Interviews With 6 Afghan Resistance Fighters:
“A Rare Chance To Understand How The Insurgents See This War, From The Collapse Of The Taliban, Through Their Revival And, Now, Their Budding Ascendancy”
“Oral History, Told Through The Words Of The Taliban Themselves”
Sep 26, 2009 By Sami Yousafzai and Ron Moreau, NEWSWEEK [Excerpts]
During wars and after them, the real voice of the enemy is rarely heard.
Propaganda is plentiful, as are prideful boasts — and the Taliban have certainly been quick studies at the modern art of information warfare.
But the fears and ambitions of ordinary fighters are too often buried under statistics and theories propounded from thousands of miles away.
To put together this remarkable oral history, told through the words of the Taliban themselves, NEWSWEEK turned to contributing correspondent Sami Yousafzai, who has been covering the conflict for the magazine since 2001.
Over that time he has developed and maintained contact with dozens of Afghan insurgents, including the six whose stories are told here.
Working with NEWSWEEK’s Ron Moreau, Yousafzai spent more than a month crisscrossing Afghanistan and Pakistan to meet these sources.
He has known them all for some time, and in the past their information has generally proved reliable.
While it’s impossible to confirm the credibility of everything they say, their stories offer a rare chance to understand how the insurgents see this war, from the collapse of the Taliban, through their revival and, now, their budding ascendancy.
*****************************************
Chapter One: The Fall
‘The bombs cut down our men like a reaper harvesting wheat. It felt like judgment day.’
Maulvi Abdul Rehman Akhundzada
HAQQANI: Two days before the September 11 attacks on America, we were all celebrating the death of (Northern Alliance commander Ahmed Shah) Masood. His forces were already on the verge of defeat, so his death all but assured us of total victory in Afghanistan.
But the September 11 attacks turned our cheer into deep concern. We gave those camels (a derogatory Afghan term for Arabs) free run of our country, and they brought us face to face with disaster.
We knew the Americans would attack us in revenge.
Realizing the danger, I immediately sent my wife and children to Pakistan. The entire government started to fall apart. I never thought the Taliban would collapse so quickly and cruelly under U.S. bombs.
Everyone began trying to save themselves and their families. When the bombing began, I changed out of my usual white mullah’s garb, put on an old brown shalwar kameez, and headed for Pakistan. I crossed the mountains on foot, and at the top I turned around and said: "God bless you, Afghanistan. I’ll never come back to you under our Islamic regime."
AKHUNDZADA: When the bombing started, I was commanding some 400 fighters on the front lines near Mazar-e Sharif. The bombs cut down our men like a reaper harvesting wheat. Bodies were dismembered. Dazed fighters were bleeding from the ears and nose from the bombs’ concussions. We couldn’t bury the dead. Our reinforcements died in their trenches.
I couldn’t bring myself to surrender, so I retreated with a few of my men in the confusion. Everything was against us. The highway south to Kabul through the Salang Tunnel was blocked. We walked four days in the deep snow without food or water. Kids started shooting at us from the hilltops, hunting us like wild animals.
By the fifth day I could barely walk.
I hid my weapon and walked to a village, saying I was a lost traveler and asking for food. The villagers fed me, but I had lost touch with my comrades. I walked on until a minibus came along; I aimed my gun at the driver and forced him to stop. The van was full of Taliban. They said they had no room for me, but I threatened to shoot out their tires unless they took me. I had to lie on the floor with their feet on my body. It was uncomfortable, but I was warm for the first time in days.
A group of local militiamen captured us the next morning at a checkpoint on the Kabul-Kandahar highway. We were nearly dead. Our mouths were dry and cracked, our lips bleeding. It felt like Judgment Day.
I lay in their filthy jail for a month before they let me go free, just after the Eid holidays. With the strength I had left, I made it to Peshawar. Our Islamic Emirate had collapsed with less than 40 days of resistance — I couldn’t accept that. Allah would let us rise again, I thought, because of all the blood we had spilled for Islam.
KHAN: After the mujahedin began retreating, Arabs, Chechens, and Taliban raced by our house and mosque in Ghazni in convoys of cars, pickups, and trucks, headed to Pakistan.
Almost immediately they started getting bombed. So they abandoned their vehicles and started walking, even the wounded. Some injured Taliban, and Arabs with their families, came to seek shelter at my father’s mosque. Other villagers wouldn’t help them. Only my father and I brought them food.
YOUNAS: When I was a child, my father was a mujahedin commander in the jihad against the Russians, and he sent our family for safety to an Afghan refugee camp in Wana, South Waziristan. After the Taliban’s victory (in 1996), he became an official in a ministry in Kabul. I used to visit him on holidays from Wana. The Islamic Emirate’s collapse was like a nightmare.
I watched as wounded, disabled, and defeated Taliban fighters straggled into Wana and the surrounding villages, along with Arabs, Chechens, and Uzbeks. Every morning as I went to school I could see them wandering around town, almost like homeless beggars. Little by little, the tribal people started helping them, giving them food. Some people even took them into their houses; at first these once proud jihadis survived, thanks to the people’s charity.
The Arabs were disappointed the Taliban hadn’t stood and fought. They told me they had wanted to fight to the death. They were clearly not as distressed as the Afghans. That was understandable.
The Arabs felt they had lost a battle.
But the Afghans were much more devastated — they had lost their country.
MASIHUDDIN: When the Taliban fell, I was a madrassa student in Nuristan. Since all the Taliban officials and militiamen had fled, I decided to continue my studies in Pakistan.
(Then-Pakistani president Pervez) Musharraf imposed new rules on the Pakistani madrassas (in 2002), including a ban on foreign students. So I went to a mosque in an outlying village (near Peshawar) to study and wait for the situation to improve. We were 10 students studying and sleeping in one small room. The people couldn’t afford to bring us food, so we often went without dinner. We rarely had electricity. Without a fan it was hard to study, even to sleep.
To make matters worse, the Peshawar police were harassing and arresting us. They didn’t hold us for long, though — I think they just wanted to frighten us. We began praying for the survival of the Taliban who had fled. There was no reason to pray for victory, since such a return seemed inconceivable.
HAQQANI: My father, brother, and family were at Mansehra (a town in northwestern Pakistan that is home to several Afghan refugee camps). But I realized it wouldn’t be wise to move in with them. Too many people knew who I was, and some had no love for the Taliban.
Instead I found a place to stay at a mosque nearby. I had to sneak over at midnight just to see my kids, like a thief. When I was visiting my daughter one night, she asked me about our Kabul home, why we didn’t have a car anymore. She complained that it was too hot in the refugee camp, and that she wanted to move back to the cool climate of Kabul. I couldn’t answer her.
But she could tell from my eyes how sad I was. I was a wreck — nervous, worried, and almost panic-stricken.
AKHUNDZADA: Once proud Taliban mullahs and fighters changed the way they dressed so they wouldn’t be recognized. No one wanted to be identified as a Talib.
Friends and relatives who had respected me while I was a commander now turned away. I had no money or job. I moved my family to a village in Punjab, far from Afghanistan, to become a day laborer, but I was a failure at it. I couldn’t speak the local language, and no one would hire me.
So I returned to Peshawar and started selling vegetables from a basket in the market. I began making money.
But I couldn’t get over the Taliban’s collapse, the death of my men.
My wife said I was crying in my sleep. I went to a doctor, who gave me some medicine. I was so distracted that when a customer would ask me for potatoes, I’d give him tomatoes.
Chapter Two: The Rebirth
‘The end of the Taliban was the start of my Jihadi career.’
Mullah Aga Mohammad
KHAN: Mullahs like my father became depressed. Under the Taliban they had been very influential, but after the collapse people paid less attention to them.
My father was so upset, he had a stroke that left him partially paralyzed.
At the end of 2002 the Afghan police raided our mosque. They grabbed my father and hauled him in front of the villagers, accusing him of being with the Taliban. They demanded to know where the Taliban’s weapons were stored. They personally insulted him and then threw him in jail. He was 70.
The faithful at our mosque went to the police and complained.
People who a few months before seemed to have turned against my father now supported him.
They said it was a disgrace for the police to have entered the mosque wearing their shoes, and to have arrested an old, crippled imam.
In early 2003 he died.
I was a just a kid, but the police arrested me too, twice — once from my house, once from the mosque.
They interrogated me, asking stupid questions like: "Where are the Taliban?" "Where are the weapons hidden?"
My family sold our motorbike to raise the money to free me. The police also arrested my brother, who was a schoolteacher. The police even arrested, insulted, and manhandled a 90-year-old mullah in our district.
People’s attitudes were changing; they were becoming angry at the police and the local officials for the disrespect they were showing toward mosques and mullahs.
YOUNAS: At first I didn’t hear the Afghans talking about going back to fight. But the Arabs did, and they encouraged the Afghans and the local tribal people not to give up. Nothing much happened for the first year or so, but then the Arabs started organizing some training camps. The first one I heard about was at Shin Warsak village, near Wana. When I had some time off from school, I decided to visit. I was really impressed. There was more than one camp. One was run by Arabs, and another by Chechens and Uzbeks.
Thanks to my madrassa studies I could speak Arabic; I made friends with Egyptians, Saudis, Libyans, and Yemenis. Nek Mohammad Wazir (a pro-Taliban Pakistani tribal leader who was killed by a June 2004 Predator strike) gave the Arabs places to train and access to weapons and other supplies. They moved openly on the main roads and in the towns and villages, showing no concern about security. I decided to leave my studies and join their resistance.
MOHAMMAD: The end of the Taliban was the start of my jihadi career. My father died in 1994, leaving me to take care of my mother, brothers, and sisters. So I’d had no time to join Mullah Omar’s movement. For years I had a very heavy conscience for having missed the jihad. After the collapse of the Taliban in late 2001, many injured and traumatized mujahedin began coming to the mosque in Peshawar where I was the imam. Some of the worshipers asked me outright why I hadn’t fought in the jihad like these men.
I needed to make up for not joining the fight. I started asking around if the mujahedin were still active, but no one could give me a real answer. Then one day I heard about a young Afghan named Azizullah who had been in the resistance — he’s in jail now in Afghanistan.
I went to his house, and told him I wanted to help the resistance against the Americans if it was forming. He lied, saying he was only a poor man and had nothing to do with jihad. Then one day I saw him walking to the mosque. I joined him. He was still hesitant, but finally he said he could help. He gave me directions to a militant camp in Waziristan and a letter of introduction.
HAQQANI: In early 2003 my family and I moved to a rented house near Peshawar. It was the first time I was living in my own house since 2001. I put my white clerical outfit back on. And suddenly the Taliban’s defense minister, Mullah Obaidullah, came to see me — the first senior Taliban leader I had seen since our collapse. He was traveling around Pakistan to rally our dispersed forces.
Half the Taliban leadership was back in touch with each other, he said, and they were determined to start a resistance movement to expel the Americans.
I didn’t think it was possible, but he assured me I could help.
He said to meet him again in two weeks, and gave me an address. I was surprised at the number and rank of the people I found at the meeting. There were former senior ministers and military commanders, all sitting together, all eager to resist the Americans.
Obaidullah told me: "We don’t need you as a deputy minister or bureaucrat. We want you to bring as many fighters as you can into the field."
AKHUNDZADA: One day a man came to buy vegetables — a mullah who had worked with our jihad in northern Afghanistan for years. We recognized each other.
He asked me what I wanted to do: keep selling potatoes or go back to the jihad.
I was making about 2,000 rupees ($33) a day, which was good, but I wanted to rejoin the struggle.
We went to a meeting at night near Peshawar, and I couldn’t believe what I saw: my top commander (from the northern front), Mullah Dadullah! He was my ideal; his name meant victory for us.
My interest in the vegetable business disappeared. After six or seven months I was called to Miran Shah (in North Waziristan). Dadullah (who would be killed in May 2007) was there; so were Akhtar Mohammad Osmani (who would be killed in December 2006) and our defense minister, Mullah Obaidullah (who would be captured by Pakistani forces in March 2007).
It was decided that each commander should go find his former soldiers and prepare to return to Afghanistan to fight.
I was sent to Quetta, where survivors from my unit had settled. There had been 400 fighters under my command. In Quetta I found 15 of them.
They embraced me and the idea of returning to free our land of the American invaders.
In North Waziristan we trained, re-equipped, recruited more men, and got ready to return to Afghanistan.
Chapter Three: The Taliban Surge
‘After these first few attacks, God seems to have opened channels of money for us.’
Qari Younas
YOUNAS: One night in April (2003), we crossed the border in five pickups and one larger truck.
Once we were safely across, we sent the vehicles back to wait for us on the Pakistan side.
Our target was a U.S. base just across the border at Machda in Paktika province. We attacked at dawn. I think we really surprised them. We shelled them with 122mm rockets and mortars for about 30 minutes. But we didn’t get close enough to fire our Kalashnikovs; before we could move in, American helicopters came, raining rockets and bullets on us. Terrified, I crawled and ran to escape death. Amid the noise and explosions, dust and smoke, I remember seeing six of us cut down and killed: two Arabs, three tribals, and an Afghan.
Still, I was strangely exhilarated.
We showed our resolve by fighting, by taking a stand.
We knew we’d be back.
We carried the stiff and bloodied bodies of our martyrs back to Wana. Thousands of locals attended their funerals, saying it was an honor to witness the burial of these martyrs. People brought flowers, ribbons, colored cloth, and flags to decorate their graves.
As the news traveled, a lot of former Taliban began returning to Wana to join us.
KHAN: By the middle of 2004, we were hearing rumors that the Taliban were operating once again in Ghazni. Friends and relatives in other rural districts were saying that armed men were beginning to show up in villages at night on motorbikes.
Within a few months, signs of them began appearing everywhere.
At first we saw shabnama ("night letters") that the Taliban were leaving in shops, mosques, and other public places warning people not to cooperate with Karzai and the Americans. By the beginning of 2005 the Taliban began targeted killings of police officers, government officials, spies, and elders who were working with the Americans.
One night around midnight someone knocked on the door of our house. We were terrified, fearing that the police had come back to arrest me or my brother once again.
But when we opened the door, it was one of my father’s former students. He had a Kalashnikov on his shoulder and was a Taliban subcommander already.
The two other Taliban he was with also carried AKs and had several hand grenades attached to their belts.
This was my first encounter with the Taliban since the defeat. We invited them to spend the night. Early the next morning I accompanied them to the mosque. My father’s former student read out the names of those he accused of having betrayed Islam by following Karzai and the infidels. He warned them to cease all contact and to quit any job they may have had with the government or the Americans. He ended by saying he would return in one week.
MOHAMMAD: Those first groups crossing the border were almost totally sponsored, organized, and led by Arab mujahedin. The Afghan Taliban were weak and disorganized.
But slowly the situation began to change.
American operations that harassed villagers, bombings that killed civilians, and Karzai’s corrupt police and officials were alienating villagers and turning them in our favor.
Soon we didn’t have to hide so much on our raids. We came openly.
When they saw us, villagers started preparing green tea and food for us.
The tables were turning. Karzai’s police and officials mostly hid in their district compounds like prisoners.
YOUNAS: Our real jihad was beginning by the start of 2005.
Jalaluddin Haqqani’s tribal fighters came actively back to our side because the Americans and the Pakistanis had arrested his brother and other relatives. He appointed his son Sirajuddin to lead the resistance.
That was a real turning point.
Until then villagers in Paktia, Paktika, and Khost thought the Taliban was defeated and finished. They had started joining the militias formed by the Americans and local warlords, and were informing on us and working against us. But with the support of Haqqani’s men we began capturing, judging, and beheading some of those Afghans who worked with the Americans and Karzai. Terrorized, their families and relatives left the villages and moved to the towns, even to Kabul. Our control was slowly being restored.
KHAN: My father’s former student returned as promised a week later. I decided to join him. I helped assassinate those people who had continued their contacts with the government and the Americans. I didn’t want to kill, but I was determined to bring back our Islamic regime and get rid of the Americans and the traitors allied with them.
By the end of 2005 the Taliban’s ranks in Ghazni were increasing.
There were new recruits like me and more former Taliban returning home from Pakistan.
At the same time, we started receiving shipments of RPGs, rockets, mines, and bombs, most of which were old and rusty. My group only had three RPG launchers and only one mortar tube, and a few rounds for each. We had a few rusty Russian mines that only worked about 30 percent of the time. So we could only carry out very quick and limited attacks on convoys, construction crews, and district compounds.
At first we didn’t have much success. But we were learning.
Just firing a mortar, even if it didn’t hit the target, was a big deal: it proved to everyone we were there and were a force to be respected.
The Americans and their Afghan allies made mistakes after mistake, killing and arresting innocent people.
There was one village in Dayak district near Ghazni City where the people had communist backgrounds, from the days of the Russians, and had never supported us.
But the police raided the village, beat the elders at a mosque and arrested them, accusing them of being Taliban.
They were freed after heavy bribes were paid.
After that incident the whole village sent us a message asking forgiveness for the abuses of the communist era.
AKHUNDZADA: There are famous Taliban poems about how mujahedin come to free villages from occupiers at the point of a bayonet.
I began living that poem.
My body and mind got stronger and my mental problems disappeared.
As word of our success traveled, I was able to organize another group of new, young recruits.
They were smarter, more spirited, and better motivated than my former Taliban fighters.
Still, we lacked weapons and money. So I visited Mullah Dadullah. He had gone into Helmand province in early 2006 with 30 people. When he returned months later, he had organized 300 sub-commanders who each had dozens of troops. His return was like the arrival of rain after five years of drought.
I gave him a list of our needs. Even before he read the list, he smiled and said: "Whether I am alive or dead, remember this: the resistance will become greater than your greatest expectations. We will return to control Afghanistan." The next day he called me, took a page out of a notebook, wrote something on it, and gave it to me. The note said to go and see this guy and he will help you. Back in Pakistan, I found the man. He kissed Dadullah’s letter.
After two weeks this man had provided me with all the guns, weapons, and supplies I had requested. Dadullah gave such letters to many people.
MOHAMMAD: Once we sent a shipment for the making of IEDs to our forces in Zabul province. For some reason we forgot to include the remote-control devices. I got an urgent call from the commander asking me to quickly send the missing items. So I hid the remotes among some books and clothes in several travel bags. At Torkham (the Khyber Pass crossing), the police asked me to open the bags. At first I thought I should flee. But where could I run? I started searching for the key to open the bags. There was a long customs queue. The impatient policeman finally said: "You’re taking too long. Get out of here."
Another night I was in a hotel in Kabul on a mission to smuggle remote devices and explosives. Afghan police and intelligence were checking all the travelers staying in the hotel. My fellow mujahedin and I hid the bags containing the remotes in the bathroom. The police checked our luggage and pockets. But God blinded their eyes to the bathroom. If they had found the devices I would have ended up in jail for life. All these close calls strengthened my faith and my commitment to the jihad.
