan Taliban than it does with western democracy

The problem with the Israeli state is not one particular policy, no matter how odious. It goes back to the very foundations of the state and the thinking of its founders, foremost among them David Ben-Gurion. While there were some voices among early Zionist leaders who sought integration, or at least peaceful coexistence with their Palestinian neighbours, Ben-Gurion was a maximalist who espoused ethnic cleansing in his diaries and letters well before he founded the state.

The sine qua non of statehood for him was a Jewish majority and Jewish superiority. “Arabs” might remain inside the new nation’s borders, but only if they acquiesced to their diminished status.

Even then, Ben-Gurion feared the Palestinian presence so much that he and the Palmach militia organised and conducted Plan Dalet, which resulted in the Nakba - the expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians in conjunction with the 1948 founding of Israel.

Palestinian communities that survived the war remained under martial law for two decades, though they posed no security threat.
Boiling the frog

As an American Jew, I was raised on liberal Zionism. I was taught from an early age that Israel was a Jewish and democratic state. I was taught to be proud of the mutual coexistence of those two terms. But the religious component of Israeli identity, as it has come to be defined, precludes democracy; they cannot coexist. It took me decades to realise this.

While it would be ill-advised to attempt to eliminate or suppress religion in a truly democratic state of Israel-Palestine, religion must be separated from the political realm if this state is ever to become normalised.

The religions of Israel’s Jewish and Palestinian citizens will remain critical to them and their identities. If practised appropriately, they will enrich the fabric of the state without prejudicing one religious or ethnic group over another. But the present Israeli regime has as much, or more, in common with Iran’s Islamic republic, Saudi Arabia’s Islamic protectorate, or the Afghan Taliban than it does with western democracy.

Palestinians protest against Israel’s annexation plan near Ramallah on 19 June (AFP)

One of the clever elements of Zionist expansionism is to pursue its goals gradually, rather than all at once. The poor frog doesn’t realise that he’s being boiled in the pot until it’s too late, because the flame raises the temperature gradually and almost imperceptibly.

Thus, Netanyahu has already backed off his original proposal of annexing the entire Jordan Valley. He is now entertaining “annexation-lite”, absorbing the major settlement enclaves of Ariel, Maaleh Adumim and Gush Etzion, while leaving the remaining territory unannexed. This hides the fact that once these blocs become part of Israel, the surrounding territory is Palestinian in name only; whatever is left will be hemmed in by Israeli fences, roads and infrastructure. And Israel could, at a later date, annex the rest.
Silver lining

In a recent Middle East Eye webinar, Professor Rashid Khalidi described annexation as “largely a red herring”, noting that it has been ongoing since 1967 in various ways, with Israeli law already applying throughout the occupied territories.

“We have to be thinking in broader terms than the narrow diplomatic language that’s been used. Israel has been annexing and creating a one-state reality since 1967. This [current annexation plan] is just a tiny step in the process,” Khalidi said, noting that Netanyahu’s more limited proposal regarding the three settlement enclaves amounts to a “charade”.

World must fight back against Israeli annexation - whether formal or not 

Read More »

“We should be talking in much more fundamental terms about the systemic structural problems that are going to have to be addressed if this problem is to be resolved on a just and equitable basis,” he said.

If there is any silver lining in the annexation plan, it is that liberal Zionists, who once denounced the boycott movement and anyone labeling Israel as an apartheid state, have been forced to reckon with the failure of their vision.

South African anti-apartheid campaigner Benjamin Pogrund, who has spent decades fighting the notion that Israel is an apartheid state, recently said in an interview: “If we annex the Jordan Valley and the settlement areas, we are apartheid. Full stop. There’s no question about it.”

South Africa’s bantustans “were simply a more refined form of apartheid to mask what it really was”, Pogrund added, noting that the consequences of Israel’s planned annexation “will obviously be extremely grave. Friends of ours in the world will not be able to defend us”.

Cracks and divides

Similarly, the pro-Israel German party Die Linke has also called for sanctioning Israel if it goes forward with this plan. “Should the Israeli government resolve to carry out the annexation, Die Linke will advocate for the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement,” it said in a statement.

This EU protocol is important not only because it offers Israel tariff-free trade and privileges of member states, but also because of the status it confers on Israel, both in Europe and around the world. To lose these privileges would be an economic and political blow.

As we've seen in the past, just as tectonic plates can crack and divide, geological forces can drive them back together again

The party’s statement, as noted by journalist Ali Abunimah, comes close to abandoning a two-state solution, which is at the very heart of the liberal Zionism Die Linke upholds: “In the face of the Israeli government’s seeming rejection of a just two-state solution, in which citizens from both sides would live with equal rights, Die Linke calls for equal civil rights for Palestinians and Israelis,” the party stated.

