Sunday, August 31, 2014
Friday, August 29, 2014
Lieberman: War against Hamas must continue
28 August 2014
Source: Middle East Monitor
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman yesterday announced his opposition to the ceasefire deal reached between his government and Palestinian fighters.
Lieberman is the latest in a number of other ministers who have already voiced their opposition to the deal; this could cause a change in the coalition or lead to an early election in case the coalition collapses.
"We object any ceasefire which enables Hamas to develop its power and prepare for a new campaign against Israel in the time it finds appropriate," he wrote. "As long as Hamas is not eradicated, the threat of rockets and tunnels will remain."
He continued: "We have to undermine political gains for Hamas through the ceasefire." He called for fighting Hamas "without concessions".
Israeli radio said that four out of eight members of the security cabinet opposed the ceasefire.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not put the deal for vote in the cabinet prior to its approval. He said it was because ministers "were updated about everything by telephone."
Link:
Source: Middle East Monitor
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman yesterday announced his opposition to the ceasefire deal reached between his government and Palestinian fighters.
Lieberman is the latest in a number of other ministers who have already voiced their opposition to the deal; this could cause a change in the coalition or lead to an early election in case the coalition collapses.
Israeli ministers who have spoken out against the ceasefire:
Construction and Housing Minister Uri Ariel (Bayit Yehudi)
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman
Home Front Defence Minister Gilad Erdan
Industry, Trade and Labour Minister Naftali Bennett
Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovich
Justice Minister Tzipi Livni
Member of the Knesset Danny Danon (Likud)
Member of the Knesset Eli Yishai (Shas)
Meretz chairwoman Zehava Gal-On
On his Facebook page, Lieberman wrote: "As long as Hamas is
controlling the Gaza Strip, we cannot guarantee the security of Israeli
citizens. And, we will never reach a political reconciliation. Hamas
cannot be a partner in any political or security agreement. You cannot
trust killers."Construction and Housing Minister Uri Ariel (Bayit Yehudi)
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman
Home Front Defence Minister Gilad Erdan
Industry, Trade and Labour Minister Naftali Bennett
Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovich
Justice Minister Tzipi Livni
Member of the Knesset Danny Danon (Likud)
Member of the Knesset Eli Yishai (Shas)
Meretz chairwoman Zehava Gal-On
"We object any ceasefire which enables Hamas to develop its power and prepare for a new campaign against Israel in the time it finds appropriate," he wrote. "As long as Hamas is not eradicated, the threat of rockets and tunnels will remain."
He continued: "We have to undermine political gains for Hamas through the ceasefire." He called for fighting Hamas "without concessions".
Israeli radio said that four out of eight members of the security cabinet opposed the ceasefire.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not put the deal for vote in the cabinet prior to its approval. He said it was because ministers "were updated about everything by telephone."
Link:
Israeli opposition: Hamas achieved dream through this war
26 August 2014
Source: Middle East Monitor
Israeli opposition chairwoman Zahava Gal-On said that the Israeli government has to accept Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' initiative to be announced next week, an Israeli news website reported yesterday.
She also called upon the government to stop the policy of separation between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
"We have to recognise the restrictions and borders of power," she said. She noted that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had communicated a message to Hamas and the Palestinian resistance that they can forcefully achieve their goals.
Gal-On stressed that the Palestinian resistance had achieved a big dream through the expulsion of settlers in Gaza periphery.
She also severely criticised the Israeli government, accusing it of ignoring the Israeli settlers in the south of Israel who live in settlements along the Gaza periphery. She said the government had committed all possible mistakes.
Link: www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13728-israeli-opposition-hamas-achieved-dream-through-this-war.
Source: Middle East Monitor
Israeli opposition chairwoman Zahava Gal-On said that the Israeli government has to accept Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' initiative to be announced next week, an Israeli news website reported yesterday.
She also called upon the government to stop the policy of separation between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
"We have to recognise the restrictions and borders of power," she said. She noted that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had communicated a message to Hamas and the Palestinian resistance that they can forcefully achieve their goals.
Gal-On stressed that the Palestinian resistance had achieved a big dream through the expulsion of settlers in Gaza periphery.
She also severely criticised the Israeli government, accusing it of ignoring the Israeli settlers in the south of Israel who live in settlements along the Gaza periphery. She said the government had committed all possible mistakes.
Link: www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13728-israeli-opposition-hamas-achieved-dream-through-this-war.
Hamas explains terms of the ceasefire deal
27 August 2014
Source: Middle East Monitor
Deputy Head of Hamas's Political Bureau Musa Abu Marzouk explained on Tuesday the terms of the ceasefire deal agreed between the Palestinian resistance and the Israeli occupation.
According to Arabs48 news website, Abu Marzouk said the deal fully ended the Israeli blockade on the Gaza Strip, halting all Israeli, American and EU restrictions on money transfers, included holding an international conference on the reconstruction of the Strip and stopping Israel's tracking and assassination of Palestinian resistance fighters.
Abu Marzouk added that the deal is based on the understandings that ended the Israeli war against the Gaza Strip in 2012. But this time, the Israeli occupation is to stick to opening the crossings for the entrance of humanitarian and relief aid, as well as all reconstruction materials.
Regarding the Rafah Crossing, Abu Marzouk said there would be a Palestinian-Egyptian meeting to specify the demands for its full re-opening and called for this meeting to happen as soon as possible.
The buffer zone was cancelled.
The Hamas official, who participated in the Palestinian delegation to the indirect talks in Cairo, said Egypt is the only guarantor for the deal, and that a new round of talks are to start within a month to discuss the other issues, like prisoners, the seaport and airport.
He said that the Israeli occupation would stop targeting senior Hamas commanders, and would allow them free movement throughout the Gaza Strip, stressing that this is the point that had postponed reaching a deal at an earlier stage.
Link: www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/europe/13754-hamas-explains-terms-of-the-ceasefire-deal.
Source: Middle East Monitor
Deputy Head of Hamas's Political Bureau Musa Abu Marzouk explained on Tuesday the terms of the ceasefire deal agreed between the Palestinian resistance and the Israeli occupation.
According to Arabs48 news website, Abu Marzouk said the deal fully ended the Israeli blockade on the Gaza Strip, halting all Israeli, American and EU restrictions on money transfers, included holding an international conference on the reconstruction of the Strip and stopping Israel's tracking and assassination of Palestinian resistance fighters.
Abu Marzouk added that the deal is based on the understandings that ended the Israeli war against the Gaza Strip in 2012. But this time, the Israeli occupation is to stick to opening the crossings for the entrance of humanitarian and relief aid, as well as all reconstruction materials.
Following are the terms according to Abu Marzouk:
Gaza Crossings
Only two out of the five Gaza crossings are presently functioning. The deal stipulates Israel's commitment to opening the other three crossings.Regarding the Rafah Crossing, Abu Marzouk said there would be a Palestinian-Egyptian meeting to specify the demands for its full re-opening and called for this meeting to happen as soon as possible.
Fishing and buffer zone
The fishing zone is to be expanded to six nautical miles and to be gradually expanded to 12 miles at a later date, but before the end of this year.The buffer zone was cancelled.