HAQQANI: In 2007 I returned to Afghanistan for the first time. I visited the south and spoke to Taliban units, to elders and villagers, and raised new recruits. Mullah Omar has entrusted me with the job of touring towns and villages on both sides of the border to encourage people to support, contribute to, and join the jihad.
Between 2006 and 2009 I have personally raised hundreds of new recruits to join the resistance. (In August) I traveled to eight Afghan provinces in 20 days.
The unpopularity of the Karzai regime helps us immensely. In 2005 some Afghans thought Karzai would bring positive change. But now most Afghans believe the Taliban are the future.
The resistance is getting stronger day by day.
Chapter Four: We Get Stronger Every Day
‘We were born here. We will die here. We aren’t going anywhere.’
Mullah Aga Mohammad
MASIHUDDIN: That base on top of the mountain (in Barge Matal) had to go. The Americans there were monitoring our phone calls and walkie-talkies, and they ran intelligence operations with Afghan spies from there.
So (last June) we began carefully planning an attack. One of our men said that the mission would be hard even if the Americans only threw stones at us, as we’d be attacking up a steep mountain. Everyone laughed at him, but we knew there was some truth in what he said.
I asked for volunteers, and everyone signed up.
As usual we prepared a medical team, including donkeys and stretchers to evacuate our wounded.
But as I divided up weapons, ammunition, explosives, and communications gear, it started to rain heavily. The Americans have heavy boots and other mountain equipment that allows them to move up and down the steep rocks. But our men mostly wear leather sandals that don’t give us any grip. So we postponed the attack for two weeks.
KHAN: Fighting the Americans is not easy. One night in the summer of 2007, my commander, Mullah Nurla, was killed in an American raid on his house. Other Americans killed 12 of our commanders. All the raids came between midnight and dawn.
We found out that the Americans were finding us by tracing our cell-phone calls, and by calls from spies giving away our locations. So we forced the cell companies to stop all transmissions from 6 p.m. to 7 a.m.
We still worry about helicopters and bombers, but we are suffering fewer American night raids. I think they just don’t have the intelligence they used to have.
Fewer people are willing to cooperate with them and betray us.
Our men, on the other hand, are watching American bases 24 hours a day.
They inform us of American movements.
We used to hit the Americans with roadside bombs and then disappear. Now when we explode an IED, we follow that with AK and RPG fire.
We now have more destructive IEDs, mostly ammonium-nitrate bombs that we mix with aluminum shards.
We get regular deliveries of these fertilizers, explosives, fuses, detonators, and remote controls. One heavy shipment is on its way right now. I think we are better at making IEDs now than the Arabs who first taught us.
HAQQANI: I admit Taliban commanders are being captured and killed, but that hasn’t stopped us, and it won’t.
Our jihad is more solid and deep than individual commanders and fighters — and we are not dependent on foreigners, on the ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence agency), or Al Qaeda.
Personally I think all this talk about Al Qaeda being strong is U.S. propaganda.
As far as I know, Al Qaeda is weak, and they are few in numbers.
Now that we control large amounts of territory, we should have a strict code of conduct for any foreigners working with us. We can no longer allow these camels to roam freely without bridles and control.
MASIHUDDIN: Late Friday afternoon, after prayers, we began to move.
We slowly sent our people up the mountain as the shadows lengthened. The mujahedin climbed slowly, steadily. We waited quietly on the ridgeline overnight without fires for warmth or to cook food. We’ve learned that the Americans are always listening for the smallest sound.
I gave the signal to attack just before sunrise. We started with our mortar and rocket teams shelling the base from the surrounding hilltops.
By dawn our mujahedin were almost hugging the base’s outer walls. We killed a number of Afghan Army soldiers, and one U.S. soldier who may have been hit in a guard tower.
As we fought, our video team filmed our advance. Our mortars, rockets, and RPGs destroyed most of one outer defensive wall.
We yelled to those inside to come out and surrender. No one came out. So we set fire to one side of the post and moved around to wait on the opposite side. The smoke forced some, if not all, of the soldiers to abandon the post. During the attack we didn’t lose any fighters.
Then American helicopters arrived, firing rockets and machine guns. We fought until sunset. We lost 12 Taliban to martyrdom, largely to the helicopter fire that comes down like heavy rain.
We cannot compare our military strength to that of the Americans.
But we have learned how to stay protected behind rocks and mountains.
Even with all their advanced technology, we forced them to withdraw and captured that base. (Coalition forces retook the post three days later and later abandoned it; a U.S. chronology of the battle differs in some details.)
YOUNAS: Not long ago, when one of my younger brothers got married, my mother asked me: "Boy, when will you marry?" I told her that the day I help to bring the Taliban back to Kabul and restore the Islamic Emirate is the day I will marry. That day may be far away, but I know it will come.
KHAN: The Americans talk about getting Taliban to leave the jihad for their dollars. That’s ridiculous. I was engaged to be married a year ago, but I don’t have the $1,500 bride price to give to the girl’s father or the $500 for the wedding. If I had money, I would not delay my marriage. Who would marry me? You’d be surprised.
The people here are not worried about giving their daughter or sister to Taliban, who can get killed within one week of the wedding. They are happy to be part of the jihad.
It’s not easy being in the Taliban.
It’s like wearing a jacket of fire.
You have to leave your family and live with the knowledge that you can be killed at any time.
The Americans can capture you and put you in dog cages in Bagram and Guantánamo. You can’t expect any quick medical treatment if you’re wounded. You don’t have any money.
Yet when I tell new recruits what they are facing they still freely put on this jacket of fire.
All this builds my confidence that we will never lose this war.
MOHAMMAD: We never worry about time. We will fight until victory no matter how long it takes. The U.S. has the weapons, but we are prepared for a long and tireless jihad.
We were born here. We will die here. We aren’t going anywhere.
MASIHUDDIN: In the south the mujahedin have adjusted to Obama’s new crusade by making some small strategic withdrawals and fighting back mostly with IEDs.
But we mujahedin in Kunar and Nuristan are lucky. These mountains and forests are our protectors. Trees and rocks shelter us everywhere.
The Americans can’t match us here.
Two or three years ago, U.S. soldiers in the region acted as if they were on holiday.
They were taking videos and photos of themselves and walking in the mountains for fun. They were playing games in the open.
Those days are over.
Now they are forced to keep their fingers on their triggers 24 hours a day.
AKHUNDZADA: Sometimes I think what’s happened is like a dream.
I thought my beard would be white by the time I saw what I am seeing now, but my beard is still black, and we get stronger every day.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
Arab officials condemn Aqsa raid
Jordanian and Palestinian officials have condemned the Israeli security forces for storming Jerusalem's al-Aqsa mosque on Sunday during clashes that left many Palestinian worshippers wounded.
Deploring the Israeli action, the officials said it amounted to a "violation of the mosque's sanctity".
Trouble had broken out after a group of about 150 Israelis turned up and entered the mosque compound, reportedly under the guard of local authorities, on the occasion of Yom Kippur, the Jewish holy day.
Speaking to the JNA state news agency on Monday, Nabil al-Sharif, the Jordanian media affairs minister, said Amman viewed the Israeli action as a "provocative act".
"Both international law and relevant conventions and resolutions call for protection of places of worship against any violations", he said.
"We decry the repeated storming of the mosque by extremist Jewish groups and Israeli forces as a provocation that would exacerbate tension and ignite further violence that threatens regional security and stability."
Jordan's foreign ministry summoned the Israeli charge d'affaires in Amman to denounce the raid, saying that it came at "a time of concerted international efforts for resumption of peace talks" to find a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Palestinian condemnation
Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said the Israeli security forces' action was a deliberate provocation in support of unwelcome settler hardliners who opposed an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Noting that riots during Yom Kippur were becoming an annual event, Erekat compared Sunday's scuffles to the violence that followed the trip to the site in the year 2000 by the ex-Israeli PM Ariel Sharon.
"We've seen this before, and we know what the consequences are," Erekat said in a statement. "
"Providing a police escort for settlers who are against peace at all costs, and whose presence is deliberately designed to provoke a reaction, are not the actions of someone who is committed to peace, but of someone who will go to extraordinary lengths to scuttle all hopes of peace," Erekat said.
Raid details
Sunday's clashes between Israeli settlers and Palestinian worshippers saw the Israeli forces intervening and firing rubber bullets and stun grenades.
The Al-Aqsa Foundation had warned a few days earlier that Israeli authorities were planning to permit settlers entrance to the area. Officials in East Jerusalem predicted that the break-in would occur on Sunday under the pretext of marking Yom Kippur.
Jews refer to sections of the mosque complex as historically part of their Temple Mount.
Many Palestinians sustained serious eye and head injuries. Nine Palestinians were also detained following the scuffles, Israeli sources said.
Clashes also erupted near Majlis Gate, one of the main entrances to the mosque, after police prevented worshippers from entering the area, according to witnesses. More clashes followed noon prayers near the Lions' Gate entrance to Al-Aqsa.
Last year, a similar incident on the Yom Kippur holiday resulted in damage to dozens of cars and shops.
Israel captured the Old City of Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed it along with the rest of mostly Arab East Jerusalem in a move not recognised by the international community.
Deploring the Israeli action, the officials said it amounted to a "violation of the mosque's sanctity".
Trouble had broken out after a group of about 150 Israelis turned up and entered the mosque compound, reportedly under the guard of local authorities, on the occasion of Yom Kippur, the Jewish holy day.
Speaking to the JNA state news agency on Monday, Nabil al-Sharif, the Jordanian media affairs minister, said Amman viewed the Israeli action as a "provocative act".
"Both international law and relevant conventions and resolutions call for protection of places of worship against any violations", he said.
"We decry the repeated storming of the mosque by extremist Jewish groups and Israeli forces as a provocation that would exacerbate tension and ignite further violence that threatens regional security and stability."
Jordan's foreign ministry summoned the Israeli charge d'affaires in Amman to denounce the raid, saying that it came at "a time of concerted international efforts for resumption of peace talks" to find a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Palestinian condemnation
Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said the Israeli security forces' action was a deliberate provocation in support of unwelcome settler hardliners who opposed an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Noting that riots during Yom Kippur were becoming an annual event, Erekat compared Sunday's scuffles to the violence that followed the trip to the site in the year 2000 by the ex-Israeli PM Ariel Sharon.
"We've seen this before, and we know what the consequences are," Erekat said in a statement. "
"Providing a police escort for settlers who are against peace at all costs, and whose presence is deliberately designed to provoke a reaction, are not the actions of someone who is committed to peace, but of someone who will go to extraordinary lengths to scuttle all hopes of peace," Erekat said.
Raid details
Sunday's clashes between Israeli settlers and Palestinian worshippers saw the Israeli forces intervening and firing rubber bullets and stun grenades.
The Al-Aqsa Foundation had warned a few days earlier that Israeli authorities were planning to permit settlers entrance to the area. Officials in East Jerusalem predicted that the break-in would occur on Sunday under the pretext of marking Yom Kippur.
Jews refer to sections of the mosque complex as historically part of their Temple Mount.
Many Palestinians sustained serious eye and head injuries. Nine Palestinians were also detained following the scuffles, Israeli sources said.
Clashes also erupted near Majlis Gate, one of the main entrances to the mosque, after police prevented worshippers from entering the area, according to witnesses. More clashes followed noon prayers near the Lions' Gate entrance to Al-Aqsa.
Last year, a similar incident on the Yom Kippur holiday resulted in damage to dozens of cars and shops.
Israel captured the Old City of Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed it along with the rest of mostly Arab East Jerusalem in a move not recognised by the international community.
Egypt arrests Muslim Brotherhood leader
Egyptian security forces have arrested a leading member of the opposition Muslim Brotherhood and three others in pre-dawn raids on Sunday, the group said on its website.
Wednesday, July 1,2009 07:04
Egyptian security forces have arrested a leading member of the opposition Muslim Brotherhood and three others in pre-dawn raids on Sunday, the group said on its website.
Abdel Moneim Abul Futuh, a member of the Islamist group"s politburo, Fathi Lashin, a former judge, Gamal Abdel Salam of the Arab doctors union, and teacher Abdel Rahman al-Gamal, were detained.
"The arrests are part of the regime"s attempt to cut the Brotherhood off from Egyptian political life," the group"s number two Mohammed Habib said on the website.
He said more than 140 members had been arrested in recent weeks.
The Brotherhood, Egypt"s main opposition movement, is officially banned but members operate openly in the name of the group despite frequent government crackdowns.
It fielded candidates running as "independents" in the 2005 election, clinching one fifth of the seats in parliament, which is controlled by President Hosni Mubarak"s ruling National Democratic Party.
Egypt"s next legislative election is scheduled for 2010.
Wednesday, July 1,2009 07:04
Egyptian security forces have arrested a leading member of the opposition Muslim Brotherhood and three others in pre-dawn raids on Sunday, the group said on its website.
Abdel Moneim Abul Futuh, a member of the Islamist group"s politburo, Fathi Lashin, a former judge, Gamal Abdel Salam of the Arab doctors union, and teacher Abdel Rahman al-Gamal, were detained.
"The arrests are part of the regime"s attempt to cut the Brotherhood off from Egyptian political life," the group"s number two Mohammed Habib said on the website.
He said more than 140 members had been arrested in recent weeks.
The Brotherhood, Egypt"s main opposition movement, is officially banned but members operate openly in the name of the group despite frequent government crackdowns.
It fielded candidates running as "independents" in the 2005 election, clinching one fifth of the seats in parliament, which is controlled by President Hosni Mubarak"s ruling National Democratic Party.
Egypt"s next legislative election is scheduled for 2010.
Egypt: Brotherhood crackdown sees more leaders arrested
Heshmat was arrested along with 12 other members, including Mohamed Sweidan, the chief administrator in the Beheira governorate.
Monday, September 28,2009 15:50
On Saturday evening, Gamal Heshmat, a leading Muslim Brotherhood reformist leader and former Member of Parliament, was arrested by Egyptian security forces in the most recent raid against the Islamic group. The arrest of yet another reformer has left the Brotherhood worried that the continued pressures being exerted by the government could lead to a conservative and extremist backlash.
Heshmat was arrested along with 12 other members, including Mohamed Sweidan, the chief administrator in the Beheira governorate.
According to sources within the Brotherhood, they were taken at around 7 pm on Saturday and it is unclear what they are being charged with, but a statement from the Brotherhood late in the evening said they are likely to face similar charges to the approximately 300 MB members currently languishing in prison.
Cairo usually holds Brotherhood leaders on charges of “belonging to a banned organization” and “receiving financial support from foreign sources.” The MB’s Executive Bureau – the Congress-like committee of the Islamic group – has denied receiving money from foreigners.
Earlier this summer, popular reformist leader Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh – he is also the Secretary-General of the Arab Doctors Union in Cairo – was arrested. He has been in police custody for more than three months and is being accused of attempting to “develop an international Islamic network.”
Aboul Fotouh’s arrest and subsequent detention has sparked much ire among activists, including secularists, who believe the crackdown against Brotherhood members is “inappropriate.” George Ishaq, a leading Kefaya (Enough) Movement activist, told Bikya Masr at a downtown solidarity demonstration for the embattled MB leader, that the “regime wants to take down anyone who opposes it and this will not happen. We will stand strong in the face of their arrogance.”
For Heshmat, Sweidan and others, the battle now heads to the courts, where release orders are routinely thrown aside by the interior ministry, who uses the nearly 30-year-old Emergency Laws to hold citizens indefinitely.
Khaled Hamza, the Editor of the Brotherhood’s English Language website Ikhwanweb, said in a statement that he fears the arrests will spark a backlash among the younger generation, who is becoming more and more fed up with the current state of affairs in Egypt.
“The ongoing crackdown and arrests of the Muslim Brotherhood’s reformists and leaders serves only the extremists who are against any form of peaceful democracy,” he began. “The radical measures adopted by the Egyptian regime with the continued arrests and crackdowns of peaceful and distinguished members of the movement will result in an outbreak by the younger generation who will follow and embrace the extremists’ path.”
The warning is worrying many in Egypt, who feel the arrests are doing more harm than good. But, what is certain is that the Brotherhood continues to push on, preparing itself for a January vote for a new Supreme Guide.
“We will not be stopped by the government to have a democratic election, something they do not do,” said current Supreme Guide Mahdy Akef.
The Brotherhood has been facing a government backlash since their surprise showing in the 2005 Parliamentary elections that saw them secure nearly one-fifth of the Parliamentary seats. Hundreds of members have seen the inside of jail cells since that election victory as Cairo prepares for life after President Hosni Mubarak, who is not expected to run for another term in 2011.
Monday, September 28,2009 15:50
On Saturday evening, Gamal Heshmat, a leading Muslim Brotherhood reformist leader and former Member of Parliament, was arrested by Egyptian security forces in the most recent raid against the Islamic group. The arrest of yet another reformer has left the Brotherhood worried that the continued pressures being exerted by the government could lead to a conservative and extremist backlash.
Heshmat was arrested along with 12 other members, including Mohamed Sweidan, the chief administrator in the Beheira governorate.
According to sources within the Brotherhood, they were taken at around 7 pm on Saturday and it is unclear what they are being charged with, but a statement from the Brotherhood late in the evening said they are likely to face similar charges to the approximately 300 MB members currently languishing in prison.
Cairo usually holds Brotherhood leaders on charges of “belonging to a banned organization” and “receiving financial support from foreign sources.” The MB’s Executive Bureau – the Congress-like committee of the Islamic group – has denied receiving money from foreigners.
Earlier this summer, popular reformist leader Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh – he is also the Secretary-General of the Arab Doctors Union in Cairo – was arrested. He has been in police custody for more than three months and is being accused of attempting to “develop an international Islamic network.”
Aboul Fotouh’s arrest and subsequent detention has sparked much ire among activists, including secularists, who believe the crackdown against Brotherhood members is “inappropriate.” George Ishaq, a leading Kefaya (Enough) Movement activist, told Bikya Masr at a downtown solidarity demonstration for the embattled MB leader, that the “regime wants to take down anyone who opposes it and this will not happen. We will stand strong in the face of their arrogance.”
For Heshmat, Sweidan and others, the battle now heads to the courts, where release orders are routinely thrown aside by the interior ministry, who uses the nearly 30-year-old Emergency Laws to hold citizens indefinitely.
Khaled Hamza, the Editor of the Brotherhood’s English Language website Ikhwanweb, said in a statement that he fears the arrests will spark a backlash among the younger generation, who is becoming more and more fed up with the current state of affairs in Egypt.
“The ongoing crackdown and arrests of the Muslim Brotherhood’s reformists and leaders serves only the extremists who are against any form of peaceful democracy,” he began. “The radical measures adopted by the Egyptian regime with the continued arrests and crackdowns of peaceful and distinguished members of the movement will result in an outbreak by the younger generation who will follow and embrace the extremists’ path.”