“For Die Linke, the following principle holds everywhere and at all times: all inhabitants of every country should enjoy equal rights - irrespective of their religion, language or ethnic group.”

It’s important not to exaggerate the significance of these changes. They certainly mark a shift in the ranks of Israel’s liberal advocates. There is also no doubt about the tectonic shifts in US politics on Israel/Palestine, which have considerably widened discourse. But as we’ve seen in the past, just as tectonic plates can crack and divide, geological forces can drive them back together again.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Richard Silverstein writes the Tikun Olam blog, devoted to exposing the excesses of the Israeli national security state. His work has appeared in Haaretz, the Forward, the Seattle Times and the Los Angeles Times. He contributed to the essay collection devoted to the 2006 Lebanon war, A Time to Speak Out (Verso) and has another essay in the collection, Israel and Palestine: Alternate Perspectives on Statehood (Rowman & Littlefield) Photo of RS by: (Erika Schultz/Seattle Times)

BELGIUM DECLARED AN ANTI-SEMITIC STATE BY ZIONISTS

Belgium calls for sanctions against Israel if it annexes West Bank

In 101-0 vote, Belgium's Chamber of Representatives approves measure challenging Israel's plans to annex large parts of occupied West Bank

Belgian legislators stand at Federal Parliament in Brussels earlier this year (AFP/File photo)

By MEE staff Published date: 26 June 2020

The Belgian Chamber of Representatives voted to create a list of potential "counter-measures" that could be implemented should Israel go forward with its West Bank annexation plans.

In a 101-0 vote, with 39 abstentions, Belgium's parliament on Friday called for the government to create a series of reactive proposals to come into play if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu goes ahead with annexing parts of the occupied West Bank on 1 July.

The proposed measures, which have yet to be published, will be "geared at responding in a proportional manner to any Israeli annexation of occupied Palestinian territory", according to the resolution.

They also call for Belgium to push for resolutions against annexation in the UN Security Council, of which it is currently a member.

The motion urges the government to "to take the initiative with third countries, at European and multilateral levels, to prevent the annexation [by] Israel of the Palestinian territories, or parts of them".

The chamber was originally scheduled to vote on the sanctions measure, as well as a second resolution to recognise Palestine as a state, on Thursday, but the vote was postponed over objections from some MPs.

On Friday, the Palestinian statehood resolution was postponed again amid last minute amendments, the Times of Israel reported.

Socialist MP Malik Ban Achour, one of the supporters of the statehood resolution, said such a move would symbolise Belgium's support for a two-state solution based on "coexistence" and "the right to live in peace and security with mutually recognised, accepted and respected borders".

Both resolutions were proposed by MPs from left-wing parties, including the Socialist Party and members of the French and Green parties.

Earlier this week, more than 1,000 parliamentarians representing 25 European countries signed a letter warning Israel against annexing parts of the occupied West Bank.

The legislators "share serious concerns about President Trump’s plan for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the imminent prospect of Israeli annexation of West Bank territory", referring to the US administration's so-called "deal of the century" proposal.

In the event of annexation, the European Union would require consensus among its 27 member states to implement significant sanctions against Israel, but some countries, including Hungary and Austria, are widely expected to veto any strong initiatives.
Widespread calls to halt annexation

On Wednesday, the UN and Arab League called on Israel to "abandon" its West Bank annexation plans.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, addressing a virtual meeting of the Security Council, said Israel's annexation of Palestinian land would be a "watershed moment" and mark a "serious violation of international law".

"I call on the Israeli government to abandon its annexation plans," he said.


Meanwhile, the Arab League said Israel's actions may trigger a major escalation of conflict in the region.

"For three decades, real peace and the creation of an independent Palestinian state, remain elusive... despair is dominating the Palestinian mood and scene," said Ahmed Aboul Gheit, head of the Arab League.

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki warned that any annexation would be a "crime", adding that Israel's objective had for decades been to seize "maximum Palestinian land, with minimum Palestinians".

"Israel is testing the resolve of the international community, thinking that its colonial apartheid will prevail… We must prove it wrong," Maliki told the Security Council.

Luxembourg, Ireland, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden, Malta and Finland have also taken stances against Israel's proposed annexation.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Wednesday it was up to Israel to decide whether to annex settlements in the occupied West Bank. His comments came after senior aides to Trump met for a second day to discuss whether to give Netanyahu the green light for the move.

While presidential adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner had reportedly asked Netanyahu to delay the 1 July schedule for annexation, Pompeo, speaking to reporters this week, said extending the annexation was a decision "for Israelis to make".