Money transfers and Gaza employees
Israeli, American and European restrictions on money transfers into the Strip were lifted and the ball is now in the court of the Palestinian unity government to pay Gaza employees' salaries.Reconstruction of Gaza
Abu Marzouk explained that the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip would be discussed at a conference slated to be held next month in Egypt. Preparations for this conference are to start after inviting all the related parties to take part in the reconstruction process. The Palestinian unity government is to run the reconstruction dossier.The Hamas official, who participated in the Palestinian delegation to the indirect talks in Cairo, said Egypt is the only guarantor for the deal, and that a new round of talks are to start within a month to discuss the other issues, like prisoners, the seaport and airport.
He said that the Israeli occupation would stop targeting senior Hamas commanders, and would allow them free movement throughout the Gaza Strip, stressing that this is the point that had postponed reaching a deal at an earlier stage.
Link: www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/europe/13754-hamas-explains-terms-of-the-ceasefire-deal.
UNICEF: Israel killed 500 children in Gaza
23 August 2014
Source: Middle East Monitor
UNICEF has said that the Israeli occupation killed around 500 Palestinian children during the war on the Gaza Strip and wounded around 3,000 others.Chief of UNICEF's Gaza Field Office Pernille Ironside said that 469 children were killed. The number is expected to rise.
She described the effects and damage of the Israeli war on the Palestinian children as "bad," noting that nine children were killed in the last 48 hours.
The Palestinian Ministry of Health announced a higher number. They said that 560 children were killed and 11,000 wounded.
Meanwhile, three children were killed on Thursday in Al-Nafaq Street in the north-east of the Gaza Strip. Several international organisations said that targeting children during the war mounts to war crimes and perpetrators must be held account for them.
UNICEF stressed that children in Gaza are experiencing difficult living conditions. They make up around half of Gaza's population, 1.8million. UNICEF said that the Israeli occupation has destroyed the houses of more than 50,000 children.
Link: middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13680-unicef-israel-killed-500-children-in-gaza.
Palestinian officials: Israel's shelling of Gaza equivalent to six nuclear bombs
22 August 2014
Source: Middle East Monitor
Israel has bombed the Gaza Strip with 20,000 tons of explosives, equivalent to six nuclear bombs, the Palestinian interior ministry said on Thursday.
In a statement quoted by Anadolu news agency, the ministry accused the Israeli army of using internationally banned weapons and highly explosive missiles during its current offensive on Gaza, which has so far led to the death of more than 2,000 Palestinians, most of them civilians, including women and children.
The statement pointed out that the Israeli army has used its war arsenal at its full capacity, for example all types of war crafts, including drones, Apache helicopters, VTOL, F15 and F16 aircrafts, all of which launched a variety of missiles, most notably MK82, MK83 and MK84, which cause massive explosions and the complete destruction of the targeted areas.
Indeed, according to the explosives police in Gaza, the Israeli army has launched more than 8,000 highly explosive MK missiles in its current war on Gaza.
The statement also noted that Israeli tanks deployed in the east of Gaza have fired highly explosive rockets on the homes and properties of civilians, causing considerable damage to them, especially in neighbourhoods in Rafah and Khan Younes in the south, Shujayea in the east and Beit Hanoun in the far north.
Using these tanks, "the occupation army has fired over 60,000 artillery shells of various sizes and targets on Gaza," the statement said, adding that the Israeli army also used air-fuel rockets, as well as flechette, dime and depleted uranium bombs.
The ministry warned that Israeli shells emit radiation that harms the environment, soil and water, and spreads diseases among the coming generations, especially cancer.
The Palestinian ministry of health announced that the death toll in the ongoing Israeli offensive in Gaza now exceeds 2,084 Palestinians, with more than 10,000 injured, as of Thursday evening.
According to Israeli statements, 64 soldiers and three civilians have been killed in Israel and over 530 have been injured, mostly as a result of "panic". Hamas, however, insists that it has killed 161 Israeli soldiers, holding an additional one hostage.
Link: middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13646-palestinian-officials-israels-shelling-of-gaza-equivalent-to-6-nuclear-bombs.
Source: Middle East Monitor
Israel has bombed the Gaza Strip with 20,000 tons of explosives, equivalent to six nuclear bombs, the Palestinian interior ministry said on Thursday.
In a statement quoted by Anadolu news agency, the ministry accused the Israeli army of using internationally banned weapons and highly explosive missiles during its current offensive on Gaza, which has so far led to the death of more than 2,000 Palestinians, most of them civilians, including women and children.
The statement pointed out that the Israeli army has used its war arsenal at its full capacity, for example all types of war crafts, including drones, Apache helicopters, VTOL, F15 and F16 aircrafts, all of which launched a variety of missiles, most notably MK82, MK83 and MK84, which cause massive explosions and the complete destruction of the targeted areas.
Indeed, according to the explosives police in Gaza, the Israeli army has launched more than 8,000 highly explosive MK missiles in its current war on Gaza.
The statement also noted that Israeli tanks deployed in the east of Gaza have fired highly explosive rockets on the homes and properties of civilians, causing considerable damage to them, especially in neighbourhoods in Rafah and Khan Younes in the south, Shujayea in the east and Beit Hanoun in the far north.
Using these tanks, "the occupation army has fired over 60,000 artillery shells of various sizes and targets on Gaza," the statement said, adding that the Israeli army also used air-fuel rockets, as well as flechette, dime and depleted uranium bombs.
The ministry warned that Israeli shells emit radiation that harms the environment, soil and water, and spreads diseases among the coming generations, especially cancer.
The Palestinian ministry of health announced that the death toll in the ongoing Israeli offensive in Gaza now exceeds 2,084 Palestinians, with more than 10,000 injured, as of Thursday evening.
According to Israeli statements, 64 soldiers and three civilians have been killed in Israel and over 530 have been injured, mostly as a result of "panic". Hamas, however, insists that it has killed 161 Israeli soldiers, holding an additional one hostage.
Link: middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13646-palestinian-officials-israels-shelling-of-gaza-equivalent-to-6-nuclear-bombs.
Kurdish oil tanker spotted off Israel
21 August 2014
Source: Middle East Monitor
A tanker carrying crude oil from Iraqi Kurdistan reappeared unladen on 19 August nearly 30 km from the coast of Israel, Reuters Live AIS ship tracking system showed.
Al-Quds newspaper reported that this is the second time that the Kamari oil tanker has appeared in the region during the past two weeks loaded with Kurdish oil. The monitoring system showed the Kamari partially unloaded north of Egypt's Sinai on 17 August before turning off its satellite communication device until 19 August.
A spokesperson for the Kurdistan Regional Government Ministry of Natural Resources was not available on Wednesday for comment, but the Kurdistan government has denied selling oil to Israel in the past, either directly or indirectly.
According to Al-Quds, the tanker was loaded with Kurdish crude oil at the Turkish port of Ceyhan on 8 August and delivered part of its cargo to Croatia via a ship-to ship transfer last week. The Hungarian MOL Group said on Monday that it had bought 80,000 tons, or slightly less than 600,000 barrels, of Kurdish crude, which was unloaded at Croatia's Omisalj port during the weekend. The company has exploration and production assets in Kurdistan.