The warning is worrying many in Egypt, who feel the arrests are doing more harm than good. But, what is certain is that the Brotherhood continues to push on, preparing itself for a January vote for a new Supreme Guide.
“We will not be stopped by the government to have a democratic election, something they do not do,” said current Supreme Guide Mahdy Akef.
The Brotherhood has been facing a government backlash since their surprise showing in the 2005 Parliamentary elections that saw them secure nearly one-fifth of the Parliamentary seats. Hundreds of members have seen the inside of jail cells since that election victory as Cairo prepares for life after President Hosni Mubarak, who is not expected to run for another term in 2011.
Muslims all over the world must unite and voice their objections and protest to these despicable acts of the IOF
The Muslim Brotherhood will not stand and witness the indecent and barbaric violations committed on the Aqsa'a sacredness; it is the duty of Muslims all over the world to unite and voice their objections and protest to these despicable acts of the Israeli occupation force.
Monday, September 28,2009 15:13
IkhwanWeb
The Muslim Brotherhood will not stand and witness the indecent and barbaric violations committed on the Aqsa'a sacredness; it is the duty of Muslims all over the world to unite and voice their objections and protest to these despicable acts of the Israeli occupation force.
In a statement on current incidents taking place in Jerusalem and in particular the Aqsa mosque Dr Mahmoud Ezzat stressed that "The Palestinian issue has been and always will be a major issue as long as the Israeli's occupation forces continue in their barbaric ways. We witness daily the obstinate, indecent and offensive measures in which they defy not only the sanctity of Alaqsa but also the most meager of all rights; the rights of freedom and the right to simply exist. The IOF offensive on all that is holy and consecrated will not deter the Palestinians who have no choice but to protect it with all their might, in fact it isn't an option but rather an obligation not only for the Palestinians but for all Muslims. It is the duty of the entire Muslim nation to unite and assist those who literally stand in the face of the IOF's weaponry and aggression". Dr Mahmoud continued to emphasize that the real change had to begin within each individual therefore it is significant that each and every man, woman and child endeavour to improve themselves which will result in improving society and consequently the Muslim world.
Ezzat claimed that the Muslims will not be fooled by any hearsay by Obama or anybody else who sweetly laces their dialogue. Positive actions will be the defining factor which will prove the good-will of all. Unfortunately what is currently taking place in regards to Alaqsa's mosque is not a first and measures must be taken to halt these ignorant invasions.
Monday, September 28,2009 15:13
IkhwanWeb
The Muslim Brotherhood will not stand and witness the indecent and barbaric violations committed on the Aqsa'a sacredness; it is the duty of Muslims all over the world to unite and voice their objections and protest to these despicable acts of the Israeli occupation force.
In a statement on current incidents taking place in Jerusalem and in particular the Aqsa mosque Dr Mahmoud Ezzat stressed that "The Palestinian issue has been and always will be a major issue as long as the Israeli's occupation forces continue in their barbaric ways. We witness daily the obstinate, indecent and offensive measures in which they defy not only the sanctity of Alaqsa but also the most meager of all rights; the rights of freedom and the right to simply exist. The IOF offensive on all that is holy and consecrated will not deter the Palestinians who have no choice but to protect it with all their might, in fact it isn't an option but rather an obligation not only for the Palestinians but for all Muslims. It is the duty of the entire Muslim nation to unite and assist those who literally stand in the face of the IOF's weaponry and aggression". Dr Mahmoud continued to emphasize that the real change had to begin within each individual therefore it is significant that each and every man, woman and child endeavour to improve themselves which will result in improving society and consequently the Muslim world.
Ezzat claimed that the Muslims will not be fooled by any hearsay by Obama or anybody else who sweetly laces their dialogue. Positive actions will be the defining factor which will prove the good-will of all. Unfortunately what is currently taking place in regards to Alaqsa's mosque is not a first and measures must be taken to halt these ignorant invasions.
Israel demands PA drop war crimes suit at The Hague
By Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz Correspondent
Tensions are mounting between Israel and the Palestinian Authority following Ramallah's call on the International Court at The Hague to examine claims of "war crimes" that the IDF allegedly committed during Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip. The issue is already weighing in on the relations between the leadership of Israel's defense and security establishment with their counterparts in the West Bank, and is part of a growing list of Israeli complaints about the behavior of PA officials.
Meanwhile, Israel has warned the Palestinian Authority that it would condition permission for a second cellular telephone provider to operate in the West Bank - an economic issue of critical importance to the PA leadership - on the Palestinians withdrawing their request at the International Court.
The issue of a second cellular provider is at the center of talks between the PA, the international Quartet, and Israel, and has been ongoing for some months. Currently the sole provider is Pal-Tel, and the PA prime minister, Salam Fayyad, considers the introduction of another carrier as an important step in improving the civilian infrastructure in the West Bank. The project is central to Watanya, the company that is set to serve as the second provider, and profits are expected to be substantial
However, if the project is not approved by October 15, the PA will be forced to pay a penalty estimated at $300 million, the sum that has already been invested in licensing and infrastructure.
Western diplomats, including the Quartet's envoy to the region, former British prime minister Tony Blair, and the U.S. ambassador to Israel, James Cunningham, have made it clear to senior Israeli officials that time is running out, and have urged them to allow for the establishment of a second provider to go forward.
Israel's objections begin with the issue of transmission frequencies. The frequencies that the Palestinians want the new company to use are very close to ones used by the Israel Defense Forces in some of its most sensitive activities.
"Israel is making it difficult for us on many levels," complains Mohammed Mustafa, economic adviser to PA President Mahmoud Abbas. "They now want us to pressure Pal-Tel to release some of its frequencies, so that they can be used by Watanya."
However, another, more substantive issue was recently added, when the Palestinian Authority appealed to the International Criminal Court. Security sources told Haaretz that this move, which was authorized by Fayyad and Abbas, incensed senior officials of the defense establishment, especially army Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi.
Ashkenazi has been kept busy by involvement in a holding action against the threat that Israeli officers would be brought before the court as a result of charges that the IDF committed war crimes in the Gaza Strip. Concern has intensified following the grave report that the Goldstone Commission released two weeks ago on behalf of the United Nations.
In Israel the argument is that the PA is being unfair, and that at the time of the operation in the Gaza Strip, last winter, its senior officials encouraged their Israeli counterparts to step up the pressure on Hamas, and even to attempt to bring its rule in the territory to the point of collapse. However, at a latter stage they joined those decrying Israel and its alleged actions in the Strip.
In light of this tension, the chief of staff conditioned his approval of a second cellular provider to the Palestinians' withdrawing their appeal to the court.
"The PA has reached the point where it has to decide whether it is working with us or against us," senior figures in the defense establishment have said. At the PA it is being said, in response to the Israeli demands, that Abbas and Fayyad will water down their appeal to the ICJ, though they will refuse to promise that it will rescinded entirely.
During the past year Israel defense officials have often praised the Palestinians on improving their contribution to securing the West Bank, and of the decisive character of the leadership under Fayyad. However, in recent weeks there have been increasing claims that even as the Authority is being praised by Israel and the international community, it is behaving irresponsibly by violating agreements between the two sides.
The Israeli claims focus on the growing presence of Palestinian security personnel in civilian clothing in East Jerusalem, contrary to the obligations of the PA. The security personnel participate in prayers at Al-Aqsa mosque, and at other sites in the city, and have stepped up their presence in the Jerusalem's medical and educational facilities. Moreover, they have also been involved in the abduction of Palestinians suspected of selling property to Jews.
Tensions are mounting between Israel and the Palestinian Authority following Ramallah's call on the International Court at The Hague to examine claims of "war crimes" that the IDF allegedly committed during Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip. The issue is already weighing in on the relations between the leadership of Israel's defense and security establishment with their counterparts in the West Bank, and is part of a growing list of Israeli complaints about the behavior of PA officials.
Meanwhile, Israel has warned the Palestinian Authority that it would condition permission for a second cellular telephone provider to operate in the West Bank - an economic issue of critical importance to the PA leadership - on the Palestinians withdrawing their request at the International Court.
The issue of a second cellular provider is at the center of talks between the PA, the international Quartet, and Israel, and has been ongoing for some months. Currently the sole provider is Pal-Tel, and the PA prime minister, Salam Fayyad, considers the introduction of another carrier as an important step in improving the civilian infrastructure in the West Bank. The project is central to Watanya, the company that is set to serve as the second provider, and profits are expected to be substantial
However, if the project is not approved by October 15, the PA will be forced to pay a penalty estimated at $300 million, the sum that has already been invested in licensing and infrastructure.
Western diplomats, including the Quartet's envoy to the region, former British prime minister Tony Blair, and the U.S. ambassador to Israel, James Cunningham, have made it clear to senior Israeli officials that time is running out, and have urged them to allow for the establishment of a second provider to go forward.
Israel's objections begin with the issue of transmission frequencies. The frequencies that the Palestinians want the new company to use are very close to ones used by the Israel Defense Forces in some of its most sensitive activities.
"Israel is making it difficult for us on many levels," complains Mohammed Mustafa, economic adviser to PA President Mahmoud Abbas. "They now want us to pressure Pal-Tel to release some of its frequencies, so that they can be used by Watanya."
However, another, more substantive issue was recently added, when the Palestinian Authority appealed to the International Criminal Court. Security sources told Haaretz that this move, which was authorized by Fayyad and Abbas, incensed senior officials of the defense establishment, especially army Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi.
Ashkenazi has been kept busy by involvement in a holding action against the threat that Israeli officers would be brought before the court as a result of charges that the IDF committed war crimes in the Gaza Strip. Concern has intensified following the grave report that the Goldstone Commission released two weeks ago on behalf of the United Nations.
In Israel the argument is that the PA is being unfair, and that at the time of the operation in the Gaza Strip, last winter, its senior officials encouraged their Israeli counterparts to step up the pressure on Hamas, and even to attempt to bring its rule in the territory to the point of collapse. However, at a latter stage they joined those decrying Israel and its alleged actions in the Strip.
In light of this tension, the chief of staff conditioned his approval of a second cellular provider to the Palestinians' withdrawing their appeal to the court.
"The PA has reached the point where it has to decide whether it is working with us or against us," senior figures in the defense establishment have said. At the PA it is being said, in response to the Israeli demands, that Abbas and Fayyad will water down their appeal to the ICJ, though they will refuse to promise that it will rescinded entirely.
During the past year Israel defense officials have often praised the Palestinians on improving their contribution to securing the West Bank, and of the decisive character of the leadership under Fayyad. However, in recent weeks there have been increasing claims that even as the Authority is being praised by Israel and the international community, it is behaving irresponsibly by violating agreements between the two sides.
The Israeli claims focus on the growing presence of Palestinian security personnel in civilian clothing in East Jerusalem, contrary to the obligations of the PA. The security personnel participate in prayers at Al-Aqsa mosque, and at other sites in the city, and have stepped up their presence in the Jerusalem's medical and educational facilities. Moreover, they have also been involved in the abduction of Palestinians suspected of selling property to Jews.
Palestinians injured in Aqsa clash:
Tarek Daccarett sent a message to the members of إرفع العلم الفلسطيني - Raise the Palestinian flag!
--------------------
Subject: Palestinians injured in Aqsa clash:
Palestine, September 27, 2009 (Pa Telegraph) - Sixteen Palestinians have been injured and another seven detained after Israeli police stormed the al-Aqsa mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem. Israeli security forces on Sunday fired rubber bullets and stun grenades at Palestinians who attempted to prevent a Zionist rally from entering the al-Haram al-Sharif courtyard within the compound on the Jewish holy day of Yom Kippur.
Jivara al-Budairi, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Jerusalem, said that a large number of Israeli security units have been seen by residents entering East Jerusalem, where the mosque is located.
"Special forces are still deployed inside the Haram compound yard, but are no longer clashing with the worshippers [Palestinians] inside", estimated to be around a thousand, our correspondent said.
Micky Rosenfeld, an Israeli police spokesman, said two Israeli policemen were also injured in the confrontation.
Also called Day of Atonement, Jews mark Yom Kippur by fasting and holding prayers.
Military closure
The police entered after Israeli settlers and Zionist groups attempted to force entry to a part of the complex they call Temple Mount.
Other Israeli settler-activist groups also gathered at the Hetta and Majlis gates, Al Jazeera's correspondent said.
Last year, a similar incident on the Yom Kippur holiday resulted in damage to dozens of cars and shops.
Meanwhile, Israeli forces have imposed military closure on Palestinian territories starting from Saturday midnight until Monday midnight in view of the religious holiday.
Israel captured the Old City of Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed it along with the rest of mostly Arab East Jerusalem in a move not recognised by the international community.
Al Jazeera and agencies
Source: The Palestine Telegraph, check more info here:
http://www.facebook.com/l/598e5;www.paltelegraph.com/
--------------------
Subject: Palestinians injured in Aqsa clash:
Palestine, September 27, 2009 (Pa Telegraph) - Sixteen Palestinians have been injured and another seven detained after Israeli police stormed the al-Aqsa mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem. Israeli security forces on Sunday fired rubber bullets and stun grenades at Palestinians who attempted to prevent a Zionist rally from entering the al-Haram al-Sharif courtyard within the compound on the Jewish holy day of Yom Kippur.
Jivara al-Budairi, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Jerusalem, said that a large number of Israeli security units have been seen by residents entering East Jerusalem, where the mosque is located.
"Special forces are still deployed inside the Haram compound yard, but are no longer clashing with the worshippers [Palestinians] inside", estimated to be around a thousand, our correspondent said.
Micky Rosenfeld, an Israeli police spokesman, said two Israeli policemen were also injured in the confrontation.
Also called Day of Atonement, Jews mark Yom Kippur by fasting and holding prayers.
Military closure
The police entered after Israeli settlers and Zionist groups attempted to force entry to a part of the complex they call Temple Mount.
Other Israeli settler-activist groups also gathered at the Hetta and Majlis gates, Al Jazeera's correspondent said.
Last year, a similar incident on the Yom Kippur holiday resulted in damage to dozens of cars and shops.
Meanwhile, Israeli forces have imposed military closure on Palestinian territories starting from Saturday midnight until Monday midnight in view of the religious holiday.
Israel captured the Old City of Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed it along with the rest of mostly Arab East Jerusalem in a move not recognised by the international community.
Al Jazeera and agencies
Source: The Palestine Telegraph, check more info here:
http://www.facebook.com/l/598e5;www.paltelegraph.com/
PNA, Hamas warn of worldwide tension over Jerusalem standoff
The Palestinian National Authority (PNA) and Islamic Hamas movement on Sunday warned that "Israeli attacks on holy places" could spark tension across the world.
The warning was made after tens of Palestinians were wounded by Israeli riot police in the Old City of Jerusalem.
Witnesses said that some 150 Palestinian prayers and a group of Jews clashed in the campus which contains al-Aqsa mosque and the Western Wall, they are Muslim and Jewish holy cites.
The Israeli police, which accompanied by the Jewish worshippers, fired tear gas and sonic blasters at the Muslim crowds and beat them with sticks, witnesses said.
"This is a new Israeli aggression on a pure part of the Muslims' belief and this alerts of unfavorable consequences, not only on the Palestinian people, but also on the entire world, including Israel," said Mahmoud al-Habbash, Palestinian minister of religious affairs.
He accused Israel of using excessive force "to blow up the peace process, evade from the political obligations and gets its government out from impasse after the international community knew that government's intentions against peace and stability in the region."
"If the international community did not intervene, everyone will repent," al-Habbash, who is also an aide to president Mahmoud Abbas, told Xinhua.
Meanwhile, Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, said that "the continuation of attacks on Islamic sacred places may open a round of confrontation against the Israeli occupation."
Ismail Radwam, a Hamas spokesman, told Xinhua that the consequences of the Israeli measures in Jerusalem "would be reflected in the Palestinian, Arab and Islamic nations."
On Sept. 28, 2000, former Israeli premier Ariel Sharon, an opposition leader then, broke into the complex of al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock, fueling the outbreak of the second Palestinian uprising which is still glowing.
Radwan accused the PNA, which holds sway in the West Bank, of cracking down against the Palestinian militant groups in the West Bank, adding that "the Israeli occupation would never have dared to carry out such an aggression if the PNA were not uprooting the resistance."
Abbas has finally met Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York this week, in protest against the continued Jewish settlement in the West Bank.
Most of the Palestinian factions slammed the U.S.-sponsored Israeli-Palestinian meetings in New York, saying they annulled the PNA's stances not to resume the peace negotiations before the settlement stops.
Source:Xinhua
The warning was made after tens of Palestinians were wounded by Israeli riot police in the Old City of Jerusalem.
Witnesses said that some 150 Palestinian prayers and a group of Jews clashed in the campus which contains al-Aqsa mosque and the Western Wall, they are Muslim and Jewish holy cites.
The Israeli police, which accompanied by the Jewish worshippers, fired tear gas and sonic blasters at the Muslim crowds and beat them with sticks, witnesses said.
"This is a new Israeli aggression on a pure part of the Muslims' belief and this alerts of unfavorable consequences, not only on the Palestinian people, but also on the entire world, including Israel," said Mahmoud al-Habbash, Palestinian minister of religious affairs.
He accused Israel of using excessive force "to blow up the peace process, evade from the political obligations and gets its government out from impasse after the international community knew that government's intentions against peace and stability in the region."
"If the international community did not intervene, everyone will repent," al-Habbash, who is also an aide to president Mahmoud Abbas, told Xinhua.
Meanwhile, Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, said that "the continuation of attacks on Islamic sacred places may open a round of confrontation against the Israeli occupation."
Ismail Radwam, a Hamas spokesman, told Xinhua that the consequences of the Israeli measures in Jerusalem "would be reflected in the Palestinian, Arab and Islamic nations."
On Sept. 28, 2000, former Israeli premier Ariel Sharon, an opposition leader then, broke into the complex of al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock, fueling the outbreak of the second Palestinian uprising which is still glowing.
Radwan accused the PNA, which holds sway in the West Bank, of cracking down against the Palestinian militant groups in the West Bank, adding that "the Israeli occupation would never have dared to carry out such an aggression if the PNA were not uprooting the resistance."
Abbas has finally met Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York this week, in protest against the continued Jewish settlement in the West Bank.
Most of the Palestinian factions slammed the U.S.-sponsored Israeli-Palestinian meetings in New York, saying they annulled the PNA's stances not to resume the peace negotiations before the settlement stops.
Source:Xinhua
Saturday, September 26, 2009
PFLP: Obama's statements and actions serve only U.S/Israeli interests
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine -PFLP
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine said, in response to U.S. President Barack Obama's statements at the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, that the U.S. position serves only U.S/Israeli interests and the ongoing strategic alliance between the major imperialist power and its Zionist colonial project partner.