UK Black Lives Matter rejects Israeli annexation of West Bank

BLM under fire from UK Board of Deputies, which accuses it of propagating an 'antisemitic trope'

Palestinians came out in support of the Black Lives Matter movement when Trayvon Martin was shot dead by police in Florida in 2012 (AFP)

By MEE and agencies Published date: 28 June 2020

The UK chapter of the Black Lives Matter movement (BLM) said it "proudly" stands in solidarity with Palestinians and rejects Israel's plans to annex large areas of the West Bank, which it intends to carry out on 1 July.

Posting a series of tweets on Sunday, BLM also criticised British politics for being "gagged of the right to critique Zionism and Israel's settler-colonial pursuits".

The tweets led to criticism from senior British Jewish figures.

As Israel moves forward with the annexation of the West Bank, and mainstream British politics is gagged of the right to critique Zionism, and Israel’s settler colonial pursuits, we loudly and clearly stand beside our Palestinian comrades.

FREE PALESTINE.

THE TWO WORDS THAT ZIONISTS WON'T SAY 

— #BlackLivesMatterUK (@ukblm) June 28, 2020

The Board of Deputies president, Marie van der Zyl, described the "gagging" comment as "beyond disappointing" and accused BLM of propagating an "antisemitic trope".

"[A] supposedly anti-racist organisation has leaned into the antisemitic trope that British politics is 'gagged' in terms of debating Israel, a claim particularly preposterous because Israel is one of the most-discussed foreign policy issues in the country," van der Zyl told the Jewish News.

Following van der Zyl's criticism, BLM took to its 60,000 followers, reiterated its support, and shared a quote from renowned academic and former Black Panther Angela Davis, who has long supported the Palestinian cause.

"One more time for those at the back," BLM UK wrote on Twitter.

"From the British Black Panthers to Black Lives Matter, solidarity and learning from Palestinians in the fight against systematic racism has always been part of our shared struggle and shared strength."

The growing row between BLM UK and the UK Board of Deputies comes only days after the UK Labour Party fired shadow education secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey for alleged anti-semitism.

One more time for those at the back.

From the British Black Panthers to Black Lives Matter, solidarity and learning from Palestinians in the fight against systemic racism has always been part of our shared struggle, and shared strength. pic.twitter.com/DlwBydqqNe

— #BlackLivesMatterUK (@ukblm) June 28, 2020

Long-Bailey shared an article that suggested that the US police officer who killed George Floyd had received training from Israeli forces.

The article in question was a wide-ranging interview with British actor Maxine Peake for the Independent website, which was published on Thursday.

In the interview, Peake is quoted as saying: "Systemic racism is a global issue... The tactics used by the police in America, kneeling on George Floyd's neck, that was learnt from seminars with Israeli secret services."


Israel's planned annexation of the Jordan Valley: Why it matters+ Show



An initial version of the article referred to a 2016 Amnesty International report on training programmes for US law enforcement officers in Israel. The reference has since been removed.

In a statement, Amnesty International said it had "documented appalling crimes under international law and human rights violations meted out to Palestinians by members of the Israeli security forces".

But it said it had never reported that "neck kneeling" was a tactic taught by Israeli secret services.

'We demand change': US Palestinians issue list of principles for candidates

'I do not vote against somebody. I vote for somebody. Right now, the Biden campaign has not earned my vote'
- Zeina Ashrawi Hutchison

Statement signed by dozens of prominent US  Palestinians calls for conditioning aid to Israel, returning US embassy to Tel Aviv and recognising right to boycott

"The Palestinian people possess an inalienable right to self-determination," statement says (AFP/File photo)By Ali Harb in  Washington

Published date: 27 June 2020

A group of prominent Palestinian Americans has issued a list of "principles" outlining its demands of candidates running in US elections. It includes imposing conditions on military aid to Israel, recognising the right to boycott and relocating the embassy from Jerusalem.

The statement, released on Friday, effectively renews calls for Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden to ensure accountability for Israel's abuses against Palestinians.

"The Palestinian people possess an inalienable right to self-determination," reads the first of 13 principles.

The preamble of the statement says Palestinian Americans' "support for candidates to federal offices shall be determined by their level of recognition and agreement with these tenets".

The statement also stresses the right of return for Palestinian refugees, ending the blockade on Gaza and reversing any recognition of Israeli annexation of parts of the occupied West Bank.

"United States military aid to Israel should be conditioned on ending Israeli practices that violate Palestinian rights and contravene international law," it reads.
Palestinian narrative

Zeina Ashrawi Hutchison, an activist who helped organise the declaration, said the statement aims to present a united Palestinian American front with a list of basic demands that tells politicians where the community stands and what they need to do to gain its support.