Nearly two weeks ago the same one million barrel tanker was loaded with Kurdish crude oil at Ceyhan port before sailing to a point nearly 200 kilometres off the Israeli and Egyptian coasts.
Reuters Live AIS ship tracking revealed that the ship was fully loaded based on its draft in the water. The tanker turned off its satellite-tracking device on 1 August, before reappearing four days later with much less draft, indicating it had unloaded its disputed oil.
However, it was not possible to determine the port where the Kamari unloaded its cargo of oil nor who the buyers were.
In June, Israel reportedly received a shipment of Kurdish oil from the Ceyhan port aboard the United Emblem Suezmax tanker, after receiving a ship-to-ship transfer.
Link: www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13627-kurdish-oil-tanker-spotted-off-israel.
Source: Middle East Monitor
A tanker carrying crude oil from Iraqi Kurdistan reappeared unladen on 19 August nearly 30 km from the coast of Israel, Reuters Live AIS ship tracking system showed.
Al-Quds newspaper reported that this is the second time that the Kamari oil tanker has appeared in the region during the past two weeks loaded with Kurdish oil. The monitoring system showed the Kamari partially unloaded north of Egypt's Sinai on 17 August before turning off its satellite communication device until 19 August.
A spokesperson for the Kurdistan Regional Government Ministry of Natural Resources was not available on Wednesday for comment, but the Kurdistan government has denied selling oil to Israel in the past, either directly or indirectly.
According to Al-Quds, the tanker was loaded with Kurdish crude oil at the Turkish port of Ceyhan on 8 August and delivered part of its cargo to Croatia via a ship-to ship transfer last week. The Hungarian MOL Group said on Monday that it had bought 80,000 tons, or slightly less than 600,000 barrels, of Kurdish crude, which was unloaded at Croatia's Omisalj port during the weekend. The company has exploration and production assets in Kurdistan.
Nearly two weeks ago the same one million barrel tanker was loaded with Kurdish crude oil at Ceyhan port before sailing to a point nearly 200 kilometres off the Israeli and Egyptian coasts.
Reuters Live AIS ship tracking revealed that the ship was fully loaded based on its draft in the water. The tanker turned off its satellite-tracking device on 1 August, before reappearing four days later with much less draft, indicating it had unloaded its disputed oil.
However, it was not possible to determine the port where the Kamari unloaded its cargo of oil nor who the buyers were.
In June, Israel reportedly received a shipment of Kurdish oil from the Ceyhan port aboard the United Emblem Suezmax tanker, after receiving a ship-to-ship transfer.
Link: www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13627-kurdish-oil-tanker-spotted-off-israel.
Israel Is Challenging America to Support Kurdish Independence
By Dov Friedman and Gabriel Mitchell
Source: New Republic
The ongoing crisis in Iraq has revived fervid calls for Kurdish independence, and yet the immediate viability of a future Kurdish state depends overwhelmingly on a single factor: stable oil exports.
Baghdad froze the Kurdistan Regional Government’s (KRG) budget allocation at the beginning of March,
in retaliation to Erbil signing an oil export deal with Turkey. This
threw the KRG’s economy into turmoil, and explains why the recent sale
of Kurdish oil from Turkey’s Ceyhan port—and Israel’s purported purchase—is so contentious. Though the first tanker carrying Kurdish oil still sits at anchor off the Moroccan coast, Reuters reported two weeks ago that the SCF Altai unloaded at Israel’s southwestern port of Ashkelon. Days later, the KRG confirmed receipt of sale revenues in its accounts at Turkey’s Halkbank.
Reactions were as swift as they were predictable. Hussain al-Shahristani, Iraq’s deputy prime minister for energy, called the sale a conspiracy. The Kurds denied selling Israel oil “directly or indirectly.” For its part, Israel kept mum—citing its policy not to comment on energy imports to private refineries. The independent dealer, which has a vested interest in not baring itself to Baghdad’s retribution, remains anonymous.
The story, as reported, leaves several questions unanswered. Did Israel purchase the oil, and did Kurdistan know Israel was the buyer? What does the purchase signify about the Israel-KRG relationship, and how might it complicate Israel’s relations with the U.S.? Sifting through the narrative clarifies the material and strategic benefits for both Israel and the KRG, and augurs the beginning of a vocal Israeli policy that defies the U.S’s declared interests in Iraq.
The KRG denied direct or indirect sales to Israel for obvious reasons. Though Kurdistan has pursued bolder, more autonomous policies in recent years, foreign policy remains the exclusive domain of Baghdad. Iraq maintains neither diplomatic nor economic relations with Israel, and flouting this policy might be deemed incendiary. Therefore, Kurdistan requires plausible deniability, and its oil sales through independent broker-dealers are as much precautionary as they are convenient. The “directly or indirectly” denial may have led every news story, but KRG officials left themselves considerably more wiggle room. The KRG sold to “different, reputable buyers,” with the goal “to maximize revenues for Kurdistan and Iraq.”
More plainly, the KRG sold to distributors, with neither control nor concern over the final destination. This formulation—denial of sale to Israel, followed by mannered obliviousness vis-à-vis the end buyer—has been reiterated by multiple government officials. Kurdistan’s primary objective is to lubricate the market for its product, and one reliable end purchaser may be all that is required to drive other dealers and countries into this lucrative market for competitively priced oil.
The view from Israel is hazier, but begins with the SCF Altai’s port of call—Ashkelon, Israel. Ashkelon is located a mere 20 kilometers south of Ashdod, the main commercial port in the area. So why would the SCF Altai unload at a secondary port? Because Ashkelon boasts one distinguishing feature: oil storage facilities.
If Israel received Kurdish oil with the intention of storing it, two scenarios are plausible. In the first, Israeli companies—with government consent—purchased the oil because the price was simply too good to pass up. Currently, Israel receives most of its 280,000 barrels-per-day from Azerbaijan, Russia, and some undisclosed sources. Since Kurdish oil arrived at a substantial discount—due to the Kurds’ eagerness to sell and the shallowness of the market—Israeli companies may have purchased and stored the oil for domestic consumption.
If Kurdish oil develops into a reliable source, Israel gains negotiating power in its future energy contracts. And if Kurdistan’s relations with the Iraqi government continue to devolve—or if Iraq continues its descent into violent chaos—the Kurds may substitute access to Basra’s ports for an Israeli route to the Red Sea, via the Trans-Israel pipeline between Ashkelon and Eilat, and onward to the lucrative, energy-thirsty markets of Asia.
In the second scenario, the sale of Kurdish oil may be technically correct yet effectively misleading. Israel may be storing the oil because the Kurds have not yet found an end buyer. The money transferred to KRG accounts at Halkbank would then mean Israel has either informally loaned KRG money or Israel has assumed the liquidity risk of the Kurdish oil shipment.
Both scenarios suggest that the Kurdish-Israel relationship has matured significantly. At least since the 1960s, Israel has provided intermittent security assistance and military training to the Kurds. This served mostly as an anti-Saddam play—keeping him distracted as Israel fought two wars against coordinated Arab neighbors—but mutual understanding of their respective predicaments bred Israeli-Kurdish affinity as well. All signs point to this security cooperation continuing today. Israeli procurement of affordable Kurdish oil would not only indicate a strengthening of economic ties, but also an Israeli lifeline to budget-starved Erbil that suggests a strategic bet on the Kurds in an evolving region.