By demanding that Palestinians engage in futile negotiations with the occupation state while the fascist Netanyahu regime continues its settlement project without even a freeze, the PFLP said on September 24, 2009, Obama's position reveals the U.S. support for Netanyahu's position and his extremism, racism and colonization, as it serves U.S./Israeli strategic interests, as the U.S. and Israel prepare for joint military exercises meant to intimidate the people of the region, raise tensions and instability and demonstrate strategic/military superiority of the occupation state.
Furthermore, the PFLP called upon Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and the PLO leadership to respect decisions of the PLO Executive Committee and the interests of the Palestinian people and refuse meetings with representatives of the occupation regime which plunders our land, violates our human rights, tramples on international law and resolutions, ignores global public opinion and legality and refuses to end the occupation, siege and aggression. Instead, the Front called for the occupation state to be isolated and called upon all who claim to represent the Palestinian people to take the lead in isolating the criminal state, rather than engaging in meetings and so-called "negotiations" with its representatives.
The Front said that Palestinian national interests require the first priority to be restoration of national unity, ending the division through comprehensive national dialogue, in order to confront the occupier and secure our national rights, including independence, the right to return, and self-determination. It stressed that disunity helps to provide an environment that promotes the occupier's projects and plans to liquidate the Palestinian cause.
Comrade Jamil Mizher, member of the Central Committee of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, described the tripartite meeting between Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Zionist occupation Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Barack Obama as serving only U.S./Israeli interests, describing the meeting as an "escape valve for the pressures on the occupation government after the release of the UN report accusing Israel of war crimes against the Palestinian people during its recent aggression on Gaza."
Comrade Mizher, speaking on September 23, 2009 to Al-Alam News, said that the meeting is a "free gift" to the fascist Netanyahu regime, while it is subject to widespread international criticism due to its war crimes in Gaza and its ongoing settlement and Zionization project. He said that the meeting completely ignores the interests, concerns and opinions of the Palestinian people and instead shows that the Palestinian representatives in the PA are more concerned with the demands of the United States. Comrade Mizher stressed that a return to so-called "negotiations" with the Netanyahu regime is unacceptable, as the entire so-called "peace process" has achieved nothing for the Palestinian people at the level of national rights.
He called upon all Palestinian forces to review and reject the policy of Oslo and the "peace process" and instead build a new political strategy based on adherence to national principles and national rights, rather than on futile "negotiations" with the criminal Israeli state.
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine said, in response to U.S. President Barack Obama's statements at the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, that the U.S. position serves only U.S/Israeli interests and the ongoing strategic alliance between the major imperialist power and its Zionist colonial project partner.
By demanding that Palestinians engage in futile negotiations with the occupation state while the fascist Netanyahu regime continues its settlement project without even a freeze, the PFLP said on September 24, 2009, Obama's position reveals the U.S. support for Netanyahu's position and his extremism, racism and colonization, as it serves U.S./Israeli strategic interests, as the U.S. and Israel prepare for joint military exercises meant to intimidate the people of the region, raise tensions and instability and demonstrate strategic/military superiority of the occupation state.
Furthermore, the PFLP called upon Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and the PLO leadership to respect decisions of the PLO Executive Committee and the interests of the Palestinian people and refuse meetings with representatives of the occupation regime which plunders our land, violates our human rights, tramples on international law and resolutions, ignores global public opinion and legality and refuses to end the occupation, siege and aggression. Instead, the Front called for the occupation state to be isolated and called upon all who claim to represent the Palestinian people to take the lead in isolating the criminal state, rather than engaging in meetings and so-called "negotiations" with its representatives.
The Front said that Palestinian national interests require the first priority to be restoration of national unity, ending the division through comprehensive national dialogue, in order to confront the occupier and secure our national rights, including independence, the right to return, and self-determination. It stressed that disunity helps to provide an environment that promotes the occupier's projects and plans to liquidate the Palestinian cause.
Comrade Jamil Mizher, member of the Central Committee of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, described the tripartite meeting between Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Zionist occupation Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Barack Obama as serving only U.S./Israeli interests, describing the meeting as an "escape valve for the pressures on the occupation government after the release of the UN report accusing Israel of war crimes against the Palestinian people during its recent aggression on Gaza."
Comrade Mizher, speaking on September 23, 2009 to Al-Alam News, said that the meeting is a "free gift" to the fascist Netanyahu regime, while it is subject to widespread international criticism due to its war crimes in Gaza and its ongoing settlement and Zionization project. He said that the meeting completely ignores the interests, concerns and opinions of the Palestinian people and instead shows that the Palestinian representatives in the PA are more concerned with the demands of the United States. Comrade Mizher stressed that a return to so-called "negotiations" with the Netanyahu regime is unacceptable, as the entire so-called "peace process" has achieved nothing for the Palestinian people at the level of national rights.
He called upon all Palestinian forces to review and reject the policy of Oslo and the "peace process" and instead build a new political strategy based on adherence to national principles and national rights, rather than on futile "negotiations" with the criminal Israeli state.
U.S., NATO Poised For Most Massive War In Afghanistan's History
by Rick Rozoff
URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15364
Global Research, September 24, 2009
Stop NATO
Over the past week U.S. newspapers and television networks have been abuzz with reports that Washington and its NATO allies are planning an unprecedented increase of troops for the war in Afghanistan, even in addition to the 17,000 new American and several thousand NATO forces that have been committed to the war so far this year.
The number, based on as yet unsubstantiated reports of what U.S. and NATO commander Stanley McChrystal and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen have demanded of the White House, range from 10,000 to 45,000.
Fox News has cited figures as high as 45,000 more American soldiers and ABC News as many as 40,000. On September 15 the Christian Science Monitor wrote of "perhaps as many as 45,000."
The similarity of the estimates indicate that a number has been agreed upon and America's obedient media is preparing domestic audiences for the possibility of the largest escalation of foreign armed forces in Afghanistan's history. Only seven years ago the United States had 5,000 troops in the country, but was scheduled to have 68,000 by December even before the reports of new deployments surfaced.
An additional 45,000 troops would bring the U.S. total to 113,000. There are also 35,000 troops from some 50 other nations serving under NATO's International Security Assistance Force in the nation, which would raise combined troop strength under McChrystal's command to 148,000 if the larger number of rumored increases materializes.
As the former Soviet Union withdrew its soldiers from Afghanistan twenty years ago the New York Times reported "At the height of the Soviet commitment, according to Western intelligence estimates, there were 115,000 troops deployed." [1]
Nearly 150,000 U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan would represent the largest foreign military presence ever in the land.
Rather than addressing this historic watershed, the American media is full of innuendos and "privileged" speculation on who has leaked the information and why, as to commercial news operations the tawdry world of Byzantine intrigues among and between American politicians, generals and the Fourth Estate is of more importance that the lengthiest and largest war in the world.
One that has been estimated by the chief of the British armed forces and other leading Western officials to last decades and that has already been extended into Pakistan, a nation with a population almost six times that of Afghanistan and in possession of nuclear weapons.
Two weeks ago the Dutch media reported that during a visit to the Netherlands "General Stanley McChrystal [said] he is considering the possibility of merging...Operation Enduring Freedom with NATO's ISAF force." [2] That is, not only would he continue to command all U.S. and NATO troops, but the two commands would be melded into one.
The call for up to 45,000 more American troops was first adumbrated in mid-September by U.S. armed forces chief Michael Mullen, with the Associated Press stating "The top U.S. military officer says that winning in Afghanistan will probably mean sending more troops." [3]
Four days later, September 19, Reuters reported that "The commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan has drawn up a long-awaited and detailed request for additional troops but has not yet sent it to Washington, a spokesman said on Saturday.
"He said General Stanley McChrystal completed the document this week, setting out exactly how many U.S. and NATO troops, Afghan security force members and civilians he thinks he needs." [4]
The Pentagon spokesman mentioned above, Lieutenant-Colonel Tadd Sholtis, said, "We're working with Washington as well as the other NATO participants about how it's best to submit this," refusing to divulge any details. [5]
Two days later the Washington Post published a 66-page "redacted" version of General McChrystal's Commander's Initial Assessment which began with this background information:
"On 26 June, 2009, the United States Secretary of Defense directed Commander, United States Central Command (CDRUSCENTCOM), to provide a multidisciplinary assessment of the situation in Afghanistan. On 02 July, 2009, Commander, NATO International Security Assistance Force (COMISAF) / U.S. Forces-Afghanistan (USFOR-A), received direction from CDRUSCENTCOM to complete the overall review.
"On 01 July, 2009, the Supreme Allied Commander Europe and NATO Secretary General also issued a similar directive.
"COMISAF [Commander, NATO International Security Assistance Force] subsequently issued an order to the ISAF staff and component commands to conduct a comprehensive review to assess the overall situation, review plans and ongoing efforts, and identify revisions to operational, tactical and strategic guidance."
The main focus of the report, not surprising given McChrystal's previous role as head of the Joint Special Operations Command, the Pentagon's preeminent special operations unit, in Iraq, is concentrated and intensified counterinsurgency war.
It includes the demand that "NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) requires a new strategy....This new strategy must also be properly resourced and executed through an integrated civilian-military counterinsurgency campaign....This is a different kind of fight. We must conduct classic counterinsurgency operations in an environment that is uniquely complex....Success demands a comprehensive counterinsurgency (COIN) campaign."
McChrystal's evaluation also indicates that the war will not only escalate within Afghanistan but will also be stepped up inside Pakistan and may even target Iran.
"Afghanistan's insurgency is clearly supported from Pakistan. Senior leaders of the major Afghan insurgent groups are based in Pakistan, are linked with al Qaeda and other violent extremist groups, and are reportedly aided by some elements of Pakistan's ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence].
"Iranian Qods Force [part of the nation's army] is reportedly training fighters for certain Taliban groups and providing other forms of military assistance to insurgents. Iran's current policies and actions do not pose a short-term threat to the mission, but Iran has the capability to threaten the mission in the future."
That the ISI has had links to armed extremists is no revelation. The Pentagon and the CIA worked hand-in-glove with it from 1979 onward to subvert successive governments in Afghanistan. That Iran is "training fighters for certain Taliban groups" is a provocational fabrication.
As to who is responsible for the thirty-year disaster that is Afghanistan, McChrystal's assessment contains a sentence that may get past most readers. It is this:
"The major insurgent groups in order of their threat to the mission are: the Quetta Shura Taliban (05T), the Haqqani Network (HQN), and the Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin (HiG)."
The last-named is the guerrilla force of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the largest recipient of hundreds of millions (perhaps billions) of U.S. dollars provided by the CIA to the Peshawar Seven Mujahideen bloc fighting the Soviet-backed government of Afghanistan from 1978-1992.
While hosting Hekmatyar and his allies at the White House in 1985 then President Ronald Reagan referred to his guests as "the moral equivalents of America's founding fathers.”
Throughout the 1980s the CIA official in large part tasked to assist the Mujahideen with funds, arms and training was Robert Gates, now U.S. Secretary of Defense.
Last December BBC News reported:
"In his book, From the Shadows, published in 1996, Mr Gates defended the role of the CIA in undertaking covert action which, he argued, helped to win the Cold War.
"In a speech in 1999, Mr Gates said that its most important role was in Afghanistan.
"'CIA had important successes in covert action. Perhaps the most consequential of all was Afghanistan where CIA, with its management, funnelled billions of dollars in supplies and weapons to the mujahideen, and the resistance was thus able to fight the vaunted Soviet army to a standoff and eventually force a political decision to withdraw,' he said." [6]
Now according to McChrystal the same Gulbuddin Hekmatyar who was cultivated and sponsored by McChrystal's current boss, Gates, is in charge of one of the three groups the Pentagon and NATO are waging ever-escalating counterinsurgency operations in South Asia against.
To make matters even more intriguing, former British foreign secretary Robin Cook - as loyal a pro-American Atlanticist as exists - conceded in the Guardian on July 8, 2005 that "Bin Laden was...a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally 'the database', was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians."
Russian analyst and vice president of the Center for Political Technologies Sergey Mikheev was quoted in early September as contending that "Afghanistan is a stage in the division of the world after the bipolar system failed. They [U.S. and NATO] wanted to consolidate their grip on Eurasia...and deployed a lot of troops there. The Taliban card was played, although nobody had been interested in the Taliban before." [7]
Pentagon chief Gates' 27 years in the CIA, including his tenure as director of the agency from 1991-1993, is being brought to bear on the Afghan war according to the Los Angeles Times of September 19, 2009, which revealed that "The CIA is deploying teams of spies, analysts and paramilitary operatives to Afghanistan, part of a broad intelligence 'surge' that will make its station there among the largest in the agency's history, U.S. officials say.
"When complete, the CIA's presence in the country is expected to rival the size of its massive stations in Iraq and Vietnam at the height of those wars. Precise numbers are classified, but one U.S. official said the agency already has nearly 700 employees in Afghanistan.
"The intelligence expansion goes beyond the CIA to involve every major spy service, officials said, including the National Security Agency, which intercepts calls and e-mails, as well as the Defense Intelligence Agency, which tracks military threats."
U.S. and NATO Commander McChrystal will put the CIA to immediate use in his plans for an all-out counterinsurgency campaign. The Los Angeles Times article added:
"McChrystal is expected to expand the use of teams that combine CIA operatives with special operations soldiers. In Iraq, where he oversaw the special operations forces from 2003 to 2008, McChrystal used such teams to speed up the cycle of gathering intelligence and carrying out raids aimed at killing or capturing insurgents.
"The CIA is also carrying out an escalating campaign of unmanned Predator missile strikes on Al Qaeda and insurgent strongholds in Pakistan. The number of strikes so far this year, 37, already exceeds the 2008 total, according to data compiled by the Long War Journal website, which tracks Predator strikes in Pakistan."
Indeed, on September 13 it was reported that "Two NATO fighter jets reportedly flew inside Pakistan's airspace for nearly two hours on Saturday.
"The airspace violation took place in different parts of the Khyber Agency bordering the Afghan border." [8]
Two days later "NATO fighter jets in Afghanistan...violated Pakistani airspace and dropped bombs on the country's northwest region.
"NATO warplanes bombed the South Waziristan tribal region....Moreover, CIA operated spy drone planes continued low-altitude flights in several towns of the Waziristan region." [9]
The dramatic upsurge in CIA deployments in South Asia won't be limited to Afghanistan. Neighboring Pakistan will be further overrun by U.S. intelligence operatives also.
On September 12 a petition was filed in the Supreme Court of Pakistan contesting the announced expansion of the U.S. embassy in the nation's capital.
"Pakistani media have been reporting that the United States plans to deploy a large number of marines with the plan to expand its embassy in Islamabad." [10]
The challenge was organized by Barrister Zafarullah Khan, who "said that Saudi Arabia was also trying to get 700,000 acres (283,400 hectares) of land in the country."
He was quoted on the day of the presentation of the petition as warning "Giving away Pakistani land to U.S. and Arab countries in this fashion is a threat for the stability and sovereignty of the country" and "further added that the purpose of giving the land to U.S. embassy was to establish an American military base...there.
"He maintained that such a big land was enough even to construct a military airport." [11]
Intelligence personnel and special forces are being matched by military equipment in the intensification of the West's war in South Asia.
On September 10 Reuters revealed in an article titled "U.S. eyes military equipment in Iraq for Pakistan" that "The Pentagon has proposed transferring U.S. military equipment from Iraq to Pakistani security forces to help Islamabad step up its offensive against the Taliban...."
A U.S. armed forces publication a few days afterward wrote that "U.S. hardware is moving out of Iraq by the ton, much of it going straight to the overstretched forces in increasingly volatile Afghanistan" and "The U.S. military has already started moving an estimated 1.5 million pieces of equipment - everything from batteries to tanks - by ground, rail and air either to Afghanistan for immediate use...." [12]
In the middle of this month "U.S. military leaders infused Gen. Stanley McChrystal's ideas of how to win the war in Afghanistan" by conducting a large-scale counterinsurgency exercise in Grafenwoehr, Germany.
"Dozens of Pashtun speakers joined more than 6,500 U.S. troops and civilians in an exercise for the Afghanistan-bound 173rd Airborne Brigade and Iraq-bound 12th Combat Aviation Brigade. It was the largest such exercise ever held by the U.S. military outside of the United States...." [13]
The Pentagon and NATO have their work cut out for them.
"A security map by the London-based International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) showed a deepening security crisis with substantial Taliban activity in at least 97 percent of the war-ravaged country.
"The Council added that the militants now have a permanent presence in 80 percent of the country." [14]
The United States is not alone in sinking deeper into the Afghan morass.
On September 14 U.S. ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder, in celebrating the "resilience and deep-seated support from our allies for what is happening in Afghanistan," was equally enthusiastic in proclaiming "Over 40 percent of the body bags that leave Afghanistan do not go to the U.S. They go to other countries...." [15]
Daalder also gave the lie to earlier claims that NATO troop increases leading up to last month's presidential election were temporary in nature by acknowledging that "Many of the extra troops that NATO countries sent to Afghanistan for the August presidential elections would stay on." [16]
Leading up to the Washington Post's publication of the McChrystal assessment, NATO's Military Committee held a two-day conference in Lisbon, Portugal which was attended by McChrystal and NATO's two Strategic Commanders, Admiral Stavridis (Supreme Allied Commander, Operations) and General Abrial (Supreme Allied Commander, Transformation) which "focused mainly on the operation in Afghanistan and on the New Strategic Concept." [17]
The 28 NATO defense chiefs present laid a wreath to the Alliance's first war dead, those killed in Afghanistan.
Earlier this month the Washington Post reported that "The U.S. military and NATO are launching a major overhaul of the way they recruit, train and equip Afghanistan's security forces," an announcement that came "in advance of expected recommendations by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal." [18]
The article quoted Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee:
"We're going to need many more trainers, hopefully including a much larger number of NATO trainers. We're going to need a surge of equipment that is coming out of Iraq and, instead of coming home, a great deal of it should be going to Afghanistan instead." [19]
According to the same report, this month NATO will "will establish a new command led by a three-star military officer to oversee recruiting and generating Afghan forces.
"The goal is to 'bring more coherence' to uncoordinated efforts by NATO contingents in Afghanistan while underscoring that the mission 'is not just America's challenge'..." [20]
Contributing to its quota of body bags, NATO has experienced losses in Afghanistan that have reached record levels. "According to the icasualties website, 363 foreign soldiers have died in Afghanistan so far this year, compared to 294 for all of 2008." [21]
This month Britain lost its 216th soldier in the nearly eight-year war. Canada lost its 131st. Denmark its 25th. Italy its 20th. Poland, where a recent poll showed 81 percent support for immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan, its 12th.