She added that it was important for Palestinians in the United States to present their own narrative at a time when the Biden campaign is not taking notice of their perspective.

"We felt completely ostracised, completely alienated and ignored by the Biden campaign," Ashrawi Hutchison told MEE. "Our voice was never heard, and we were sidelined on a conversation that pertains directly to us."

The statement was signed by 120 Palestinian Americans, including activists, heads of organisations, professors and writers.

It comes less than a week before a 1 July deadline that the Israeli government had set for annexing parts of the West Bank and amid growing calls for US Democrats to take a consequential stance against Israeli policies towards Palestinians.

But Biden has categorically ruled out imposing conditions on the $3.8bn yearly US military aid to Israel - a proposal that was championed by Senator Bernie Sanders.

The former vice president's campaign sparked outrage from Palestine solidarity activists earlier this year when it released a plan for Jewish-American communities that stressed "unwavering" support to Israel and denounced the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement as antisemitic.

In May, Tony Blinken, a top foreign policy adviser to Biden, repeated an Israeli saying seen as a racist trope against Arabs and Palestinians when addressing a pro-Israel group.

"In the category of 'Never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity,' I think a reminder to Palestinians... that they can and should do better," Blinken said, echoing the words of the late Israeli diplomat Abba Eban who said in 1973: "The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity."

Ignoring Palestinian voices

The only time the Biden campaign has tried to address the pro-Palestinian rights community was through a single paragraph in a lengthy statement on Muslim-American issues. "As President, Joe will actively engage Israelis and Palestinians alike to help them find ways to live together in peace, freedom, security, and prosperity and to champion a two-state solution," the paragraph reads in part.

Palestinian and Arab Americans have long warned against painting the Palestinian cause as a religious conflict.

Earlier this month, several Palestinian activists left a virtual meeting with the Biden campaign's Muslim outreach director, demanding to be addressed by a senior foreign policy official.

"The Palestinian cause is not a religious issue. It's a moral issue. It's a human rights issue," Ashrawi Hutchison told MEE.

"And it's incumbent upon not just the Palestinians, but Americans and Israelis and the people of the world, to stand up against the apartheid and ethnic cleansing that is continually happening for decades with impunity."

She added that diminishing Palestinians' struggle for equal rights to a religious issue is offensive, as it hijacks the voices of secular and Christian Palestinians.

"We do deserve an equal seat at the table with any campaign but particularly in this case, the Biden campaign."

The Biden campaign has not responded to multiple requests for comment by MEE since May.

The presumptive Democratic nominee is rising in public opinion polls as President Donald Trump struggles to deal with the coronavirus crisis and renewed racial justice protests.

But Ashrawi Hutchison said Biden should not take the votes of Palestinian Americans for granted simply because he is not Trump, urging the campaign to look at the list of demands seriously.

"Our right to vote is extremely important... It's time that we demand change. I do not vote against somebody. I vote for somebody. Right now, the Biden campaign has not earned my vote," Ashrawi Hutchison told MEE.

Palestinian-Israeli Joint List urges US Democrats to stop annexation

Annexation would increase Israeli control over occupied territories and negate prospects of a viable Palestinian state, legislators warn

Any annexation of parts of West Bank would violate 'universal values and norms', 

Joint List says (AFP/File photo)

By Ali Harb Published date: 25 June 2020 

Palestinian members of the Israeli parliament are calling on US Democrats to "take a firm stand" against Israel's plan to annex large parts of the occupied West Bank, and use "all the tools" at their disposal to prevent it.

In a letter addressed to Democratic members of the US Congress on Thursday, members of the Joint List, which represents Palestinian citizens of Israel, said annexation would be a violation of "universal values and norms".

"We would respectfully suggest that this undermines American interests. We caution that any such move will destabilise the region further and will heighten the tensions between Israel and the Palestinians, and between Israel and its neighbors, notably Jordan," reads the letter, led by Knesset Member Aida Touma-Sliman and signed by all 15 Joint list legislators.

The Joint List is the third-largest party in the Israeli parliament. The bloc's statement comes less than a week before the 1 July deadline for the Israeli government to start the process of annexing parts of the occupied West Bank.
Blaming Trump

The Palestinian members of the Israeli parliament framed their government's plans as an initiative enabled by the Democrats' rival currently occupying the White House - Republican President Donald Trump.

"The act of annexation was endorsed and encouraged by the current US administration in the context of its so-called 'Peace to Prosperity' plan," the letter said.

"Let us be clear, without the administration’s plan, annexation would unlikely be considered by the Israeli leadership. That plan was adopted by all of the factions comprising the new governing coalition in Israel - some with more enthusiasm, some with polite reservations."