With the U.S. still adamant about a unified Iraq, Israel’s strategy places it at loggerheads with its foremost ally. As has been the case with the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, Israel’s leaders have not hesitated to highlight their policy divergence from the U.S. over Iraq, too. President Shimon Peres, in his meeting with President Obama, spoke of recognizing true friends and holding them close, and included the Kurds as a prime example. Days later, in a speech at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “It is upon us to support the Kurds’ aspiration for independence. They deserve it.”
It is implausible that Israel believed it could lead international opinion on Kurdish independence; more likely, Israel aimed its statements at the U.S. When the 80,000-ton SCF Altai docked in Ashkelon, it remained in port for more than two and a half days—a moderately protracted stay for a tanker of that size unloading a shipment. Did Israel face U.S. pressure not to receive the Kurdish crude, with the tanker idling in port? It is one plausible explanation. If so, the dual Peres-Netanyahu statements constitute a sharp riposte. Israel proclaimed its support for a longtime covert friend. With so few reliable friends remaining, it seems to have publicly challenged the U.S. to do the same.
Reactions were as swift as they were predictable. Hussain al-Shahristani, Iraq’s deputy prime minister for energy, called the sale a conspiracy. The Kurds denied selling Israel oil “directly or indirectly.” For its part, Israel kept mum—citing its policy not to comment on energy imports to private refineries. The independent dealer, which has a vested interest in not baring itself to Baghdad’s retribution, remains anonymous.
The story, as reported, leaves several questions unanswered. Did Israel purchase the oil, and did Kurdistan know Israel was the buyer? What does the purchase signify about the Israel-KRG relationship, and how might it complicate Israel’s relations with the U.S.? Sifting through the narrative clarifies the material and strategic benefits for both Israel and the KRG, and augurs the beginning of a vocal Israeli policy that defies the U.S’s declared interests in Iraq.
The KRG denied direct or indirect sales to Israel for obvious reasons. Though Kurdistan has pursued bolder, more autonomous policies in recent years, foreign policy remains the exclusive domain of Baghdad. Iraq maintains neither diplomatic nor economic relations with Israel, and flouting this policy might be deemed incendiary. Therefore, Kurdistan requires plausible deniability, and its oil sales through independent broker-dealers are as much precautionary as they are convenient. The “directly or indirectly” denial may have led every news story, but KRG officials left themselves considerably more wiggle room. The KRG sold to “different, reputable buyers,” with the goal “to maximize revenues for Kurdistan and Iraq.”
More plainly, the KRG sold to distributors, with neither control nor concern over the final destination. This formulation—denial of sale to Israel, followed by mannered obliviousness vis-à-vis the end buyer—has been reiterated by multiple government officials. Kurdistan’s primary objective is to lubricate the market for its product, and one reliable end purchaser may be all that is required to drive other dealers and countries into this lucrative market for competitively priced oil.
The view from Israel is hazier, but begins with the SCF Altai’s port of call—Ashkelon, Israel. Ashkelon is located a mere 20 kilometers south of Ashdod, the main commercial port in the area. So why would the SCF Altai unload at a secondary port? Because Ashkelon boasts one distinguishing feature: oil storage facilities.
If Israel received Kurdish oil with the intention of storing it, two scenarios are plausible. In the first, Israeli companies—with government consent—purchased the oil because the price was simply too good to pass up. Currently, Israel receives most of its 280,000 barrels-per-day from Azerbaijan, Russia, and some undisclosed sources. Since Kurdish oil arrived at a substantial discount—due to the Kurds’ eagerness to sell and the shallowness of the market—Israeli companies may have purchased and stored the oil for domestic consumption.
If Kurdish oil develops into a reliable source, Israel gains negotiating power in its future energy contracts. And if Kurdistan’s relations with the Iraqi government continue to devolve—or if Iraq continues its descent into violent chaos—the Kurds may substitute access to Basra’s ports for an Israeli route to the Red Sea, via the Trans-Israel pipeline between Ashkelon and Eilat, and onward to the lucrative, energy-thirsty markets of Asia.
In the second scenario, the sale of Kurdish oil may be technically correct yet effectively misleading. Israel may be storing the oil because the Kurds have not yet found an end buyer. The money transferred to KRG accounts at Halkbank would then mean Israel has either informally loaned KRG money or Israel has assumed the liquidity risk of the Kurdish oil shipment.
Both scenarios suggest that the Kurdish-Israel relationship has matured significantly. At least since the 1960s, Israel has provided intermittent security assistance and military training to the Kurds. This served mostly as an anti-Saddam play—keeping him distracted as Israel fought two wars against coordinated Arab neighbors—but mutual understanding of their respective predicaments bred Israeli-Kurdish affinity as well. All signs point to this security cooperation continuing today. Israeli procurement of affordable Kurdish oil would not only indicate a strengthening of economic ties, but also an Israeli lifeline to budget-starved Erbil that suggests a strategic bet on the Kurds in an evolving region.
With the U.S. still adamant about a unified Iraq, Israel’s strategy places it at loggerheads with its foremost ally. As has been the case with the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, Israel’s leaders have not hesitated to highlight their policy divergence from the U.S. over Iraq, too. President Shimon Peres, in his meeting with President Obama, spoke of recognizing true friends and holding them close, and included the Kurds as a prime example. Days later, in a speech at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “It is upon us to support the Kurds’ aspiration for independence. They deserve it.”
It is implausible that Israel believed it could lead international opinion on Kurdish independence; more likely, Israel aimed its statements at the U.S. When the 80,000-ton SCF Altai docked in Ashkelon, it remained in port for more than two and a half days—a moderately protracted stay for a tanker of that size unloading a shipment. Did Israel face U.S. pressure not to receive the Kurdish crude, with the tanker idling in port? It is one plausible explanation. If so, the dual Peres-Netanyahu statements constitute a sharp riposte. Israel proclaimed its support for a longtime covert friend. With so few reliable friends remaining, it seems to have publicly challenged the U.S. to do the same.
Dov Friedman is a graduate student at Yale
University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. He is currently in
Kurdistan researching foreign policy in emerging energy states with
support from the Coca-Cola World Fund. Gabriel Mitchell is the
Israel-Turkey Project Coordinator for Mitvim—The Israeli Institute for
Regional Foreign Policies and an editor for the Kurdistan Review. He is an incoming PhD candidate in Governance at Virginia Tech University.
Link: .newrepublic.com/article/118549/israel-and-kurdistans-alleged-oil-deal-putting-us-notice.
Link: .newrepublic.com/article/118549/israel-and-kurdistans-alleged-oil-deal-putting-us-notice.
While Gaza war rages, Israel quietly speeds up settlement construction in the West Bank and Jerusalem
21 August 2014
Source: Middle East Monitor
Israel started construction on hundreds of housing units in the West Bank and Jerusalem since its assault on the Gaza Strip began in early July, Palestinian experts on settlement issues in the West Bank said.
Experts told the Anadolu news agency that Israel has refrained from announcing ongoing construction work in the new housing units to avoid further tensions in the West Bank and more international pressure during the war.