Russian ambassador to Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov, who had been in the nation in the 1980s, was cited by Associated Press on September 12 as reflecting that in 2002 the U.S. had 5,000 troops in the nation and "Taliban controlled just a small corner of the country's southeast."
"Now we have Taliban fighting in the peaceful Kunduz and Baghlan (provinces) with your (NATO's) 100,000 troops. And if this trend is the rule, if you bring 200,000 soldiers here, all of Afghanistan will be under the Taliban."
Associated Press also cited Kabulov's concern that "the U.S. and its allies are competing with Russia for influence in the energy-rich region....Afghanistan remains a strategic prize because of its location near the gas and oil fields of Iran, the Caspian Sea, Central Asia and the Persian Gulf."
He also said "Russia has questions about NATO's intentions in Afghanistan, which...lies outside of the alliance's 'political domain'" and "Moscow is concerned that NATO is building permanent bases in the region."
The concerns are legitimate in light of this month's latest quadrennial report by the Pentagon on security threats which "put emerging superpower China and former Cold War foe Russia alongside Iran and North Korea on a list of the four main nations challenging American interests." [22]
At the same time a U.S. military newspaper reported on statements by Pentagon chief Robert Gates:
"Gates said the roughly $6.5 billion he has proposed to upgrade the [Air Force] fleet assures U.S. domination of the skies for decades.
"By the time China produces its first - 5th generation - fighter, he said, the U.S. will have more than 1,000 F-22s and F-35s. And while the U.S. conducted 35,000 refueling missions last year, Russia performed about 30.
"The secretary also highlighted new efforts to support robust space and cyber commands, as well as the new Global Strike Command that oversees the nuclear arsenal." [23]
To add to Russian and Chinese apprehensions about NATO's role in South and Central Asia, ten days ago the U.S. ambassador to Kazakhstan, which borders Russia and China, "offered to Kazakhstan to take part in the peacekeeping mission in Afghanistan."
At the opening ceremony of the NATO Steppe Eagle-2009 military exercises in that nation envoy Richard Hoagland said "Kazakhstan may again become part of the international NATO peacekeeping force in Afghanistan." [24]
Radio Free Europe reported on September 16 that NATO was to sign new agreements with Kyrgyzstan, which also borders China, for the use of the Manas Air Base that as many as 200,000 U.S. and NATO troops have passed through since the beginning of the Afghan war.
On the same day NATO' plans for expanding transit routes through the South Caucasus and the Caspian Sea region were described. "[T]he air corridor through Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan is the most feasible.
"This route will be best suited if ISAF transport planes fly directly to Baku from Turkey or any other NATO member....Moreover, it [Azerbaijan] is not a CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization] member, which allows Azerbaijan more freedom for maneuver in the region when dealing with NATO." [25]
Just as troops serving under NATO command in the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan now include those from almost fifty countries on five continents, so the broadening scope of the war is absorbing vaster tracts of Eurasia and the Middle East.
America's longest armed conflict since that in Indochina and NATO's first ground war threatens to not only remain the world's most dangerous conflagration but also one that plunges the 21st Century into a war without end.
URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15364
Global Research, September 24, 2009
Stop NATO
Over the past week U.S. newspapers and television networks have been abuzz with reports that Washington and its NATO allies are planning an unprecedented increase of troops for the war in Afghanistan, even in addition to the 17,000 new American and several thousand NATO forces that have been committed to the war so far this year.
The number, based on as yet unsubstantiated reports of what U.S. and NATO commander Stanley McChrystal and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen have demanded of the White House, range from 10,000 to 45,000.
Fox News has cited figures as high as 45,000 more American soldiers and ABC News as many as 40,000. On September 15 the Christian Science Monitor wrote of "perhaps as many as 45,000."
The similarity of the estimates indicate that a number has been agreed upon and America's obedient media is preparing domestic audiences for the possibility of the largest escalation of foreign armed forces in Afghanistan's history. Only seven years ago the United States had 5,000 troops in the country, but was scheduled to have 68,000 by December even before the reports of new deployments surfaced.
An additional 45,000 troops would bring the U.S. total to 113,000. There are also 35,000 troops from some 50 other nations serving under NATO's International Security Assistance Force in the nation, which would raise combined troop strength under McChrystal's command to 148,000 if the larger number of rumored increases materializes.
As the former Soviet Union withdrew its soldiers from Afghanistan twenty years ago the New York Times reported "At the height of the Soviet commitment, according to Western intelligence estimates, there were 115,000 troops deployed." [1]
Nearly 150,000 U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan would represent the largest foreign military presence ever in the land.
Rather than addressing this historic watershed, the American media is full of innuendos and "privileged" speculation on who has leaked the information and why, as to commercial news operations the tawdry world of Byzantine intrigues among and between American politicians, generals and the Fourth Estate is of more importance that the lengthiest and largest war in the world.
One that has been estimated by the chief of the British armed forces and other leading Western officials to last decades and that has already been extended into Pakistan, a nation with a population almost six times that of Afghanistan and in possession of nuclear weapons.
Two weeks ago the Dutch media reported that during a visit to the Netherlands "General Stanley McChrystal [said] he is considering the possibility of merging...Operation Enduring Freedom with NATO's ISAF force." [2] That is, not only would he continue to command all U.S. and NATO troops, but the two commands would be melded into one.
The call for up to 45,000 more American troops was first adumbrated in mid-September by U.S. armed forces chief Michael Mullen, with the Associated Press stating "The top U.S. military officer says that winning in Afghanistan will probably mean sending more troops." [3]
Four days later, September 19, Reuters reported that "The commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan has drawn up a long-awaited and detailed request for additional troops but has not yet sent it to Washington, a spokesman said on Saturday.
"He said General Stanley McChrystal completed the document this week, setting out exactly how many U.S. and NATO troops, Afghan security force members and civilians he thinks he needs." [4]
The Pentagon spokesman mentioned above, Lieutenant-Colonel Tadd Sholtis, said, "We're working with Washington as well as the other NATO participants about how it's best to submit this," refusing to divulge any details. [5]
Two days later the Washington Post published a 66-page "redacted" version of General McChrystal's Commander's Initial Assessment which began with this background information:
"On 26 June, 2009, the United States Secretary of Defense directed Commander, United States Central Command (CDRUSCENTCOM), to provide a multidisciplinary assessment of the situation in Afghanistan. On 02 July, 2009, Commander, NATO International Security Assistance Force (COMISAF) / U.S. Forces-Afghanistan (USFOR-A), received direction from CDRUSCENTCOM to complete the overall review.
"On 01 July, 2009, the Supreme Allied Commander Europe and NATO Secretary General also issued a similar directive.
"COMISAF [Commander, NATO International Security Assistance Force] subsequently issued an order to the ISAF staff and component commands to conduct a comprehensive review to assess the overall situation, review plans and ongoing efforts, and identify revisions to operational, tactical and strategic guidance."
The main focus of the report, not surprising given McChrystal's previous role as head of the Joint Special Operations Command, the Pentagon's preeminent special operations unit, in Iraq, is concentrated and intensified counterinsurgency war.
It includes the demand that "NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) requires a new strategy....This new strategy must also be properly resourced and executed through an integrated civilian-military counterinsurgency campaign....This is a different kind of fight. We must conduct classic counterinsurgency operations in an environment that is uniquely complex....Success demands a comprehensive counterinsurgency (COIN) campaign."
McChrystal's evaluation also indicates that the war will not only escalate within Afghanistan but will also be stepped up inside Pakistan and may even target Iran.
"Afghanistan's insurgency is clearly supported from Pakistan. Senior leaders of the major Afghan insurgent groups are based in Pakistan, are linked with al Qaeda and other violent extremist groups, and are reportedly aided by some elements of Pakistan's ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence].
"Iranian Qods Force [part of the nation's army] is reportedly training fighters for certain Taliban groups and providing other forms of military assistance to insurgents. Iran's current policies and actions do not pose a short-term threat to the mission, but Iran has the capability to threaten the mission in the future."
That the ISI has had links to armed extremists is no revelation. The Pentagon and the CIA worked hand-in-glove with it from 1979 onward to subvert successive governments in Afghanistan. That Iran is "training fighters for certain Taliban groups" is a provocational fabrication.
As to who is responsible for the thirty-year disaster that is Afghanistan, McChrystal's assessment contains a sentence that may get past most readers. It is this:
"The major insurgent groups in order of their threat to the mission are: the Quetta Shura Taliban (05T), the Haqqani Network (HQN), and the Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin (HiG)."
The last-named is the guerrilla force of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the largest recipient of hundreds of millions (perhaps billions) of U.S. dollars provided by the CIA to the Peshawar Seven Mujahideen bloc fighting the Soviet-backed government of Afghanistan from 1978-1992.
While hosting Hekmatyar and his allies at the White House in 1985 then President Ronald Reagan referred to his guests as "the moral equivalents of America's founding fathers.”
Throughout the 1980s the CIA official in large part tasked to assist the Mujahideen with funds, arms and training was Robert Gates, now U.S. Secretary of Defense.
Last December BBC News reported:
"In his book, From the Shadows, published in 1996, Mr Gates defended the role of the CIA in undertaking covert action which, he argued, helped to win the Cold War.
"In a speech in 1999, Mr Gates said that its most important role was in Afghanistan.
"'CIA had important successes in covert action. Perhaps the most consequential of all was Afghanistan where CIA, with its management, funnelled billions of dollars in supplies and weapons to the mujahideen, and the resistance was thus able to fight the vaunted Soviet army to a standoff and eventually force a political decision to withdraw,' he said." [6]
Now according to McChrystal the same Gulbuddin Hekmatyar who was cultivated and sponsored by McChrystal's current boss, Gates, is in charge of one of the three groups the Pentagon and NATO are waging ever-escalating counterinsurgency operations in South Asia against.
To make matters even more intriguing, former British foreign secretary Robin Cook - as loyal a pro-American Atlanticist as exists - conceded in the Guardian on July 8, 2005 that "Bin Laden was...a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally 'the database', was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians."
Russian analyst and vice president of the Center for Political Technologies Sergey Mikheev was quoted in early September as contending that "Afghanistan is a stage in the division of the world after the bipolar system failed. They [U.S. and NATO] wanted to consolidate their grip on Eurasia...and deployed a lot of troops there. The Taliban card was played, although nobody had been interested in the Taliban before." [7]
Pentagon chief Gates' 27 years in the CIA, including his tenure as director of the agency from 1991-1993, is being brought to bear on the Afghan war according to the Los Angeles Times of September 19, 2009, which revealed that "The CIA is deploying teams of spies, analysts and paramilitary operatives to Afghanistan, part of a broad intelligence 'surge' that will make its station there among the largest in the agency's history, U.S. officials say.
"When complete, the CIA's presence in the country is expected to rival the size of its massive stations in Iraq and Vietnam at the height of those wars. Precise numbers are classified, but one U.S. official said the agency already has nearly 700 employees in Afghanistan.
"The intelligence expansion goes beyond the CIA to involve every major spy service, officials said, including the National Security Agency, which intercepts calls and e-mails, as well as the Defense Intelligence Agency, which tracks military threats."
U.S. and NATO Commander McChrystal will put the CIA to immediate use in his plans for an all-out counterinsurgency campaign. The Los Angeles Times article added:
"McChrystal is expected to expand the use of teams that combine CIA operatives with special operations soldiers. In Iraq, where he oversaw the special operations forces from 2003 to 2008, McChrystal used such teams to speed up the cycle of gathering intelligence and carrying out raids aimed at killing or capturing insurgents.
"The CIA is also carrying out an escalating campaign of unmanned Predator missile strikes on Al Qaeda and insurgent strongholds in Pakistan. The number of strikes so far this year, 37, already exceeds the 2008 total, according to data compiled by the Long War Journal website, which tracks Predator strikes in Pakistan."
Indeed, on September 13 it was reported that "Two NATO fighter jets reportedly flew inside Pakistan's airspace for nearly two hours on Saturday.
"The airspace violation took place in different parts of the Khyber Agency bordering the Afghan border." [8]
Two days later "NATO fighter jets in Afghanistan...violated Pakistani airspace and dropped bombs on the country's northwest region.
"NATO warplanes bombed the South Waziristan tribal region....Moreover, CIA operated spy drone planes continued low-altitude flights in several towns of the Waziristan region." [9]
The dramatic upsurge in CIA deployments in South Asia won't be limited to Afghanistan. Neighboring Pakistan will be further overrun by U.S. intelligence operatives also.
On September 12 a petition was filed in the Supreme Court of Pakistan contesting the announced expansion of the U.S. embassy in the nation's capital.
"Pakistani media have been reporting that the United States plans to deploy a large number of marines with the plan to expand its embassy in Islamabad." [10]
The challenge was organized by Barrister Zafarullah Khan, who "said that Saudi Arabia was also trying to get 700,000 acres (283,400 hectares) of land in the country."
He was quoted on the day of the presentation of the petition as warning "Giving away Pakistani land to U.S. and Arab countries in this fashion is a threat for the stability and sovereignty of the country" and "further added that the purpose of giving the land to U.S. embassy was to establish an American military base...there.
"He maintained that such a big land was enough even to construct a military airport." [11]
Intelligence personnel and special forces are being matched by military equipment in the intensification of the West's war in South Asia.
On September 10 Reuters revealed in an article titled "U.S. eyes military equipment in Iraq for Pakistan" that "The Pentagon has proposed transferring U.S. military equipment from Iraq to Pakistani security forces to help Islamabad step up its offensive against the Taliban...."
A U.S. armed forces publication a few days afterward wrote that "U.S. hardware is moving out of Iraq by the ton, much of it going straight to the overstretched forces in increasingly volatile Afghanistan" and "The U.S. military has already started moving an estimated 1.5 million pieces of equipment - everything from batteries to tanks - by ground, rail and air either to Afghanistan for immediate use...." [12]
In the middle of this month "U.S. military leaders infused Gen. Stanley McChrystal's ideas of how to win the war in Afghanistan" by conducting a large-scale counterinsurgency exercise in Grafenwoehr, Germany.
"Dozens of Pashtun speakers joined more than 6,500 U.S. troops and civilians in an exercise for the Afghanistan-bound 173rd Airborne Brigade and Iraq-bound 12th Combat Aviation Brigade. It was the largest such exercise ever held by the U.S. military outside of the United States...." [13]
The Pentagon and NATO have their work cut out for them.
"A security map by the London-based International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) showed a deepening security crisis with substantial Taliban activity in at least 97 percent of the war-ravaged country.
"The Council added that the militants now have a permanent presence in 80 percent of the country." [14]
The United States is not alone in sinking deeper into the Afghan morass.
On September 14 U.S. ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder, in celebrating the "resilience and deep-seated support from our allies for what is happening in Afghanistan," was equally enthusiastic in proclaiming "Over 40 percent of the body bags that leave Afghanistan do not go to the U.S. They go to other countries...." [15]
Daalder also gave the lie to earlier claims that NATO troop increases leading up to last month's presidential election were temporary in nature by acknowledging that "Many of the extra troops that NATO countries sent to Afghanistan for the August presidential elections would stay on." [16]
Leading up to the Washington Post's publication of the McChrystal assessment, NATO's Military Committee held a two-day conference in Lisbon, Portugal which was attended by McChrystal and NATO's two Strategic Commanders, Admiral Stavridis (Supreme Allied Commander, Operations) and General Abrial (Supreme Allied Commander, Transformation) which "focused mainly on the operation in Afghanistan and on the New Strategic Concept." [17]
The 28 NATO defense chiefs present laid a wreath to the Alliance's first war dead, those killed in Afghanistan.
Earlier this month the Washington Post reported that "The U.S. military and NATO are launching a major overhaul of the way they recruit, train and equip Afghanistan's security forces," an announcement that came "in advance of expected recommendations by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal." [18]
The article quoted Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee:
"We're going to need many more trainers, hopefully including a much larger number of NATO trainers. We're going to need a surge of equipment that is coming out of Iraq and, instead of coming home, a great deal of it should be going to Afghanistan instead." [19]
According to the same report, this month NATO will "will establish a new command led by a three-star military officer to oversee recruiting and generating Afghan forces.
"The goal is to 'bring more coherence' to uncoordinated efforts by NATO contingents in Afghanistan while underscoring that the mission 'is not just America's challenge'..." [20]
Contributing to its quota of body bags, NATO has experienced losses in Afghanistan that have reached record levels. "According to the icasualties website, 363 foreign soldiers have died in Afghanistan so far this year, compared to 294 for all of 2008." [21]
This month Britain lost its 216th soldier in the nearly eight-year war. Canada lost its 131st. Denmark its 25th. Italy its 20th. Poland, where a recent poll showed 81 percent support for immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan, its 12th.
Russian ambassador to Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov, who had been in the nation in the 1980s, was cited by Associated Press on September 12 as reflecting that in 2002 the U.S. had 5,000 troops in the nation and "Taliban controlled just a small corner of the country's southeast."
"Now we have Taliban fighting in the peaceful Kunduz and Baghlan (provinces) with your (NATO's) 100,000 troops. And if this trend is the rule, if you bring 200,000 soldiers here, all of Afghanistan will be under the Taliban."
Associated Press also cited Kabulov's concern that "the U.S. and its allies are competing with Russia for influence in the energy-rich region....Afghanistan remains a strategic prize because of its location near the gas and oil fields of Iran, the Caspian Sea, Central Asia and the Persian Gulf."
He also said "Russia has questions about NATO's intentions in Afghanistan, which...lies outside of the alliance's 'political domain'" and "Moscow is concerned that NATO is building permanent bases in the region."
The concerns are legitimate in light of this month's latest quadrennial report by the Pentagon on security threats which "put emerging superpower China and former Cold War foe Russia alongside Iran and North Korea on a list of the four main nations challenging American interests." [22]
At the same time a U.S. military newspaper reported on statements by Pentagon chief Robert Gates:
"Gates said the roughly $6.5 billion he has proposed to upgrade the [Air Force] fleet assures U.S. domination of the skies for decades.
"By the time China produces its first - 5th generation - fighter, he said, the U.S. will have more than 1,000 F-22s and F-35s. And while the U.S. conducted 35,000 refueling missions last year, Russia performed about 30.
"The secretary also highlighted new efforts to support robust space and cyber commands, as well as the new Global Strike Command that oversees the nuclear arsenal." [23]
To add to Russian and Chinese apprehensions about NATO's role in South and Central Asia, ten days ago the U.S. ambassador to Kazakhstan, which borders Russia and China, "offered to Kazakhstan to take part in the peacekeeping mission in Afghanistan."
At the opening ceremony of the NATO Steppe Eagle-2009 military exercises in that nation envoy Richard Hoagland said "Kazakhstan may again become part of the international NATO peacekeeping force in Afghanistan." [24]
Radio Free Europe reported on September 16 that NATO was to sign new agreements with Kyrgyzstan, which also borders China, for the use of the Manas Air Base that as many as 200,000 U.S. and NATO troops have passed through since the beginning of the Afghan war.