Trump unveiled his "deal of the century" plan earlier this year, which would allow Israel to retain all of its West Bank settlements, the existence of which the International Court of Justice has said is contrary to international law.

The scheme, which has been dismissed by Palestinian leaders, also promises Palestinians financial assistance and recognition of statehood over a fragmented territory with no control over its borders or its air space.

Still, the US administration has not made an explicit endorsement of unilateral annexation outside of the framework of a negotiated solution.

On Thursday, a US official told Reuters that the administration had not made a "final decision" on annexation. On Wednesday, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed Palestinians for rejecting Trump's plan and referred to annexation as an Israeli matter.

"The decisions about Israel extending sovereignty towards these places are decisions for the Israelis to make," Pompeo said.

Democratic letters in Congress

Democrats have received increasing calls from human rights groups to help prevent annexation by insisting Israel should face repercussions if it goes ahead.

So far, the party has only verbally denounced Israel's plans. The campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has categorically ruled out setting conditions on US aid to Israel.

In the Senate, a letter warning that annexation would "erode the strong support among the American people for the special relationship and diplomatic partnership with the United States that Israel currently enjoys" only gained the support of 21 legislators.

Democrats in the US House of Representatives are also circulating a letter expressing "deep concern" over Israel's plans.



'Between a rock and a hard place': Palestine activists slam Biden

Palestine solidarity activists have long called on Democrats to apply meaningful pressure on Israel, using the vast leverage that Washington has over the Middle Eastern country, including its international diplomatic support and military aid worth $3.8bn a year.

Palestinian-American analyst Omar Baddar told Middle East Eye last week that annexation is already a reality on the ground that has been "effectively enabled by Democrats".

"It seems as though there is no line that Israel can cross that would cause a majority of Democrats in Congress to start talking about accountability," Baddar said.

He added that it was "unbelievable" Democrats were still using outdated terminology that failed to recognise the bitter harshness of Israel's plan to officially declare its "theft of Palestinian land" on the world stage.

However much of the Palestinian territory is annexed - a few or all settlement blocs, or the entire Jordan Valley - the Joint List warned of dangerous consequences.

"It will mark the crossing of a new Rubicon in the intensification of the Israeli control over Palestinian lands taken in 1967, in negating the prospect of a viable, sovereign and independent Palestinian state, in expansion of the illegal settlement project and in increasing human rights violations in the occupied West Bank," wrote the Palestinian members of the Israeli parliament.
Discrimination

Their letter also warned that annexation would hurt Palestinian citizens of Israel as well as Palestinians living in the occupied territories.

"As a parliamentary faction representing mainly the Palestinian minority within Israel, we know that our constituents will be exposed to heightened racist incitement and discrimination due to the pending plans in the West Bank," the Joint List members said.

"Structural institutionalized discrimination is a reality for Palestinians both inside Israel and Palestinians under occupation; its manifestation and practices differ - but acts such as home demolition, racist legislation or police violence have little respect for the Green Line."

The legislators also paid tribute to racial justice protests unfolding in the United States, saying that Palestinians were inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement.

"We would like to express our unequivocal support for the struggle for equality and to achieve historic as well as contemporary racial justice in the US," the letter reads.

"The Black Lives Matter movement is inspiring and empowering our struggle here for justice and equality for all."

Critics of Democratic leaders in Congress say the party's seemingly unshakable support for Israel puts it at odds with a base that is increasingly sympathetic towards Palestinians.

The US Campaign for Palestinian Rights (USCPR), a Washington-based advocacy group, said earlier this month that Democrats must listen to their supporters on ending militarism at home and abroad.

"More important than establishment Democrats is their base and the support among young progressives, especially Black and progressives of colour, for Palestinian rights and freedom," USCPR manager of policy and advocacy campaigns Sana Siddiq told MEE.

"We're in the middle of a nationwide conversation, led by the Movement for Black Lives, about divesting from violence and harm and investing in community needs and safety. That conversation is part of the DNA of the movement for Palestinian rights, and divesting from militarism, including ending US military funding for Israeli violence, is something that Democrats are going to have to get on board with if they want to remain relevant."

US Democrats circulate Israel letter expressing 'concern' over annexation
Letter says annexation may jeopardise Israel's relations with Europe and Arab countries, but mentions no consequences for US-Israeli ties


Letter frames annexation as bad for Israel, addresses its government in advisory tone (AFP/File photo)

By Ali Harb in Washington Published date: 18 June 2020

Democrats in the US House of Representatives are circulating a letter cautioning Israel against annexing parts of the Palestinian West Bank, with a statement that expresses "deep concern" but fails to mention any potential consequences from Washington.