Anadolu's correspondent reported settlement expansion activities since the beginning of the war on Gaza, wherein Israel annexed more Palestinian agricultural land to build new housing units in settlements that are located on the road linking Nablus, north of the West Bank, with Ramallah in the centre.
The correspondent said that according to eyewitnesses, there is ongoing construction work in the northern Jordan Valley and in Bethlehem, south of the West Bank.
"Israel unofficially gave settlers the green light to carry out construction work in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, especially inside large settlement areas, without tendering or licensing [for new construction]," said Suhail Khalilieh, a researcher at the Applied Research Institute in Jerusalem (ARIJ).
"Relevant bodies will work later, after the end of the war, on issuing official decisions to license them," he added.
"Through daily monitoring of tenders for the construction of new settlement or housing units published in Israeli media, we can notice that there is a significant decrease [in the number of tenders] in comparison to the situation before the war on Gaza," Khalilieh added, noting that the Israeli government is adopting the policy of "silent settlement expansion" likely because it fears an increase in popular anger in the West Bank and a rise in international pressures on Israel.
Ghassan Daghlas, who monitors settlement activity in the north of the West Bank, said that settlement construction in the West Bank has not stopped but rather it is witnessing abnormal growth amid silence from Israeli officials. Daghlas pointed out that settlement construction has increased by 60 per cent.
He said that settlers' attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank have decreased amid the war on Gaza, noting that this can be attributed to the fear of the outbreak of a new uprising in the West Bank, which is not preferred by the Israeli authorities especially during the Gaza war.
"The West Bank has witnessed a decline in the number of Israeli attacks during the war on Gaza. There is a desire to avoid popular rage," he said.
Another expert who specialises in settlement activity, Abdul Hadi Hantash, classified settlement construction into two categories: The first is publicly announced construction, and the second is discrete construction that the Israeli authorities do not unveil.
Hantash told Anadolu that since the beginning of the Gaza war, Israel has accelerated discrete construction, adding that building has been concentrated in large settlement areas such as Gush Etzion - near Bethlehem, Ma'ale Adumim - in East Jerusalem, and Ariel - in the north of the West Bank).
He noted that settlers have seized thousands of dunams of agricultural in the vicinity of Salfit and Nablus.
Hantash also said that the Israeli settlements council, the Yesha Council, is currently implementing plans that it had prepared and submitted to the government before the Gaza war. The council is now capitalising on the war and implementing these plans without obtaining government approval, Hantash explained.
According to Anadolu's correspondent, the West Bank is witnessing tensions due to the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip, which has continued since July 7. Palestinians stage rallies and sit-ins that often result in confrontations with the Israeli army, which has caused the death of 22 Palestinians and the injury of hundreds, according to official Palestinian sources.
On Tuesday, Israel resumed air strikes on a number of areas in Gaza after it announced that rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip towards Israeli towns. No Palestinian group claimed responsibility for the rockets. Al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas' military wing, and Saraya Al-Quds, Islamic Jihad's military wing, later announced that they responded to Israeli strikes with rocket fire.
Israeli strikes launched on Tuesday killed 19 Palestinians, which raised the number of victims in the Gaza Strip since its start on July 7 to 2,036.
Link: .middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13638-while-gaza-war-rages-israel-quietly-speeds-up-settlement-construction-in-the-west-bank-and-jerusalem.
Source: Middle East Monitor
Israel started construction on hundreds of housing units in the West Bank and Jerusalem since its assault on the Gaza Strip began in early July, Palestinian experts on settlement issues in the West Bank said.
Experts told the Anadolu news agency that Israel has refrained from announcing ongoing construction work in the new housing units to avoid further tensions in the West Bank and more international pressure during the war.
Anadolu's correspondent reported settlement expansion activities since the beginning of the war on Gaza, wherein Israel annexed more Palestinian agricultural land to build new housing units in settlements that are located on the road linking Nablus, north of the West Bank, with Ramallah in the centre.
The correspondent said that according to eyewitnesses, there is ongoing construction work in the northern Jordan Valley and in Bethlehem, south of the West Bank.
"Israel unofficially gave settlers the green light to carry out construction work in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, especially inside large settlement areas, without tendering or licensing [for new construction]," said Suhail Khalilieh, a researcher at the Applied Research Institute in Jerusalem (ARIJ).
"Relevant bodies will work later, after the end of the war, on issuing official decisions to license them," he added.
"Through daily monitoring of tenders for the construction of new settlement or housing units published in Israeli media, we can notice that there is a significant decrease [in the number of tenders] in comparison to the situation before the war on Gaza," Khalilieh added, noting that the Israeli government is adopting the policy of "silent settlement expansion" likely because it fears an increase in popular anger in the West Bank and a rise in international pressures on Israel.
Ghassan Daghlas, who monitors settlement activity in the north of the West Bank, said that settlement construction in the West Bank has not stopped but rather it is witnessing abnormal growth amid silence from Israeli officials. Daghlas pointed out that settlement construction has increased by 60 per cent.
He said that settlers' attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank have decreased amid the war on Gaza, noting that this can be attributed to the fear of the outbreak of a new uprising in the West Bank, which is not preferred by the Israeli authorities especially during the Gaza war.
"The West Bank has witnessed a decline in the number of Israeli attacks during the war on Gaza. There is a desire to avoid popular rage," he said.
Another expert who specialises in settlement activity, Abdul Hadi Hantash, classified settlement construction into two categories: The first is publicly announced construction, and the second is discrete construction that the Israeli authorities do not unveil.
Hantash told Anadolu that since the beginning of the Gaza war, Israel has accelerated discrete construction, adding that building has been concentrated in large settlement areas such as Gush Etzion - near Bethlehem, Ma'ale Adumim - in East Jerusalem, and Ariel - in the north of the West Bank).
He noted that settlers have seized thousands of dunams of agricultural in the vicinity of Salfit and Nablus.
Hantash also said that the Israeli settlements council, the Yesha Council, is currently implementing plans that it had prepared and submitted to the government before the Gaza war. The council is now capitalising on the war and implementing these plans without obtaining government approval, Hantash explained.
According to Anadolu's correspondent, the West Bank is witnessing tensions due to the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip, which has continued since July 7. Palestinians stage rallies and sit-ins that often result in confrontations with the Israeli army, which has caused the death of 22 Palestinians and the injury of hundreds, according to official Palestinian sources.
On Tuesday, Israel resumed air strikes on a number of areas in Gaza after it announced that rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip towards Israeli towns. No Palestinian group claimed responsibility for the rockets. Al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas' military wing, and Saraya Al-Quds, Islamic Jihad's military wing, later announced that they responded to Israeli strikes with rocket fire.
Israeli strikes launched on Tuesday killed 19 Palestinians, which raised the number of victims in the Gaza Strip since its start on July 7 to 2,036.
Link: .middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13638-while-gaza-war-rages-israel-quietly-speeds-up-settlement-construction-in-the-west-bank-and-jerusalem.
Israeli settlers unleash dog pack on Palestinian kids
Aug 20, 2014
Source: PressTV
The boy, identified as Karmel Moayyad Shakir, was playing with his peers in the village of Azawiyeh when the illegal settlers from the nearby Kannat settlement arrived at the spot along with a large pack of dogs.