On the same day NATO' plans for expanding transit routes through the South Caucasus and the Caspian Sea region were described. "[T]he air corridor through Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan is the most feasible.
"This route will be best suited if ISAF transport planes fly directly to Baku from Turkey or any other NATO member....Moreover, it [Azerbaijan] is not a CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization] member, which allows Azerbaijan more freedom for maneuver in the region when dealing with NATO." [25]
Just as troops serving under NATO command in the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan now include those from almost fifty countries on five continents, so the broadening scope of the war is absorbing vaster tracts of Eurasia and the Middle East.
America's longest armed conflict since that in Indochina and NATO's first ground war threatens to not only remain the world's most dangerous conflagration but also one that plunges the 21st Century into a war without end.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Hamas, Fatah slam hardline Netanyahu's speech
Hamas says Israel carrying out Holocaust against Palestinians, PA delegate walks out on Netanyahu speech.
GAZA CITY - Hamas on Thursday accused Israel of carrying out a Holocaust against Palestinians, after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave a speech at the UN General Assembly.
"Israel is the one carrying out a Holocaust against the Palestinians," Sami Abu Zahri, a spokesman for the democratically elected Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
Although Israel was created by a UN resolution over 60 years ago, it is known for its defiance of the international community, especially when concerning UN resolutions on it's illegal occupation of Arab land.
The hardliner used his address to the annual meetings of heads of state and government to blast the United Nations for its report criticizing Israel for using excessive force in its assault on the Gaza Strip eight months ago.
He unleashed a tirade against the findings of the UN probe into the Gaza assault, and warned it could affect how Israel reacts in the future towards the Palestinians.
He linked Israel's willingness to make future concessions to the Palestinians, to how other nations react to the report.
While the UN investigation found that both Israel and Palestinian groups had committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity, it reserved some of its harshest language for the actions taken by Israel against the civilian population in the densely-populated Gaza Strip.
Netanyahu also addressed Israel's conflict with the Palestinians, saying again that he would accept a demilitarized Palestinian state alongside Israel, in reference to what is seen by critics as a 'non-State'.
However, he offered no olive branches to the Palestinians and did not refer to calls by the Palestinians and the US to freeze illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and annexed Palestinian East Jerusalem.
A lone Palestinian delegate walked out as Netanyahu defended Israel's December-January assault on the Gaza Strip that killed 1,400 mainly civilian Palestinians.
GAZA CITY - Hamas on Thursday accused Israel of carrying out a Holocaust against Palestinians, after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave a speech at the UN General Assembly.
"Israel is the one carrying out a Holocaust against the Palestinians," Sami Abu Zahri, a spokesman for the democratically elected Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
Although Israel was created by a UN resolution over 60 years ago, it is known for its defiance of the international community, especially when concerning UN resolutions on it's illegal occupation of Arab land.
The hardliner used his address to the annual meetings of heads of state and government to blast the United Nations for its report criticizing Israel for using excessive force in its assault on the Gaza Strip eight months ago.
He unleashed a tirade against the findings of the UN probe into the Gaza assault, and warned it could affect how Israel reacts in the future towards the Palestinians.
He linked Israel's willingness to make future concessions to the Palestinians, to how other nations react to the report.
While the UN investigation found that both Israel and Palestinian groups had committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity, it reserved some of its harshest language for the actions taken by Israel against the civilian population in the densely-populated Gaza Strip.
Netanyahu also addressed Israel's conflict with the Palestinians, saying again that he would accept a demilitarized Palestinian state alongside Israel, in reference to what is seen by critics as a 'non-State'.
However, he offered no olive branches to the Palestinians and did not refer to calls by the Palestinians and the US to freeze illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and annexed Palestinian East Jerusalem.
A lone Palestinian delegate walked out as Netanyahu defended Israel's December-January assault on the Gaza Strip that killed 1,400 mainly civilian Palestinians.
Palestinian factions blast Netanyahu UN speech
Palestinians from both Hamas and Fatah factions have criticized the speech of Israeli Prime Minister Binjamin Netanyahu at the UN General Assembly as 'bogus and unacceptable'.
"Netanyahu spoke of the Holocaust but Israel committed the largest massacre of the century," Hamas spokesperson, Sami Abu Zuhri, said in reference to Operation Cast Lead which resulted in the death of over 1,500 Palestinians and the injury of about 5,450 people in the impoverished Gaza Strip.
He added the Israeli Prime Minister is seeking to justify the massacres in the blockaded coastal sliver, and that such falsehood cannot reverse confirmed war crimes against Gazans.
Abu Zuhri further highlighted that Palestine is the homeland of the Arabs, the Palestinians and the Muslims, and will never be a Jewish land no matter what.
Hamas legislator Mushier Al Masri, meanwhile, stated that Netanyahu does his utmost to cover up the Gaza manslaughter in the hope to twist the world logic and gain support for 'Zionist terrorism”.
The Palestinian Authority's chief negotiator with Israel, Saib Erekat, also called Netanyahu's demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state 'unacceptable'.
During his UN General Assembly speech on Thursday, Netanyahu referred to the Holocaust and the decision to annihilate the Jewish people during the Nazi era. He also reiterated his demands that the Palestinians must recognize Israel as a Jewish State as a precondition to resuming the stalled peace process.
"Netanyahu spoke of the Holocaust but Israel committed the largest massacre of the century," Hamas spokesperson, Sami Abu Zuhri, said in reference to Operation Cast Lead which resulted in the death of over 1,500 Palestinians and the injury of about 5,450 people in the impoverished Gaza Strip.
He added the Israeli Prime Minister is seeking to justify the massacres in the blockaded coastal sliver, and that such falsehood cannot reverse confirmed war crimes against Gazans.
Abu Zuhri further highlighted that Palestine is the homeland of the Arabs, the Palestinians and the Muslims, and will never be a Jewish land no matter what.
Hamas legislator Mushier Al Masri, meanwhile, stated that Netanyahu does his utmost to cover up the Gaza manslaughter in the hope to twist the world logic and gain support for 'Zionist terrorism”.
The Palestinian Authority's chief negotiator with Israel, Saib Erekat, also called Netanyahu's demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state 'unacceptable'.
During his UN General Assembly speech on Thursday, Netanyahu referred to the Holocaust and the decision to annihilate the Jewish people during the Nazi era. He also reiterated his demands that the Palestinians must recognize Israel as a Jewish State as a precondition to resuming the stalled peace process.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Netanyahu accuses Sweden of trying to reach out to Hamas
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent and Agencies
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has complained over Sweden's attempting to establish contact with Hamas, Haaretz has learned. His allegation could worsen Israel's already tense relationship with the Scandinavian country following the publication there of an inflammatory news article accusing Israeli soldiers of harvesting the organs of Palestinians.
Netanyahu complained about Sweden's alleged attempts to start a dialogue with Hamas 10 days ago in a meeting with Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Moratinos. Spain will replace Sweden as president of the European Union in January.
Netanyahu reportedly told Moratinos the Swedes are "reaching out to Hamas." Netanyahu did not specify through which sources he had learned of this. Moratinos, according to a source in the Prime Minister's Bureau, said he was not aware of such intentions, but said he would inquire about the subject with Swedish diplomats.
Advertisement
Though Hamas is defined as a terrorist organization by the EU, parliamentarians from European countries meet occasionally with Hamas representatives. According to Hamas' representative in Lebanon, Usamah Hamdan, MPs from Sweden, the Netherlands and three other West European nations consulted with Hamas representatives over the past months.
Meanwhile, the Swedish chancellor of justice has decided not to launch an investigation into a newspaper that alleged Israeli soldiers kill Palestinian civilians to harvest their organs, Army Radio reported Saturday.
Swedish judicial authorities ruled that the report in the tabloid Aftonbladet did not constitute racism and was therefore legal. The ruling came in response to two requests submitted to Swedish justice officials.
According to Swedish law, a publication may be considered illegal if it is threatening or expresses contempt toward a person or group of people based on their race, ethnicity, or nationality.
The newspaper story sparked an outcry in Israel, with its author accused of disseminating "a blood libel" against the Jews. Much of the controversy was due to the article's attempts to tie Jewish criminals who trafficked in organs in New Jersey to the alleged harvesting of Palestinian organs by Israel Defense Forces soldiers.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has complained over Sweden's attempting to establish contact with Hamas, Haaretz has learned. His allegation could worsen Israel's already tense relationship with the Scandinavian country following the publication there of an inflammatory news article accusing Israeli soldiers of harvesting the organs of Palestinians.
Netanyahu complained about Sweden's alleged attempts to start a dialogue with Hamas 10 days ago in a meeting with Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Moratinos. Spain will replace Sweden as president of the European Union in January.
Netanyahu reportedly told Moratinos the Swedes are "reaching out to Hamas." Netanyahu did not specify through which sources he had learned of this. Moratinos, according to a source in the Prime Minister's Bureau, said he was not aware of such intentions, but said he would inquire about the subject with Swedish diplomats.
Advertisement
Though Hamas is defined as a terrorist organization by the EU, parliamentarians from European countries meet occasionally with Hamas representatives. According to Hamas' representative in Lebanon, Usamah Hamdan, MPs from Sweden, the Netherlands and three other West European nations consulted with Hamas representatives over the past months.
Meanwhile, the Swedish chancellor of justice has decided not to launch an investigation into a newspaper that alleged Israeli soldiers kill Palestinian civilians to harvest their organs, Army Radio reported Saturday.
Swedish judicial authorities ruled that the report in the tabloid Aftonbladet did not constitute racism and was therefore legal. The ruling came in response to two requests submitted to Swedish justice officials.
According to Swedish law, a publication may be considered illegal if it is threatening or expresses contempt toward a person or group of people based on their race, ethnicity, or nationality.
The newspaper story sparked an outcry in Israel, with its author accused of disseminating "a blood libel" against the Jews. Much of the controversy was due to the article's attempts to tie Jewish criminals who trafficked in organs in New Jersey to the alleged harvesting of Palestinian organs by Israel Defense Forces soldiers.
Hamas: don't renounce capital
Hamas PM Ismail Haniyeh has warned Palestinian National Authority (PNA) officials not to "renounce Jerusalem or the refugees" during Tuesday's three-way meeting with the presidents of Israel and the US.
Speaking on Sunday at a ceremony in a Gaza City stadium marking the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, Mr Haniyeh said: "No-one has the right to give up on Jerusalem or the Palestinian refugees. From Gaza, from a place of strength, we say we will not relinquish our rights."
US President Barack Obama, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and PNA President Mahmoud Abbas are scheduled to hold talks on the sidelines of the UN general assembly in New York today.
The meeting is part of US efforts to revive Middle East peace talks, which have been stalled due to Tel Aviv's refusal to stop illegal settlement construction.
Mr Haniyeh insisted that "neither the Palestine Liberation Organisation or any other faction has a mandate to sign an agreement hurting the Palestinian people's principles and rights."
If any such agreement is reached, "it will not be respected by our people," he said.
The de facto prime minister of the PNA blasted proposals made by US Middle East envoy George Mitchell as "no different than offers by previous US administrations," which, he argued, were designed to achieve a compromise at the expense of Palestinians' fundamental rights.
Mr Haniyeh also urged the Arab League and European countries to use "all means" to ensure that a recently released report detailing war crimes committed during Israel's December-January war on the Gaza Strip is brought to the attention of the UN security council and then referred to prosecutors.
"We hope the report will not be doomed to the fate of the dozens of reports that Israel has condemned for decades," he said.
The 575-page UN report drawn up by Richard Goldstone, a former South African judge, confirmed that Israel committed multiple war crimes during the assault, which killed over 1,400 Palestinians.
And it found that those Palestinian resistance fighters who fired rockets into Israeli residential areas also violated international humanitarian law.
Israeli jets struck three tunnels in the southern Gaza Strip morning after Palestinian militants fired two Qassam rockets into the western Negev desert.
And on Sunday, Israeli troops killed two men near the border fence in northern Gaza who had allegedly been planting explosives.
The men were later identified as Abed Hafiz al-Silawi of the Popular Resistance Committees and Mahmoud Natzir of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
Speaking on Sunday at a ceremony in a Gaza City stadium marking the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, Mr Haniyeh said: "No-one has the right to give up on Jerusalem or the Palestinian refugees. From Gaza, from a place of strength, we say we will not relinquish our rights."
US President Barack Obama, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and PNA President Mahmoud Abbas are scheduled to hold talks on the sidelines of the UN general assembly in New York today.
The meeting is part of US efforts to revive Middle East peace talks, which have been stalled due to Tel Aviv's refusal to stop illegal settlement construction.
Mr Haniyeh insisted that "neither the Palestine Liberation Organisation or any other faction has a mandate to sign an agreement hurting the Palestinian people's principles and rights."
If any such agreement is reached, "it will not be respected by our people," he said.
The de facto prime minister of the PNA blasted proposals made by US Middle East envoy George Mitchell as "no different than offers by previous US administrations," which, he argued, were designed to achieve a compromise at the expense of Palestinians' fundamental rights.
Mr Haniyeh also urged the Arab League and European countries to use "all means" to ensure that a recently released report detailing war crimes committed during Israel's December-January war on the Gaza Strip is brought to the attention of the UN security council and then referred to prosecutors.
"We hope the report will not be doomed to the fate of the dozens of reports that Israel has condemned for decades," he said.
The 575-page UN report drawn up by Richard Goldstone, a former South African judge, confirmed that Israel committed multiple war crimes during the assault, which killed over 1,400 Palestinians.
And it found that those Palestinian resistance fighters who fired rockets into Israeli residential areas also violated international humanitarian law.
Israeli jets struck three tunnels in the southern Gaza Strip morning after Palestinian militants fired two Qassam rockets into the western Negev desert.
And on Sunday, Israeli troops killed two men near the border fence in northern Gaza who had allegedly been planting explosives.
The men were later identified as Abed Hafiz al-Silawi of the Popular Resistance Committees and Mahmoud Natzir of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
Syria Says Israel Burying Nuclear Waste
Published on September 21, 2009
by OfficialWire NewsDesk
(UPI and OfficialWire)
JERUSALEM, ISRAEL
Re-Tweet this article
Syria accused Israel of burying nuclear waste in tunnels in the Golan Heights, Syrian government officials said.
The Egyptian government-affiliated newspaper Al-Ahram said the officials made the accusations in a recent report dubbed "the suffering of Syrian citizens in the Golan," submitted to the United Nations human rights commission.
The newspaper noted that similar accusations were made by Syrian government officials in 2003, when they said special Israeli army units were digging tunnels in Mount Hermon to dump nuclear waste from Israel's nuclear reactor in Dimona.
In the recent report,Syrian sources said Israel has dug a tunnel in Mount Hermon to hide dozens of nuclear warheads and has booby-trapped the Golan Heights with bombs, tactical nuclear mines and combustible radioactive devices,the newspaper said.
It said Israel has attempted to downplay the accusations, saying it is digging anti-tank ditches in the Golan Heights.
The Golan Heights was captured by Israel in the 1967 Six Days War. Syria has insisted a full Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights is a key part to any peace deal.
by OfficialWire NewsDesk
(UPI and OfficialWire)
JERUSALEM, ISRAEL
Re-Tweet this article
Syria accused Israel of burying nuclear waste in tunnels in the Golan Heights, Syrian government officials said.
The Egyptian government-affiliated newspaper Al-Ahram said the officials made the accusations in a recent report dubbed "the suffering of Syrian citizens in the Golan," submitted to the United Nations human rights commission.
The newspaper noted that similar accusations were made by Syrian government officials in 2003, when they said special Israeli army units were digging tunnels in Mount Hermon to dump nuclear waste from Israel's nuclear reactor in Dimona.
In the recent report,Syrian sources said Israel has dug a tunnel in Mount Hermon to hide dozens of nuclear warheads and has booby-trapped the Golan Heights with bombs, tactical nuclear mines and combustible radioactive devices,the newspaper said.
It said Israel has attempted to downplay the accusations, saying it is digging anti-tank ditches in the Golan Heights.
The Golan Heights was captured by Israel in the 1967 Six Days War. Syria has insisted a full Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights is a key part to any peace deal.
King warns of new Mideast war
2009-05-11 10:26
London - King Abdullah of Jordan has warned that a new Middle East war could break out within 12-18 months unless a peace agreement is reached - but added that the US were finalising "ambitious" peace proposals.
In an interview published by the London Times newspaper on Monday, the Jordanian monarch said that failure to reach a peace agreement could result in a new conflict within 12 to 18 months.
"If we delay our peace negotiations, then there is going to be another conflict between Arabs or Muslims and Israel in the next 12 to 18 months," he said.
King Abullah said the US government was finalising an ambitious "57-state solution" for peace that he is helping to prepare. The plan would include proposals to settle Israel's disputes with Syria and Lebanon.
"If there are no clear signals and no clear directives to all of us, there will be a feeling that this is just another American government that is going to let us all down, said the king.
He also warned that if Israel procrastinated on a two-state solution, or there was no clear US vision on what should happen this year, the "tremendous credibility" of US President Barack Obama in the Arab world would evaporate.
A "57-state solution" would include all 57 member of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said King Abdullah.
"What we are talking about is not Israelis and Palestinians sitting at the table, but Israelis sitting with Palestinians, Israelis sitting with Syrians, Israelis sitting with Lebanese," he said.
The Times said that a plan could offer Israel entry visas to every Arab country, the right of Israeli national airline El Al to fly over Arab territory, and the eventual recognition of Israel by all OIC members.
Israel would have to respond by halting the construction and expansion of settlements, and agree to withdraw from land taken since 1967. The right of return of Palestinian refugees and the future status of Jerusalem would be negotiated within the framework of the deal.
King Abdullah said the fact that there was now a "right-wing government" in Israel should not mean that we should "chuck in the towel".
There would be a lot of "shuttle diplomacy" to try to reach a solution over the next few months, he said. -
London - King Abdullah of Jordan has warned that a new Middle East war could break out within 12-18 months unless a peace agreement is reached - but added that the US were finalising "ambitious" peace proposals.
In an interview published by the London Times newspaper on Monday, the Jordanian monarch said that failure to reach a peace agreement could result in a new conflict within 12 to 18 months.
"If we delay our peace negotiations, then there is going to be another conflict between Arabs or Muslims and Israel in the next 12 to 18 months," he said.
King Abullah said the US government was finalising an ambitious "57-state solution" for peace that he is helping to prepare. The plan would include proposals to settle Israel's disputes with Syria and Lebanon.
"If there are no clear signals and no clear directives to all of us, there will be a feeling that this is just another American government that is going to let us all down, said the king.