The letter, first revealed by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on Tuesday, comes as an Israeli government deadline approaches for starting the process of annexation on 1 July.

The letter, addressed to Israeli leaders including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, cautions Israel that "unilateral annexation" may harm its relations with Arab neighbours and "European friends", but does not refer to US-Israeli ties.

"As committed partners in supporting and protecting the special US-Israel relationship, we express our deep concern with the stated intention to move ahead with any unilateral annexation of West Bank territory, and we urge your government to reconsider plans to do so," it says.

The statement follows a somewhat more strongly worded letter from the Senate, which failed to garner any support beyond 21 senators.

The Senate letter warned that annexation "would likely erode the strong support among the American people for the special relationship and diplomatic partnership with the United States that Israel currently enjoys."

According to Peter Beinart, of Jewish Currents, the Democratic senators behind the letter watered it down in order to make it more appealing to their pro-Israel colleagues. The original draft, led by senators Chris Murphy, Chris Van Hollen and Tim Kaine, contained a sentence saying annexation may diminish popular support for US security assistance to Israel.

The letter still failed to get the signatures of even half of the Democratic caucus.

The now-circulating House letter seems to be a weaker version of the already watered-down Senate statement.

Enabling Israel

Palestinian-American activist Ahmad Abuznaid called the House Democratic effort a "joke" for failing to put any pressure on the Israeli government.

He said the US enabling of Israel's policies against the Palestinians is not merely akin to letting friends drive drunk, but is more "like a parent continuing to support and fund their child’s alcoholism and reckless endangerment of others".

"The US actually has the opportunity to eliminate these types of decisions by taking advantage of the enormous power dynamics at play here," Abuznaid told MEE.

"The United States diplomatically at the United Nations and across the world defends and supports Israel. The United States supports Israel to the tune of $4bn a year."

The US Campaign for Palestinian Rights (USCPR), a Washington-based advocacy group, also voiced disappointment over the letter.

"Israel is formalising its long-time, de facto annexation of Palestinian lands because it knows that the only thing the US government will express is 'concern' for its violations of international law, Palestinian rights, lives, and land while simultaneously providing Israel with political cover at the United Nations and writing them blank check after blank check," USCPR manager of policy and advocacy campaigns Sana Siddiq told MEE.

"It is long past time for accountability and divesting from military funding to Israel."

Top congressional Democrats and presidential nominee Joe Biden have repeatedly ruled out conditioning aid to Israel to pressure it to end its abuses against Palestinians, an idea that has been championed by Senator Bernie Sanders and other progressives.

The letter is being pushed by Democratic House members Jan Schakowsky, Ted Deutch, David Price and Bradley Schneider.

Two states

The statement stresses support for a two-state solution and emphasises US-Israeli ties in an advisory tone that frames annexation as bad for Israel, but renders its consequences for Palestinians as a secondary concern.

"We remain steadfast in our belief that pursuing two states for two peoples is essential to ensuring a secure, Jewish, democratic Israel able to live side-by-side, in peace and mutual recognition, with an independent, viable, de-militarized Palestinian state," the letter reads.

In 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted to partition historic Palestine, which was then under British control, into two states, one for Palestinians and another for Jews. The following year, Israel declared its independence and took control of 78 percent of the land - far more that allowed by the UN partition plan.

The Palestinian Authority has long sought to establish its own state on the remaining 22 percent for what had previously been the British Mandate of Palestine - namely Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.



'Between a rock and a hard place': Palestine activists slam Biden


Israel then took control of those areas, along with Syria’s Golan Heights, during the 1967 War. While occupation is temporary by nature, Israel began building Jewish settlements in the newly conquered areas in violation of international law, which prohibits countries from transferring their civilians into occupied territories.

Israel subsequently annexed East Jerusalem in 1980 and the Golan Heights a year later. But the international community, including the United States, has refused to legitimise Israel’s claims to those areas.

Still, over the past three years, President Donald Trump reversed decades of US policy by declaring Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and recognising Israel’s claim of sovereignty over the Golan - to the cheers of many top Democrats in Congress.

And now his administration is refusing to publicly reject Israel’s West Bank annexation plans.

State Department and White House officials have said they support annexation within the context of Trump’s "deal of the century" plan, which would allow Israel to keep all of its West Bank settlements in exchange for recognising a disjointed Palestinian state without control over its borders or airspace.
International law

Legal scholars argue that annexation would not only be illegal, it would breach a fundamental tenet of international law that is at the core of the modern world order - the prohibition of acquiring land by force.

For example, in 2018 British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who was foreign minister at the time, said the Russian annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea threatened global security.