Before the boy’s family could intervene, the dogs attacked the five-year-old who was lucky enough not to die, yet sustained severe injuries.
The presence and continued expansion of Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine has created a major obstacle for the efforts to establish peace in the Middle East.
More than half a million Israelis live in over 120 illegal settlements built since Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and East al-Quds in 1967.
The UN and most countries regard the Israeli settlements as illegal because the territories were captured by Israel in a war in 1967 and are hence subject to the Geneva Conventions, which forbid construction on occupied lands.
NT/MAM/MHB
Link: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/20/376034/settler-dogs-savage-palestinian-kids/.
Source: PressTV
Israeli
settlers have unleashed a large pack of dogs on Palestinian children,
brutally injuring one near Salfit in the center of the occupied West
Bank.
The dogs harshly savaged the five-year-old boy, who is in dire need of several surgeries, including a facial reconstructive one.The boy, identified as Karmel Moayyad Shakir, was playing with his peers in the village of Azawiyeh when the illegal settlers from the nearby Kannat settlement arrived at the spot along with a large pack of dogs.
Before the boy’s family could intervene, the dogs attacked the five-year-old who was lucky enough not to die, yet sustained severe injuries.
“We were sitting in the house. My son went out to play with his friends when suddenly I heard the kids screaming and the sound of dogs. I ran out and saw more than 20 dogs attacking my son with the settlers in the background. There was so much blood we rushed him directly to hospital,” said Thikra Ashkira, the kid’s mother.Karmel’s family said the villagers there were vulnerable to the Israelis’ repeated attacks, with Israeli military forces protecting the attackers.
“The area we live in is the closest to the Israeli settlement. We suffer many such attacks by the settlers and their dogs. We usually try to keep the kids inside, but we can’t do it every time because they have the right to play,” said Moayyad Shakir, Karmel’s father.Among many other illegal settlements, Kannat is notorious for its extremist Israeli residents.
The presence and continued expansion of Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine has created a major obstacle for the efforts to establish peace in the Middle East.
More than half a million Israelis live in over 120 illegal settlements built since Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and East al-Quds in 1967.
The UN and most countries regard the Israeli settlements as illegal because the territories were captured by Israel in a war in 1967 and are hence subject to the Geneva Conventions, which forbid construction on occupied lands.
NT/MAM/MHB
Link: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/20/376034/settler-dogs-savage-palestinian-kids/.
Jordan's king pushes to expand military, intelligence authority
August 25, 2014
Osama Al Sharif
Source: Al- Monitor
On Aug. 14, the Jordanian government announced that it would ask parliament to approve two constitutional amendments giving the king sole authority to appoint the head of the armed forces and director of the kingdom’s General Intelligence Department (GID). Almost three years ago, in October 2011, in response to public protests calling for political reforms, King Abdullah II had approved a number of constitutional amendments that curtailed some of his powers and allowed for the creation of a Constitutional Court and an Independent Elections Commission.
These reforms were hailed as a major step toward full constitutional monarchy. Jordan’s version of the Arab Spring was largely peaceful and bloodless, and Abdullah was able to project himself as a champion of political reforms that would lead, according to statements made in June 2011, to the formation of parliamentary governments. That promise remains to be fulfilled.
The Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Action Front (IAF) boycotted the 2013 legislative elections, and other political parties performed poorly, failing to fill the vacuum. Weak and unpopular, the parties' presence in the current Lower House, comprised mostly of independents, is modest. The government of Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour, appointed by Abdullah in October 2012, was supposed to include elected deputies as a precursor to the formation of parliamentary governments. To date, however, Ensour has failed to fulfill that pledge, probably due to royal objections.
It is clear that Abdullah instructed Ensour to handle the two constitutional amendments. Under the current constitution, the government recommends the appointees for head of the armed forces and GID director, and the king approves them through royal decree. The king had asked the prime minister on Aug. 12 to “activate” the Ministry of Defense, whose portfolio has been handled directly by the prime minister for decades. In effect, the portfolio will now be managed by a civilian or a retired army officer. The king said the new ministry will handle “political, economic, legal and logistical duties related to national defense … and nonmilitary services … while allowing the armed forces to dedicate its time to professional military duties.”
The government is rushing the two amendments through parliament, which has been convened in an extraordinary session. The timing and reasons for the amendments, described by Ensour as important reforms that will enhance Jordan’s democratic process, were not made clear. Pundits rushed to explain the surprise move. Clearly Abdullah is looking to expand his authority, making sure that the decision to appoint and fire the heads of two very sensitive institutions remains his alone.
Critics of the move did not waste time making their points. In general, they saw the move as a violation of the constitution and a derogation of the general mandate of the government. A number of retired army officers issued a statement denouncing the action, describing it as “an attack on the constitution and a challenge to the will of the people, who are the source of all authorities.”
Mohammad al-Hammouri, a respected constitutional expert and former justice minister, wrote on Aug. 19, “Giving the king exclusive powers to appoint the heads of the armed forces and GID constitutes an abrogation of the parliamentary system and a coup against the constitution, effectively turning Jordan from a constitutional monarchy to a presidential monarchy.”
He added that the Jordanian system of government is based on the principle of separation of powers, with the people being the source of authority. He added that the only exclusive power that the king has is to prevent amendment of the constitution, while the authority to run the state’s domestic and foreign affairs is tied directly to the Council of Ministers.
Osama Al Sharif
Source: Al- Monitor
On Aug. 14, the Jordanian government announced that it would ask parliament to approve two constitutional amendments giving the king sole authority to appoint the head of the armed forces and director of the kingdom’s General Intelligence Department (GID). Almost three years ago, in October 2011, in response to public protests calling for political reforms, King Abdullah II had approved a number of constitutional amendments that curtailed some of his powers and allowed for the creation of a Constitutional Court and an Independent Elections Commission.
These reforms were hailed as a major step toward full constitutional monarchy. Jordan’s version of the Arab Spring was largely peaceful and bloodless, and Abdullah was able to project himself as a champion of political reforms that would lead, according to statements made in June 2011, to the formation of parliamentary governments. That promise remains to be fulfilled.
The Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Action Front (IAF) boycotted the 2013 legislative elections, and other political parties performed poorly, failing to fill the vacuum. Weak and unpopular, the parties' presence in the current Lower House, comprised mostly of independents, is modest. The government of Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour, appointed by Abdullah in October 2012, was supposed to include elected deputies as a precursor to the formation of parliamentary governments. To date, however, Ensour has failed to fulfill that pledge, probably due to royal objections.
It is clear that Abdullah instructed Ensour to handle the two constitutional amendments. Under the current constitution, the government recommends the appointees for head of the armed forces and GID director, and the king approves them through royal decree. The king had asked the prime minister on Aug. 12 to “activate” the Ministry of Defense, whose portfolio has been handled directly by the prime minister for decades. In effect, the portfolio will now be managed by a civilian or a retired army officer. The king said the new ministry will handle “political, economic, legal and logistical duties related to national defense … and nonmilitary services … while allowing the armed forces to dedicate its time to professional military duties.”
The government is rushing the two amendments through parliament, which has been convened in an extraordinary session. The timing and reasons for the amendments, described by Ensour as important reforms that will enhance Jordan’s democratic process, were not made clear. Pundits rushed to explain the surprise move. Clearly Abdullah is looking to expand his authority, making sure that the decision to appoint and fire the heads of two very sensitive institutions remains his alone.