He also warned that if Israel procrastinated on a two-state solution, or there was no clear US vision on what should happen this year, the "tremendous credibility" of US President Barack Obama in the Arab world would evaporate.
A "57-state solution" would include all 57 member of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said King Abdullah.
"What we are talking about is not Israelis and Palestinians sitting at the table, but Israelis sitting with Palestinians, Israelis sitting with Syrians, Israelis sitting with Lebanese," he said.
The Times said that a plan could offer Israel entry visas to every Arab country, the right of Israeli national airline El Al to fly over Arab territory, and the eventual recognition of Israel by all OIC members.
Israel would have to respond by halting the construction and expansion of settlements, and agree to withdraw from land taken since 1967. The right of return of Palestinian refugees and the future status of Jerusalem would be negotiated within the framework of the deal.
King Abdullah said the fact that there was now a "right-wing government" in Israel should not mean that we should "chuck in the towel".
There would be a lot of "shuttle diplomacy" to try to reach a solution over the next few months, he said. -
Monday, September 21, 2009
Hamas leader interview
Ken Livingstone
20-sep-2009 03:11
Damascus
In a world exclusive, Ken Livingstone discusses religion, violence and the chances for peace with the Hamas leader Khaled Meshal
The key to peace in the Middle East is restoration of international law and the recognition of the right of both Palestinians and Israeli Jews to live in peace and security side by side. As President Obama says, there is no peace process today. Israel's prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, continues to extend illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and maintain a near-complete blockade of Gaza. Palestinians fire ineffectual rockets into Israel. Israel regularly attacks Palestinian territories with modern weapons.
No major conflict can be resolved without each side talking to the other. That was the case in South Africa, Ireland and countless other situations where people said they would never talk to their opponents. I was vilified in the Eighties for saying that, to resolve the Irish conflict, you had to talk to Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness.
In the Middle East, peace can only be achieved through discussion between the elected representatives of both the Israelis and the Palestinians - and that means Hamas, which won a big majority in the last Palestinian parliamentary election, as well as Fatah. This does not mean that I agree with the views of Hamas, Fatah or the government of Israel. Far from it: I do not. For example, I think a number of passages in the original Hamas charter are unacceptable and should be repudiated. Many observers believe that this is also the view of some in Hamas.
Yet, for too many people, Hamas as an organisation remains opaque. What they know about it is derived from a hostile media; it has no face. Most would probably think its leader is some disturbed Osama Bin Laden figure. In fact, al-Qaeda's supporters in Gaza are so hostile to Hamas that they have declared war on it.
For these reasons, I thought it important to interview the de facto leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshal, who lives in exile in Syria. Not every issue is clear. But at the beginning of any peace process, what matters most is engagement. Dialogue is necessary to get to clarity and mutual understanding. Sinn Fein did not answer every question at the beginning and neither does Binyamin Netanyahu today. The answers from Meshal come at a time of heightened tensions and renewed death threats against him, adding to the permanent danger of assassination bids not only by the Israelis, but also al-Qaeda supporters in the region.
I hope this interview will help to make the case for the dialogue that is needed, which I believe is inevitable. It is simply a question of how much suffering there will be, on both sides, before we get there.
Ken Livingstone: Could you explain a little about your childhood and the experiences that shaped your development into the person you are today?
Khaled Meshal: I was born in the West Bank village of Silwad near Ramallah in 1956. In my early age, I learned from my father how he was part of the Palestinian revolution against the British mandate in Palestine in the Thirties and how he fought, alongside other Palestinians using primitive weapons, against the well-equipped and trained Zionist gangs attacking Palestinian villages in 1948
I lived in Silwad for 11 years until the 1967 war, when I was forced with my family, like hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, to leave home and settle in Jordan. That was a shocking experience I will never forget.
KL: What happened to you after the war?
KM: Soon afterwards, I left Jordan for Kuwait, where my father had already been working and living since before 1967. After completing my primary education in 1970, I joined the prestigious Abdullah al-Salim Secondary School. In the early Seventies, it was a hub of intense political and ideological activity.
During my second year at al-Salim school, I joined the Muslim Brotherhood (al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun). Upon finishing my fourth year successfully I secured admission to Kuwait University, where I studied for a BSc degree in physics.
Kuwait University had an active branch of the General Union of Palestinian Students (GUPS), which had been under the absolute control of the Fatah movement. I and my fellow Islamists decided, in 1977, to join GUPS, which we had previously shunned, and contest its leadership election. However, working from within GUPS proved impossible; we felt constantly impeded and realised we Islamists would never be given a chance. By 1980, two years after I graduated, my juniors decided to leave GUPS and form their own Palestinian association on campus.
Many of the students had become disillusioned with the Palestinian leadership, who seemed intent on settling for much less than what they had grown up dreaming of, namely the complete liberation of Palestine and the return of all the refugees to their homes
KL: What is the situation in Gaza today?
KM: Gaza today is under siege. Crossings are closed most of the time and for months victims of the Israeli war on Gaza have been denied access to construction materials to rebuild their destroyed homes. Schools, hospitals and homes in many parts of the Gaza Strip are in need of rebuilding. Tens of thousands of people remain homeless. As winter approaches, the conditions of these victims will only get worse in the cold and rain. One and a half million people are held hostage in one of the biggest prisons in the history of humanity. They are unable to travel freely out of the Strip, whether for medical treatment, for education or for other needs. What we have in Gaza is a disaster and a crime against humanity perpetrated by the Israelis. The world community, through its silence and indifference, colludes in this crime.
KL: Why do you think Israel is still imposing the siege on Gaza?
KM: The Israelis claim that the siege is for security reasons. The real intention is to pressure Hamas by punishing the entire population. The sanctions were put in place soon after Hamas won the Palestinian elections in January 2006. While security is one of their concerns, it is not the main motivation. The primary objective is to provoke a coup against the results of the democratic elections that brought Hamas to power. The Israelis and their allies seek to impose failure on Hamas by persecuting the people. This is a hideous and immoral endeavour. Today, the siege continues despite the fact that we have, for the past six months, observed a ceasefire. Last year, a truce was observed from June to December 2008. Yet the siege was never lifted, and the sanctions remained in place. Undermining Hamas is the main objective of the siege. The Israelis hope to turn the people of Gaza against Hamas by increasing the suffering of the entire population of the Strip.
KL: How many supporters of Hamas and elected representatives of Hamas are there in prison in Israel? Have they all been charged and convicted of crimes?
KM: Out of a total of 12,000 Palestinian captives in Israeli detention, around 4,000 are Hamas members. These include scores of ministers and parliamentarians (Palestinian Legislative Council members). Around ten have recently been released, but about 40 PLC members remain in detention. Some have been given sentences, but many are held in what the Israelis call administrative detention. The only crime these people are accused of is their association with Hamas's parliamentary group. Exercising one's democratic right is considered a crime by Israel. All these Palestinians are brought before an Israeli system of justice that has nothing to do with justice. The Israeli judiciary is an instrument of the occupation. In Israel, there are two systems of justice: one applies to Israelis and another applies to the Palestinians. This is an apartheid regime.
KL: What part, if any, do other states and institutions, such as the US, the EU, Britain, Egypt, or the Palestinian Authority, play in the blockade of Gaza?
KM: The blockade of Gaza would never have succeeded had it not been for the collusion of regional and international powers.
KL: How do you think the blockade can be lifted?
KM: In order for the blockade to be lifted, the rule of international law must be respected. The basic human rights of the Palestinians and their right to live in dignity and free from persecution would have to be acknowledged. There has to be an international will to serve justice and uphold the basic principles of international human rights law. The international community would have to free itself from the shackles of Israeli pressure, speak the truth and act accordingly.
KL: Israel says that the bombing and invasion of Gaza last year was in response to repeated breaking of the ceasefire by Hamas and the firing of rockets into southern Israel. Is this the case?
KM: The Israelis are not telling the truth. We entered into a truce deal with Israel from 19 June to 19 December 2008. Yet the blockade was not lifted. The deal entailed a bilateral ceasefire, lifting the blockade and opening the crossings. We fully abided by the ceasefire while Israel only partially observed it, and towards the end of the term it resumed hostilities. Throughout that period, Israel maintained the siege and only intermittently opened some of the crossings, allowing no more than 10 per cent of the basic needs of the Gazan population to get through. Israel killed the potential for renewing the truce because it deliberately and repeatedly violated it.
I have always informed my western visitors, including the former US president Jimmy Carter, that the moment Hamas is offered a truce that includes lifting the blockade and opening the crossings, Hamas will adopt a positive stance. So far, no one has made us any such offer. As far as we are concerned, the blockade amounts to a declaration of war that warrants self-defence.
KL: What are the ideology and goals of Hamas?
KM: Our people have been the victims of a colonial project called Israel. For years, we have suffered various forms of repression. Half of our people have been dispossessed and are denied the right to return to their homes, and half live under an occupation regime that violates their basic human rights. Hamas struggles for an end to occupation and for the restoration of our people's rights, including their right to return home.
KL: What is your view of the cause of the conflict between the state of Israel and the Palestinians?
KM: The conflict is the outcome of aggression and occupation. Our struggle against the Israelis is not because they are Jewish, but because they invaded our homeland and dispossessed us. We do not accept that because the Jews were once persecuted in Europe they have the right to take our land and throw us out. The injustices suffered by the Jews in Europe were horrible and criminal, but were not perpetrated by the Palestinians or the Arabs or the Muslims. So, why should we be punished for the sins of others or be made to pay for their crime?
KL: Do you believe that Israel intends to continue to expand its borders?
KM: Israel does not, officially, have stated borders. When Israel was created in our homeland 62 years ago, its founders dreamed of a "Greater Israel" that extended from the Nile to the Euphrates. Expansionism manifested itself on different occasions: in 1956, in 1967 and later on in the occupation of parts of Lebanon in the Eighties. Arab weakness, Israeli military superiority, the support given to Israel by the western powers, and the massacres it was prepared to commit against unarmed civilians in Palestine, Egypt and Lebanon, enabled it to expand from time to time. Although expansionism still lurks in the minds of many Israelis, it would seem that this is no longer a practical option. Lebanese and Palestinian resistance has forced Israel to withdraw unilaterally from lands it had previously occupied through war and aggression. While in the past Israel was able to defeat several Arab armies, today it faces formidable resistance that will not only check its expansionism but also, in time, force it to relinquish more of the land that it illegally occupies.
KL: What are your principal goals? Is Hamas primarily a political or a religious organisation?
KM: Hamas is a national liberation movement. We do not see a contradiction between our Islamic identity and our political mission. While we engage the occupiers through resistance and struggle to achieve our people's rights, we are proud of our religious identity that derives from Islam. Unlike the experience of the Europeans with Christianity, Islam does not provide for, demand or recognise an ecclesiastical authority. It simply provides a set of broad guidelines whose detailed interpretations are subject to and the product of human endeavour (ijtihad).
KL: Are you committed to the destruction of Israel?
KM: What is really happening is the destruction of the Palestinian people by Israel; it is the one that occupies our land and exiles us, kills us, incarcerates us and persecutes our people. We are the victims, Israel is the oppressor, and not vice versa.
KL: Why does Hamas support military force in this conflict?
KM: Military force is an option that our people resort to because nothing else works. Israel's conduct and the collusion of the international community, whether through silence or indifference or actual embroilment, vindicate armed resistance. We would love to see this conflict resolved peacefully. If occupation were to come to an end and our people enabled to exercise self-determination in their homeland, there would then be no need for any use of force. The reality is that nearly 20 years of peaceful negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis have not restored any of our rights. On the contrary, we have incurred more suffering and more losses as a result of the one-sided compromises made by the Palestinian negotiating party.
Since the PLO entered into the Oslo peace deal with Israel in 1993, more Palestinian land in the West Bank has been expropriated by the Israelis to build more illegal Jewish settlements, expand existing ones or construct highways for the exclusive use of Israelis living in these settlements. The apartheid wall that the Israelis erected along the West Bank has consumed large areas of the land that was supposed to be returned to the Palestinians according to the peace deal.
The apartheid wall and hundreds of checkpoints turned the West Bank into isolated enclaves like cells in a large prison, which makes life intolerable.
Jerusalem is constantly tampered with in order to alter its landscape and identity, and hundreds of Palestinian homes have been destroyed inside the city and around it, making thousands of Palestinians homeless in their own homeland. Instead of releasing Palestinian prisoners, the Israelis have arrested an additional 5,000 Palestinians since the Annapolis peace conference in 2007 - actions that testify to the fact they simply aren't interested in peace at all.
KL: Does Hamas engage in military activity outside Palestine?
KM: No; since its establishment 22 years ago, Hamas has confined its field of military operation to occupied Palestine.
KL: Do you wish to establish an Islamic state in Palestine in which all other religions are subordinate?
KM: Our priority as a national liberation movement is to end the Israeli occupation of our homeland. Once our people are free in their land and enjoy the right to self-determination, they alone have the final say on what system of governance they wish to live under. It is our firm belief that Islam cannot be imposed on the people. We shall campaign, in a fully democratic process, for an Islamic agenda. If that is what the people opt for, then that is their choice. We believe that Islam is the best source of guidance and the best guarantor for the rights of Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
KL: Does Hamas impose Islamic dress in Gaza? For example, is it compulsory in Gaza for women to wear the hijab, niqab or burqa?
KM: No. Intellectually, Hamas derives its vision from the people's culture and religion. Islam is our religion and is the basic constituent of our culture. We do not deny other Palestinians the right to have different visions. We do not impose on the people any aspects of religion or social conduct. Features of religion in Gaza society are genuine and spontaneous; they have not been imposed by any authority other than the faith and conviction of the observant.
KL: It is suggested that the division in the Palestinian people between the West Bank and Gaza and between Fatah and Hamas, which obviously weakens their position, came about because Hamas seized power by force in Gaza. Is this true and how do you explain this division?
KM: Undoubtedly, division does weaken the Palestinians and harms their cause. However, the division is caused not by Hamas, but by the insistence of certain international and regional parties on reversing the results of Palestinian democracy. It dismayed them that Hamas was elected by the Palestinian people.
The division is compounded by the existence of a Palestinian party that seeks empowerment from those same regional and international parties, including the US and Israel, that wish to see Hamas out of the arena. Soon after its victory in the election of January 2006, every effort was exerted to undermine the ability of Hamas to govern.
When these efforts failed, General Keith Dayton, of the United States army, who currently serves as US security co-ordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority, was despatched to Gaza to plot a coup against the Hamas-led national unity government that came out of the Mecca agreement of 2007. The plot prompted Hamas in Gaza to act in self-defence in the events of June 2007. The claim that Hamas carried out a coup is baseless because Hamas was leading the democratically elected government. All it did was act against those who were plotting a coup against it under the command and guidance of General Dayton.
KL: Do those of other political or religious views such as Fatah enjoy democratic freedoms in Gaza? What is the situation of Hamas members in the West Bank territories controlled by Fatah?
KM: Some Palestinian factions have been inspired by Arab nationalism, others by Marxism or Leninism, and others by liberalism. While we strongly believe that these ideas are alien to our people and have failed to meet their aspirations, we insist that the people are the final arbiter on whom they wish to lead them and by which system they desire to be governed. Thus, democracy is our best option for settling our internal Palestinian differences. Whatever the people choose will have to be respected.
We endeavour to the best of our ability to protect the human rights and civil liberties of the affiliates of Fatah and all the other factions within the Gaza Strip. In contrast, the Palestinians in the West Bank under Israeli occupation and the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah continue to be denied their basic rights. General Dayton is in the West Bank supervising the severe and brutal crackdown on Hamas and other Palestinian groups. More than 1,000 political prisoners, including students, university professors and professionals in all fields are hunted down, detained and tortured, sometimes to death, by the US-, British- and EU-trained and -sponsored Palestinian Authority's security force.
KL: Do you believe it is possible to reunite the Palestinian people? If so, how do you think this could be done and within what kind of timescale?
KM: It is possible to reunite the Palestinians. In order for this to happen two things are needed. First, foreign interventions and demands must stop. The Palestinian people should be left to deal with their own differences without external pressure. Second, all Palestinian parties must respect the rules of the democratic game and submit to the results of its process.
KL: Hamas's refusal to recognise Israel is frequently cited as an insuperable obstacle to negotiations and a peace settlement.
KM: This issue is only used as a pretext. Israel does not recognise the rights of the Palestinian people, yet this is not raised as an obstacle to Israel being internationally recognised nor to it being allowed to take part in talks. The reality is that Israel is the one that occupies the land and possesses superior power. Rather than ask the Palestinians, who are the victims, it is Israel, who is the oppressor, who should be asked to recognise the rights of the Palestinians.
In the past, Yasser Arafat recognised Israel but failed to achieve much. Today, Mahmoud Abbas recognises Israel, but we have yet to see any of the promised dividends of the peace process.
Israel concedes only under pressure. In the absence of any tangible pressure on Israel by the Arabs or by the international community, no settlement will succeed.
KL: Do you have a "road map" of interim steps which could realistically lead to a peaceful settlement of the conflict? Do you think Jews, Muslims and Christians can one day live together in peace in the Holy Land?
KM: We do, in Hamas, believe that a realistic peaceful settlement to the conflict will have to begin with a ceasefire agreement between the two sides based on a full withdrawal of Israel from all the territories occupied in 1967. Israeli intransigence and the lack of will to act on the part of the international community are what impede this settlement. We believe that only once our people are free and back in their land will they be able to determine the future of the conflict.
It should be reiterated here that we do not resist the Israelis because they are Jews. As a matter of principle, we do not have problems with the Jews or the Christians, but do have a problem with those who attack us and oppress us. For many centuries, Christians, Jews and Muslims coexisted peacefully in this part of the world. Our society never witnessed the sort of racism and genocide that Europe saw until recently against "the other". These issues started in Europe. Colonialism was imposed on this region by Europe, and Israel was the product of the oppression of the Jews in Europe and not of any such problem that existed in the Muslim land.
KL: What role do you think that other countries and organisations, in particular the US, EU and Britain, are currently playing in the Israel/ Palestine conflict and the divisions between the Palestinians?
KM: The role played by all these has thus far been negative. The attitude towards Israeli crimes against our people has been either silence or collusion. The policies and positions adopted by these parties have contributed to the Palestinian division or augmented it. On the one hand, conditions are stipulated that have the effect of torpedoing unity talks and reconciliation efforts. On the other hand, some of these international parties are directly embroiled in suppressing our people in the West Bank. The US and the EU provide funding, training and guidance to build a Palestinian security apparatus specialised in the persecution of critics of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah.
We have particularly been concerned about reports that the British government, directly as well as indirectly by means of security firms and the services of retired army, police and intelligence officers, is fully involved in the programme led by General Dayton against Hamas in the West Bank. KL: What should countries such as the US and Britain do to assist a peaceful settlement?