"The security of every nation depends on the essential principle that countries should not change borders or acquire territory by force. That is why the fate of Crimea matters to all of us," he wrote.

But for pro-Israel Democrats, the looming annexation of the West Bank raises a set of political challenges at home.

Many US politicians have long balanced their unquestioning support for Israel with advocacy for the two-state solution.


Live discussion: How will the world respond to Israel's annexation plans?Read More »

Establishing a viable Palestinian state is already difficult to achieve because of the continuous growth of settlements; it would be all but impossible if Israel claims sovereignty over lands between and around Palestinian communities in the occupied West Bank.

Besides finishing off the almost-dead two-state solution, such a blatant violation of international law would pressure Democratic politicians to criticise Israel at a time when their base is growing increasingly more sympathetic towards Palestinians.

Meanwhile, Trump has been promoting his anti-Palestinian policies in an attempt to court pro-Israel Democrats, including a US Jewish community that traditionally favours Democratic candidates and liberal policies.

Still, he received a resounding rebuke last year after accusing Jewish Americans who vote for Democrats of being "very disloyal" - perpetuating the antisemitic trope of dual loyalty.

Many Democrats who disagree with Trump on most policy positions have been reluctant to meaningfully oppose annexation.

Abuznaid said centrist Democrats are trying to be close to the pro-Trump Israeli government at the expense of their own base, particularly young people who recognise and support Palestinians’ human rights.

"Right now we see such a strong alignment between Netanyahu and Trump, and the Democrats would love to be Netanyahu’s best friends again," he told MEE.

"The Democrats want to please a war criminal, someone who has allegations of corruption via his own government. They would like to get close to that kind of leader while their base and the younger people are telling them: 'We are done supporting apartheid. We are done financing the occupation of Palestinian land and the Palestinian people'."

Why aren't Jordanians protesting against Israeli annexation plan?
Coronavirus restrictions have dampened public demonstrations in Jordan, but government statements have reassured the public on the state's opposition to Israel's plans

Jordanians, usually swift to express solidarity with their Palestinian neighbours, have left streets quiet since Israel announced plans to annex parts of the West Bank (AFP)

By Mohammad Ersan in AmmanPublished date: 28 June 2020 

For a public usually swift to express solidarity with their Palestinian neighbours, the recent popular silence has been deafening in Jordan, with nary a protest since Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on 1 March that his government was planning to annex large areas of the occupied West Bank by 1 July.


Israeli annexation: How will Jordan respond?Read More »

On 21 June, MP Saud Abu Mahfouz, a member of the Islamic Action Front (IAF) party, stood alone outside the US Embassy in Amman to express his rejection of the annexation and US President Donald Trump's much-criticised Israel-Palestine plan - also known as the "deal of the century".

This one-man protest has been the only one since the annexation plans were made public, despite Jordanians having taken to the streets en masse in the past to oppose a gas deal with Israel.

So how can this silence be explained? Political and media sources tell Middle East Eye that the continued precautions amid the coronavirus pandemic, coupled with a strong stance by the Jordanian leadership, have played a large role in dampening public uproar in the streets.

However, some said they worry that the strict measures to contain the spread of Covid-19 could become a convenient excuse to discourage public displays of dissent in the country.
Paralysed by the pandemic

In March, Jordanian authorities issued strict orders in order to tackle the coronavirus pandemic, earning praise from citizens for taking swift action to contain the spread of the illness in the country.


With annexation plan looming, Israel grapples with reality of apartheid

Read More »

Among these new regulations, meetings of 20 or more people have been forbidden.

Jordanian political parties have pointed to these restrictions on public meetings to explain their relative inaction following Netanyahu's annexation plans.

"The reason for the absence of protests is a medical one. The defence orders prevent more than 20 persons from meeting. This has not changed even though the pandemic has been under control," IAF secretary-general Murad Adaileh told MEE.

"The annexation plan affects Jordan's national security and demolishes what is known as the two-state solution," he said. "That is why the government must stop the defence orders. We are studying how to hold a protest while respecting distancing and other safety health concerns."

Left-wing parties have also been relatively inactive, not going beyond issuing the usual denunciations.

But for Abdel Majid Dandis, a politburo member for the left-wing Wihda (Unity) Party, "the health restrictions due to the coronavirus are not the only reason for the restrictions of popular protests against the annexation plans".

"The ban on large gatherings because of the coronavirus is a factor that has left an impact on political activities," he said. "But a much more important factor has been the general restrictions on freedoms, especially the freedom of expression. This restriction has left a strong impact."

Dandis referred to the detention of the secretary-general of Wihda, Said Diab, who was referred to Jordan's cybercrime unit by the government because of an article he wrote on the occasion of Jordan's Independence Day on 25 May.