Critics of the move did not waste time making their points. In general, they saw the move as a violation of the constitution and a derogation of the general mandate of the government. A number of retired army officers issued a statement denouncing the action, describing it as “an attack on the constitution and a challenge to the will of the people, who are the source of all authorities.”
Mohammad al-Hammouri, a respected constitutional expert and former justice minister, wrote on Aug. 19, “Giving the king exclusive powers to appoint the heads of the armed forces and GID constitutes an abrogation of the parliamentary system and a coup against the constitution, effectively turning Jordan from a constitutional monarchy to a presidential monarchy.”
He added that the Jordanian system of government is based on the principle of separation of powers, with the people being the source of authority. He added that the only exclusive power that the king has is to prevent amendment of the constitution, while the authority to run the state’s domestic and foreign affairs is tied directly to the Council of Ministers.
Thursday, August 21, 2014
Thousands Sue for Damages Against Cholesterol Drugs as Big Pharma Defends Billion Dollar Industry
August 20, 2014
Brian Shilhavy
Source: Health Impact News Daily
The $100 billion dollar cholesterol-lowering statin drug industry is under attack, as thousands of Americans are filing lawsuits against the manufacturers of cholesterol-lowering drugs such as Lipitor.
Research continues to confirm just how dangerous these drugs are, with yet another study published recently linking increased statin drug use to type 2 diabetes. Since the study was published by the American Diabetes Association, these known risks to cholesterol-lowering drugs can no longer be denied or defended, and the lawsuits are pouring in at a rapid pace. Most of the lawsuits at this point are from women who have suffered with diabetes as a result of taking cholesterol-lowering drugs, but lawsuits over breast cancer, Alzheimer’s, liver damage, and others may soon follow now that it is generally known how dangerous these drugs are.
This information regarding a tsunami of lawsuits against cholesterol drug manufacturers has yet to be widely published by the mainstream media, however. To find out the magnitude of the lawsuits being filed against statin drug manufacturers, we turn to law firms who are reaping the fruit of litigation against Big Pharma.
According to statistics supplied by various law firms, there were 464 claims filed against Lipitor as of April 15, 2014, which increased to 703 by May 15, and then to 846 by June 16. As of mid-July 2014 over 959 claims have been filed for damages due to Lipitor alone. There are also many claims currently filed against Crestor, the next nearest competitor to Lipitor, and undoubtedly other similar drugs now sold under generic labels. These lawsuits now number well over 1,000, and are increasing at a rapid pace.
Lipitor is by far the most profitable drug in the history of mankind among all pharmaceutical products, let alone being the most profitable cholesterol drug before its patent expired at the end of 2011. Sales to date from this one particular cholesterol-lowering statin drug has exceeded $140 billion.
Lipitor benefited from the change in marketing laws in 1997 that allowed pharmaceutical companies in the U.S. to advertise their products directly to consumers. Pfizer convinced an entire generation of Americans that they needed a pill to lower their cholesterol in order to prevent heart disease, in what will go down as one of the most brilliant and unethical marketing schemes of all time.
After Lipitor’s patent expired at the end of 2011, the FDA issued its first warnings against statin drugs, which includes: liver injury, memory loss, diabetes, and muscle damage. Soon after issuing these warnings, the lawsuits started trickling in. Today, with more and more studies being published linking statin drug use to various side effects, those lawsuits have become a tidal wave, even though you are not likely to hear about this in the mainstream media.
Since the patent on Lipitor has expired, pharmaceutical companies have been searching for the next big blockbuster cholesterol drug to bring in profits like Lipitor did. One of these newer cholesterol-lowering drugs is U.S.-made Zetia by Merck. Alberto Donzelli, head of education, appropriateness, and evidence-based medicine at Milan’s public health authority in Italy, has issued warnings about the dangers of this drug, and advised doctors in Italy not to prescribe it. Merck responded with two cease-and-desist orders and the threat of suing Donzelli. Donzelli backed down, but Merck has received a lot of public pressure in Europe since the story was picked up by the British Medical Journal. It was also reported in the Wall Street Journal here in the U.S. When doctors and medical professionals oppose Big Pharma, they put their careers and sometimes their lives on the line.
The fact that cholesterol is not responsible for heart disease, and
that cholesterol-lowering drugs provide no statistical advantages to
prolonging life by reducing heart attacks, has been widely reported for
many years now by those of us in the alternative health media. One
mainstream media source in Australia, however, decided to air a
documentary on the Cholesterol Myth and “Cholesterol Drug Wars”. The
show featured Dr. MaryAnne Demasi and interviewed several doctors and
health officials who dared to tell the truth regarding the cholesterol
drug scam. It was broadcast by ABC
Australia in late 2013, under vigorous protests from the pharmaceutical
industry. The videos were eventually removed from their website, and the
network issued a statement retracting their endorsement of the show.
However, they can still be seen on YouTube for now (watch them here.)
However, as we are seeing, Americans are starting to wake up to the Cholesterol Myth and the Statin Drug scam, and those injured by these drugs are seeking damages in litigation at a very fast pace here in 2014, in spite of the mainstream media blackout due to intimidation from Big Pharma.
So what’s next?
If we follow the pattern of Big Pharma when their products can no longer be supported in a free market due to lack of consumer confidence and demand, and massive litigation due to faulty products, they will probably seek some kind of government protection from these lawsuits. Such government protection will allow them to distribute their cholesterol drugs through government drug programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the new Obamacare. With the baby boomer generation heading into their senior years, it is just too large of a market for them to give up without a fight.
The logic they will use with politicians in Washington D.C. will be very similar to the logic currently used by the vaccine market: Americans are too stupid to know better, so we need laws to protect us and our products against litigation so we can continue to manufacture and distribute them to people who don’t want them, because they don’t realize how much they need our drugs.
This logic is clearly seen in the above referenced American Diabetes study on statins, where they state in their conclusion: “Benefits of statins in reducing cardiovascular events clearly overwhelm the diabetes risk.” In other words, we need to sacrifice those who are harmed by our products for “the greater good” of society, because our drugs are necessary for public health.
This kind of logic and legal protection against their dangerous products is exactly what happened in 1986, when Big Pharma convinced Congress that vaccines were necessary for public health, in spite of the fact that they were causing great harm and sales were slumping, while they were incurring great legal bills in litigation. They threatened Congress to stop manufacturing vaccines due to all the litigation, and Congress obliged by passing legislation that removed all legal liability for damages due to vaccines. That law was then upheld years later, in 2011, by the U.S. Supreme Court. Today, you cannot sue Big Pharma for damages due to their vaccines, which has resulted in the U.S. administering more vaccines per child than any other country in the world. Without legal protection, the industry would not have survived. Or if it had survived, we would have far fewer and far safer vaccines in the marketplace today. Instead, we mass vaccinate with an ineffective annual flu vaccine that is crippling hundreds of people a year (see: Government Pays Damages to Vaccine Victims: Flu Shot Most Dangerous with GBS and Death Settlements). The flu shot is being mandated for certain segments of the population as a condition for employment or school, with increasing pressure to mandate forced vaccinations for a greater segment of the population all in the name of “public health safety”.