KM: They should simply uphold international law - the occupation is illegal, the annexation of East Jerusalem is illegal, the settlements are illegal, the apartheid wall is illegal, and the siege of Gaza is illegal. Yet nothing is done.
KL: What relations does Hamas wish to have with the rest of the world, and, for example, with Britain?
KM: Hamas defends a just cause. For this purpose, it desires to open up to the world. The movement seeks to establish good relations and to conduct constructive dialogue with all those concerned with Palestine.
20-sep-2009 03:11
Damascus
In a world exclusive, Ken Livingstone discusses religion, violence and the chances for peace with the Hamas leader Khaled Meshal
The key to peace in the Middle East is restoration of international law and the recognition of the right of both Palestinians and Israeli Jews to live in peace and security side by side. As President Obama says, there is no peace process today. Israel's prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, continues to extend illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and maintain a near-complete blockade of Gaza. Palestinians fire ineffectual rockets into Israel. Israel regularly attacks Palestinian territories with modern weapons.
No major conflict can be resolved without each side talking to the other. That was the case in South Africa, Ireland and countless other situations where people said they would never talk to their opponents. I was vilified in the Eighties for saying that, to resolve the Irish conflict, you had to talk to Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness.
In the Middle East, peace can only be achieved through discussion between the elected representatives of both the Israelis and the Palestinians - and that means Hamas, which won a big majority in the last Palestinian parliamentary election, as well as Fatah. This does not mean that I agree with the views of Hamas, Fatah or the government of Israel. Far from it: I do not. For example, I think a number of passages in the original Hamas charter are unacceptable and should be repudiated. Many observers believe that this is also the view of some in Hamas.
Yet, for too many people, Hamas as an organisation remains opaque. What they know about it is derived from a hostile media; it has no face. Most would probably think its leader is some disturbed Osama Bin Laden figure. In fact, al-Qaeda's supporters in Gaza are so hostile to Hamas that they have declared war on it.
For these reasons, I thought it important to interview the de facto leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshal, who lives in exile in Syria. Not every issue is clear. But at the beginning of any peace process, what matters most is engagement. Dialogue is necessary to get to clarity and mutual understanding. Sinn Fein did not answer every question at the beginning and neither does Binyamin Netanyahu today. The answers from Meshal come at a time of heightened tensions and renewed death threats against him, adding to the permanent danger of assassination bids not only by the Israelis, but also al-Qaeda supporters in the region.
I hope this interview will help to make the case for the dialogue that is needed, which I believe is inevitable. It is simply a question of how much suffering there will be, on both sides, before we get there.
Ken Livingstone: Could you explain a little about your childhood and the experiences that shaped your development into the person you are today?
Khaled Meshal: I was born in the West Bank village of Silwad near Ramallah in 1956. In my early age, I learned from my father how he was part of the Palestinian revolution against the British mandate in Palestine in the Thirties and how he fought, alongside other Palestinians using primitive weapons, against the well-equipped and trained Zionist gangs attacking Palestinian villages in 1948
I lived in Silwad for 11 years until the 1967 war, when I was forced with my family, like hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, to leave home and settle in Jordan. That was a shocking experience I will never forget.
KL: What happened to you after the war?
KM: Soon afterwards, I left Jordan for Kuwait, where my father had already been working and living since before 1967. After completing my primary education in 1970, I joined the prestigious Abdullah al-Salim Secondary School. In the early Seventies, it was a hub of intense political and ideological activity.
During my second year at al-Salim school, I joined the Muslim Brotherhood (al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun). Upon finishing my fourth year successfully I secured admission to Kuwait University, where I studied for a BSc degree in physics.
Kuwait University had an active branch of the General Union of Palestinian Students (GUPS), which had been under the absolute control of the Fatah movement. I and my fellow Islamists decided, in 1977, to join GUPS, which we had previously shunned, and contest its leadership election. However, working from within GUPS proved impossible; we felt constantly impeded and realised we Islamists would never be given a chance. By 1980, two years after I graduated, my juniors decided to leave GUPS and form their own Palestinian association on campus.
Many of the students had become disillusioned with the Palestinian leadership, who seemed intent on settling for much less than what they had grown up dreaming of, namely the complete liberation of Palestine and the return of all the refugees to their homes
KL: What is the situation in Gaza today?
KM: Gaza today is under siege. Crossings are closed most of the time and for months victims of the Israeli war on Gaza have been denied access to construction materials to rebuild their destroyed homes. Schools, hospitals and homes in many parts of the Gaza Strip are in need of rebuilding. Tens of thousands of people remain homeless. As winter approaches, the conditions of these victims will only get worse in the cold and rain. One and a half million people are held hostage in one of the biggest prisons in the history of humanity. They are unable to travel freely out of the Strip, whether for medical treatment, for education or for other needs. What we have in Gaza is a disaster and a crime against humanity perpetrated by the Israelis. The world community, through its silence and indifference, colludes in this crime.
KL: Why do you think Israel is still imposing the siege on Gaza?
KM: The Israelis claim that the siege is for security reasons. The real intention is to pressure Hamas by punishing the entire population. The sanctions were put in place soon after Hamas won the Palestinian elections in January 2006. While security is one of their concerns, it is not the main motivation. The primary objective is to provoke a coup against the results of the democratic elections that brought Hamas to power. The Israelis and their allies seek to impose failure on Hamas by persecuting the people. This is a hideous and immoral endeavour. Today, the siege continues despite the fact that we have, for the past six months, observed a ceasefire. Last year, a truce was observed from June to December 2008. Yet the siege was never lifted, and the sanctions remained in place. Undermining Hamas is the main objective of the siege. The Israelis hope to turn the people of Gaza against Hamas by increasing the suffering of the entire population of the Strip.
KL: How many supporters of Hamas and elected representatives of Hamas are there in prison in Israel? Have they all been charged and convicted of crimes?
KM: Out of a total of 12,000 Palestinian captives in Israeli detention, around 4,000 are Hamas members. These include scores of ministers and parliamentarians (Palestinian Legislative Council members). Around ten have recently been released, but about 40 PLC members remain in detention. Some have been given sentences, but many are held in what the Israelis call administrative detention. The only crime these people are accused of is their association with Hamas's parliamentary group. Exercising one's democratic right is considered a crime by Israel. All these Palestinians are brought before an Israeli system of justice that has nothing to do with justice. The Israeli judiciary is an instrument of the occupation. In Israel, there are two systems of justice: one applies to Israelis and another applies to the Palestinians. This is an apartheid regime.
KL: What part, if any, do other states and institutions, such as the US, the EU, Britain, Egypt, or the Palestinian Authority, play in the blockade of Gaza?
KM: The blockade of Gaza would never have succeeded had it not been for the collusion of regional and international powers.
KL: How do you think the blockade can be lifted?
KM: In order for the blockade to be lifted, the rule of international law must be respected. The basic human rights of the Palestinians and their right to live in dignity and free from persecution would have to be acknowledged. There has to be an international will to serve justice and uphold the basic principles of international human rights law. The international community would have to free itself from the shackles of Israeli pressure, speak the truth and act accordingly.
KL: Israel says that the bombing and invasion of Gaza last year was in response to repeated breaking of the ceasefire by Hamas and the firing of rockets into southern Israel. Is this the case?
KM: The Israelis are not telling the truth. We entered into a truce deal with Israel from 19 June to 19 December 2008. Yet the blockade was not lifted. The deal entailed a bilateral ceasefire, lifting the blockade and opening the crossings. We fully abided by the ceasefire while Israel only partially observed it, and towards the end of the term it resumed hostilities. Throughout that period, Israel maintained the siege and only intermittently opened some of the crossings, allowing no more than 10 per cent of the basic needs of the Gazan population to get through. Israel killed the potential for renewing the truce because it deliberately and repeatedly violated it.
I have always informed my western visitors, including the former US president Jimmy Carter, that the moment Hamas is offered a truce that includes lifting the blockade and opening the crossings, Hamas will adopt a positive stance. So far, no one has made us any such offer. As far as we are concerned, the blockade amounts to a declaration of war that warrants self-defence.
KL: What are the ideology and goals of Hamas?
KM: Our people have been the victims of a colonial project called Israel. For years, we have suffered various forms of repression. Half of our people have been dispossessed and are denied the right to return to their homes, and half live under an occupation regime that violates their basic human rights. Hamas struggles for an end to occupation and for the restoration of our people's rights, including their right to return home.
KL: What is your view of the cause of the conflict between the state of Israel and the Palestinians?
KM: The conflict is the outcome of aggression and occupation. Our struggle against the Israelis is not because they are Jewish, but because they invaded our homeland and dispossessed us. We do not accept that because the Jews were once persecuted in Europe they have the right to take our land and throw us out. The injustices suffered by the Jews in Europe were horrible and criminal, but were not perpetrated by the Palestinians or the Arabs or the Muslims. So, why should we be punished for the sins of others or be made to pay for their crime?
KL: Do you believe that Israel intends to continue to expand its borders?
KM: Israel does not, officially, have stated borders. When Israel was created in our homeland 62 years ago, its founders dreamed of a "Greater Israel" that extended from the Nile to the Euphrates. Expansionism manifested itself on different occasions: in 1956, in 1967 and later on in the occupation of parts of Lebanon in the Eighties. Arab weakness, Israeli military superiority, the support given to Israel by the western powers, and the massacres it was prepared to commit against unarmed civilians in Palestine, Egypt and Lebanon, enabled it to expand from time to time. Although expansionism still lurks in the minds of many Israelis, it would seem that this is no longer a practical option. Lebanese and Palestinian resistance has forced Israel to withdraw unilaterally from lands it had previously occupied through war and aggression. While in the past Israel was able to defeat several Arab armies, today it faces formidable resistance that will not only check its expansionism but also, in time, force it to relinquish more of the land that it illegally occupies.
KL: What are your principal goals? Is Hamas primarily a political or a religious organisation?
KM: Hamas is a national liberation movement. We do not see a contradiction between our Islamic identity and our political mission. While we engage the occupiers through resistance and struggle to achieve our people's rights, we are proud of our religious identity that derives from Islam. Unlike the experience of the Europeans with Christianity, Islam does not provide for, demand or recognise an ecclesiastical authority. It simply provides a set of broad guidelines whose detailed interpretations are subject to and the product of human endeavour (ijtihad).
KL: Are you committed to the destruction of Israel?
KM: What is really happening is the destruction of the Palestinian people by Israel; it is the one that occupies our land and exiles us, kills us, incarcerates us and persecutes our people. We are the victims, Israel is the oppressor, and not vice versa.
KL: Why does Hamas support military force in this conflict?
KM: Military force is an option that our people resort to because nothing else works. Israel's conduct and the collusion of the international community, whether through silence or indifference or actual embroilment, vindicate armed resistance. We would love to see this conflict resolved peacefully. If occupation were to come to an end and our people enabled to exercise self-determination in their homeland, there would then be no need for any use of force. The reality is that nearly 20 years of peaceful negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis have not restored any of our rights. On the contrary, we have incurred more suffering and more losses as a result of the one-sided compromises made by the Palestinian negotiating party.
Since the PLO entered into the Oslo peace deal with Israel in 1993, more Palestinian land in the West Bank has been expropriated by the Israelis to build more illegal Jewish settlements, expand existing ones or construct highways for the exclusive use of Israelis living in these settlements. The apartheid wall that the Israelis erected along the West Bank has consumed large areas of the land that was supposed to be returned to the Palestinians according to the peace deal.
The apartheid wall and hundreds of checkpoints turned the West Bank into isolated enclaves like cells in a large prison, which makes life intolerable.
Jerusalem is constantly tampered with in order to alter its landscape and identity, and hundreds of Palestinian homes have been destroyed inside the city and around it, making thousands of Palestinians homeless in their own homeland. Instead of releasing Palestinian prisoners, the Israelis have arrested an additional 5,000 Palestinians since the Annapolis peace conference in 2007 - actions that testify to the fact they simply aren't interested in peace at all.
KL: Does Hamas engage in military activity outside Palestine?
KM: No; since its establishment 22 years ago, Hamas has confined its field of military operation to occupied Palestine.
KL: Do you wish to establish an Islamic state in Palestine in which all other religions are subordinate?
KM: Our priority as a national liberation movement is to end the Israeli occupation of our homeland. Once our people are free in their land and enjoy the right to self-determination, they alone have the final say on what system of governance they wish to live under. It is our firm belief that Islam cannot be imposed on the people. We shall campaign, in a fully democratic process, for an Islamic agenda. If that is what the people opt for, then that is their choice. We believe that Islam is the best source of guidance and the best guarantor for the rights of Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
KL: Does Hamas impose Islamic dress in Gaza? For example, is it compulsory in Gaza for women to wear the hijab, niqab or burqa?
KM: No. Intellectually, Hamas derives its vision from the people's culture and religion. Islam is our religion and is the basic constituent of our culture. We do not deny other Palestinians the right to have different visions. We do not impose on the people any aspects of religion or social conduct. Features of religion in Gaza society are genuine and spontaneous; they have not been imposed by any authority other than the faith and conviction of the observant.
KL: It is suggested that the division in the Palestinian people between the West Bank and Gaza and between Fatah and Hamas, which obviously weakens their position, came about because Hamas seized power by force in Gaza. Is this true and how do you explain this division?
KM: Undoubtedly, division does weaken the Palestinians and harms their cause. However, the division is caused not by Hamas, but by the insistence of certain international and regional parties on reversing the results of Palestinian democracy. It dismayed them that Hamas was elected by the Palestinian people.
The division is compounded by the existence of a Palestinian party that seeks empowerment from those same regional and international parties, including the US and Israel, that wish to see Hamas out of the arena. Soon after its victory in the election of January 2006, every effort was exerted to undermine the ability of Hamas to govern.
When these efforts failed, General Keith Dayton, of the United States army, who currently serves as US security co-ordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority, was despatched to Gaza to plot a coup against the Hamas-led national unity government that came out of the Mecca agreement of 2007. The plot prompted Hamas in Gaza to act in self-defence in the events of June 2007. The claim that Hamas carried out a coup is baseless because Hamas was leading the democratically elected government. All it did was act against those who were plotting a coup against it under the command and guidance of General Dayton.
KL: Do those of other political or religious views such as Fatah enjoy democratic freedoms in Gaza? What is the situation of Hamas members in the West Bank territories controlled by Fatah?
KM: Some Palestinian factions have been inspired by Arab nationalism, others by Marxism or Leninism, and others by liberalism. While we strongly believe that these ideas are alien to our people and have failed to meet their aspirations, we insist that the people are the final arbiter on whom they wish to lead them and by which system they desire to be governed. Thus, democracy is our best option for settling our internal Palestinian differences. Whatever the people choose will have to be respected.
We endeavour to the best of our ability to protect the human rights and civil liberties of the affiliates of Fatah and all the other factions within the Gaza Strip. In contrast, the Palestinians in the West Bank under Israeli occupation and the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah continue to be denied their basic rights. General Dayton is in the West Bank supervising the severe and brutal crackdown on Hamas and other Palestinian groups. More than 1,000 political prisoners, including students, university professors and professionals in all fields are hunted down, detained and tortured, sometimes to death, by the US-, British- and EU-trained and -sponsored Palestinian Authority's security force.
KL: Do you believe it is possible to reunite the Palestinian people? If so, how do you think this could be done and within what kind of timescale?
KM: It is possible to reunite the Palestinians. In order for this to happen two things are needed. First, foreign interventions and demands must stop. The Palestinian people should be left to deal with their own differences without external pressure. Second, all Palestinian parties must respect the rules of the democratic game and submit to the results of its process.
KL: Hamas's refusal to recognise Israel is frequently cited as an insuperable obstacle to negotiations and a peace settlement.
KM: This issue is only used as a pretext. Israel does not recognise the rights of the Palestinian people, yet this is not raised as an obstacle to Israel being internationally recognised nor to it being allowed to take part in talks. The reality is that Israel is the one that occupies the land and possesses superior power. Rather than ask the Palestinians, who are the victims, it is Israel, who is the oppressor, who should be asked to recognise the rights of the Palestinians.
In the past, Yasser Arafat recognised Israel but failed to achieve much. Today, Mahmoud Abbas recognises Israel, but we have yet to see any of the promised dividends of the peace process.
Israel concedes only under pressure. In the absence of any tangible pressure on Israel by the Arabs or by the international community, no settlement will succeed.
KL: Do you have a "road map" of interim steps which could realistically lead to a peaceful settlement of the conflict? Do you think Jews, Muslims and Christians can one day live together in peace in the Holy Land?
KM: We do, in Hamas, believe that a realistic peaceful settlement to the conflict will have to begin with a ceasefire agreement between the two sides based on a full withdrawal of Israel from all the territories occupied in 1967. Israeli intransigence and the lack of will to act on the part of the international community are what impede this settlement. We believe that only once our people are free and back in their land will they be able to determine the future of the conflict.
It should be reiterated here that we do not resist the Israelis because they are Jews. As a matter of principle, we do not have problems with the Jews or the Christians, but do have a problem with those who attack us and oppress us. For many centuries, Christians, Jews and Muslims coexisted peacefully in this part of the world. Our society never witnessed the sort of racism and genocide that Europe saw until recently against "the other". These issues started in Europe. Colonialism was imposed on this region by Europe, and Israel was the product of the oppression of the Jews in Europe and not of any such problem that existed in the Muslim land.
KL: What role do you think that other countries and organisations, in particular the US, EU and Britain, are currently playing in the Israel/ Palestine conflict and the divisions between the Palestinians?
KM: The role played by all these has thus far been negative. The attitude towards Israeli crimes against our people has been either silence or collusion. The policies and positions adopted by these parties have contributed to the Palestinian division or augmented it. On the one hand, conditions are stipulated that have the effect of torpedoing unity talks and reconciliation efforts. On the other hand, some of these international parties are directly embroiled in suppressing our people in the West Bank. The US and the EU provide funding, training and guidance to build a Palestinian security apparatus specialised in the persecution of critics of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah.
We have particularly been concerned about reports that the British government, directly as well as indirectly by means of security firms and the services of retired army, police and intelligence officers, is fully involved in the programme led by General Dayton against Hamas in the West Bank. KL: What should countries such as the US and Britain do to assist a peaceful settlement?
KM: They should simply uphold international law - the occupation is illegal, the annexation of East Jerusalem is illegal, the settlements are illegal, the apartheid wall is illegal, and the siege of Gaza is illegal. Yet nothing is done.
KL: What relations does Hamas wish to have with the rest of the world, and, for example, with Britain?
KM: Hamas defends a just cause. For this purpose, it desires to open up to the world. The movement seeks to establish good relations and to conduct constructive dialogue with all those concerned with Palestine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)