'The government needs to reflect the people’s mindset, which refuses all plans that aim at normalisation'

- Mohammad al-Absi, activist

In his article, Diab called on Jordan to free itself of the influence of foreign states, particularly from the West, and to stand up more to Zionists and Israel supporters in the region.

Jordan's attorney general decided that Diab should be detained, but the Wihda leader has since been transferred to hospital for a heart operation.

Despite not taking to the streets, Jordanian political parties, whether Islamists, leftists or nationalists, have been calling on the government to cancel the gas deal with Israel as a response to the annexation plan.

Mohammad al-Absi, the leader of a campaign entitled "The gas of the enemy is an occupation" called for permission to hold protests against annexation, "because it is a part of the rejected deal of the century".

"The government needs to reflect the people's mindset, which refuses all plans that aim at normalisation" of relations with Israel, Absi told MEE.
Strong official position

In spite of these concerns, the Jordanian government has expressed strong rejection of Israel's annexation plans.



Saeb Erekat: Stop treating Israel as a state above the law and end annexation

Read More »


In May, King Abdullah told German magazine Der Spiegel: "I do not want to make any threats and create an atmosphere of controversy, but we are considering all options... We agree with many countries in Europe and with the international community that the law of the fittest should not apply in the Middle East."

Prime Minister Omar Razzaz has openly discussed the likelihood of conflict with Israel if it chose to go forward with annexation.

"The annexation that the Israeli occupation is planning to execute in the West Bank will bring conflict and tension," Razzaz said in a speech broadcast on 21 June. "We are facing two paths... either the path of peace or the path of conflict."

Omar Kallab, a Jordanian writer and TV anchor, believes that the government's stance has left a mark and lessened the desire among citizens to go out and protest.

"The strong position expressed by the king has satisfied the aspirations of many and has left little room for people to protest," Kallab told MEE. "That is why the situation now is very different than when the Bahrain workshop [for the Trump plan in June 2019] took place.

"A clear and unambiguous official political position relaxes the activists, and when the coronavirus pandemic put [on] restrictions, people agreed to refrain from demonstrating because they were satisfied with the king's position."

For Kallab, the "conflict" alluded to by Razzaz is open-ended.

"All options are open, and the doctrine of the Jordanian military regarding the struggle with Israel has not changed," the journalist said.

'Palestinian lives matter': Killing of autistic man by Israeli police draws George Floyd parallels

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - The killing of an autistic Palestinian by Israeli police has sparked protests by both Palestinians and Israelis, drawing comparisons with the death of African-American George Floyd in the United States.

A Palestinian man walks past a mural depicting George Floyd, who died in Minneapolis police custody, in Gaza City June 18, 2020. REUTERS/Mohammed Salem

Iyad al-Halaq, 32, was on his way to volunteer at a special needs school in Jerusalem’s Old City on May 30 when police chased him and shot him dead, suspecting him of carrying a weapon.

“The boy surrendered and he lay on the ground like a baby in his mother’s womb,” Kheiry al-Halaq said of his son, whom police said was found to be unarmed.

“They shed the blood of an innocent young man who did not experience much from this life ... he was one of God’s weakest creatures,” his mother, Rana al-Halaq, said from her son’s bedroom, surrounded by his possessions and a poster of him.

Police are investigating the shooting and two officers have given testimony, a police spokesman said.

Both Floyd, 46, and Halaq were from communities that often complain of police brutality and racism.

loyd died after a Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes while detaining him on May 25. He was unarmed and his death has led to protests around the world.

Demonstrations for Halaq have been held in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Bethlehem in the occupied West Bank, where protesters lit candles and chanted “Palestinian lives matter”, in what they called an act of solidarity with African-Americans.

Palestinian artist Taqi Spateen has painted murals of Floyd and Halaq on a concrete wall Israel built through parts of the West Bank. The painting of Halaq is captioned, in English: “Not only Floyd. Iyad Hallaq too”.

“Both men were killed by the arrogance of racism,” Spateen said.

Halaq’s killing drew condolences from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who called it a “tragedy”.

Palestinians have long complained of heavy-handed tactics by police and troops using lethal force in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.


The Israeli rights group B’Tselem says that of the 133 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in 2019, 56 “were not taking part in hostilities” and 28 were minors.

Salem Barahmeh, a Palestinian rights advocate in the West Bank city of Ramallah, said he believed Israeli police officers might be lightly punished for Halaq’s death.

“But a proper charge? I don’t have much hope,” he said. “It won’t be the justice that Iyad al-Halaq deserves.”


Reporting by Sinan Abu Mayzer and Suheir Sheikh, Additional reporting and writing by Rami Ayyub, Editing by Timothy Heritage