Is this kind of government protection and mandated drug distribution on the horizon for cholesterol-lowering drugs? You can be sure they will try. It is up to you, the consumer, to stop buying their products now, and to stop voting for people to represent you in Washington D.C. who support Big Pharma.
We are currently living in the Dark Ages when it comes to health freedom, as today’s pharmaceutical companies are the biggest criminals in the marketplace, having reached settlements in criminal medical abuses that reach into the billions of dollars. Yet the government continues to not only recommend their products, but purchase and distribute them with YOUR tax dollars via government funded programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare.
As a consumer, you must resist purchasing these toxic products, and fight against any kind of mandated “health program” that forces you to purchase or take their products. History will look back on these Dark Days of medical tyranny with horror. In the meantime, don’t become a fatality and statistic to the cholesterol drug scam! If you are responsible for caring for any seniors, help them to not become a fatality or statistic as well, by being informed and taking a stand for your rights!
Brian Shilhavy
Source: Health Impact News Daily
The $100 billion dollar cholesterol-lowering statin drug industry is under attack, as thousands of Americans are filing lawsuits against the manufacturers of cholesterol-lowering drugs such as Lipitor.
Research continues to confirm just how dangerous these drugs are, with yet another study published recently linking increased statin drug use to type 2 diabetes. Since the study was published by the American Diabetes Association, these known risks to cholesterol-lowering drugs can no longer be denied or defended, and the lawsuits are pouring in at a rapid pace. Most of the lawsuits at this point are from women who have suffered with diabetes as a result of taking cholesterol-lowering drugs, but lawsuits over breast cancer, Alzheimer’s, liver damage, and others may soon follow now that it is generally known how dangerous these drugs are.
This information regarding a tsunami of lawsuits against cholesterol drug manufacturers has yet to be widely published by the mainstream media, however. To find out the magnitude of the lawsuits being filed against statin drug manufacturers, we turn to law firms who are reaping the fruit of litigation against Big Pharma.
According to statistics supplied by various law firms, there were 464 claims filed against Lipitor as of April 15, 2014, which increased to 703 by May 15, and then to 846 by June 16. As of mid-July 2014 over 959 claims have been filed for damages due to Lipitor alone. There are also many claims currently filed against Crestor, the next nearest competitor to Lipitor, and undoubtedly other similar drugs now sold under generic labels. These lawsuits now number well over 1,000, and are increasing at a rapid pace.
Lipitor is by far the most profitable drug in the history of mankind among all pharmaceutical products, let alone being the most profitable cholesterol drug before its patent expired at the end of 2011. Sales to date from this one particular cholesterol-lowering statin drug has exceeded $140 billion.
Lipitor benefited from the change in marketing laws in 1997 that allowed pharmaceutical companies in the U.S. to advertise their products directly to consumers. Pfizer convinced an entire generation of Americans that they needed a pill to lower their cholesterol in order to prevent heart disease, in what will go down as one of the most brilliant and unethical marketing schemes of all time.
After Lipitor’s patent expired at the end of 2011, the FDA issued its first warnings against statin drugs, which includes: liver injury, memory loss, diabetes, and muscle damage. Soon after issuing these warnings, the lawsuits started trickling in. Today, with more and more studies being published linking statin drug use to various side effects, those lawsuits have become a tidal wave, even though you are not likely to hear about this in the mainstream media.
Big Pharma Fights Back – They Do Not Want you to Know Cholesterol Drugs are Worthless and Dangerous
As is often the case when learning about the criminal activities of Big Pharma, much of the research is conducted outside of the U.S. The above referenced study published recently by the American Diabetes Association, for example, was conducted in Italy.Since the patent on Lipitor has expired, pharmaceutical companies have been searching for the next big blockbuster cholesterol drug to bring in profits like Lipitor did. One of these newer cholesterol-lowering drugs is U.S.-made Zetia by Merck. Alberto Donzelli, head of education, appropriateness, and evidence-based medicine at Milan’s public health authority in Italy, has issued warnings about the dangers of this drug, and advised doctors in Italy not to prescribe it. Merck responded with two cease-and-desist orders and the threat of suing Donzelli. Donzelli backed down, but Merck has received a lot of public pressure in Europe since the story was picked up by the British Medical Journal. It was also reported in the Wall Street Journal here in the U.S. When doctors and medical professionals oppose Big Pharma, they put their careers and sometimes their lives on the line.
Dr
MaryAnne Demasi from the Catalyst. Her investigative reporting on the
dangers of statin drugs has now been banned in Australia.
What’s Next in the Cholesterol Drug Wars?
One in four Americans over the age of 45 are currently on statin drugs. In spite of the increased research linking these drugs to diabetes, Alzheimer’s Disease, liver damage, breast cancer, among many others (see: Consumer Alert: 300+ Health Problems Linked To Statin Drugs), government-funded Big Pharma agencies continue to promote statin drugs and are attempting to get more Americans to take them. New guidelines put out by the American Heart Association earlier this year (2014) would more than double the number of Americans taking statin drugs. Big Pharma educated doctors and health officials have been so indoctrinated by the cholesterol theory of heart disease, that there have actually been debates about adding cholesterol lowering drugs to drinking water! In their minds, every person on the planet should be taking these cholesterol-lowering drugs.However, as we are seeing, Americans are starting to wake up to the Cholesterol Myth and the Statin Drug scam, and those injured by these drugs are seeking damages in litigation at a very fast pace here in 2014, in spite of the mainstream media blackout due to intimidation from Big Pharma.
So what’s next?
If we follow the pattern of Big Pharma when their products can no longer be supported in a free market due to lack of consumer confidence and demand, and massive litigation due to faulty products, they will probably seek some kind of government protection from these lawsuits. Such government protection will allow them to distribute their cholesterol drugs through government drug programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the new Obamacare. With the baby boomer generation heading into their senior years, it is just too large of a market for them to give up without a fight.
The logic they will use with politicians in Washington D.C. will be very similar to the logic currently used by the vaccine market: Americans are too stupid to know better, so we need laws to protect us and our products against litigation so we can continue to manufacture and distribute them to people who don’t want them, because they don’t realize how much they need our drugs.
This logic is clearly seen in the above referenced American Diabetes study on statins, where they state in their conclusion: “Benefits of statins in reducing cardiovascular events clearly overwhelm the diabetes risk.” In other words, we need to sacrifice those who are harmed by our products for “the greater good” of society, because our drugs are necessary for public health.
This kind of logic and legal protection against their dangerous products is exactly what happened in 1986, when Big Pharma convinced Congress that vaccines were necessary for public health, in spite of the fact that they were causing great harm and sales were slumping, while they were incurring great legal bills in litigation. They threatened Congress to stop manufacturing vaccines due to all the litigation, and Congress obliged by passing legislation that removed all legal liability for damages due to vaccines. That law was then upheld years later, in 2011, by the U.S. Supreme Court. Today, you cannot sue Big Pharma for damages due to their vaccines, which has resulted in the U.S. administering more vaccines per child than any other country in the world. Without legal protection, the industry would not have survived. Or if it had survived, we would have far fewer and far safer vaccines in the marketplace today. Instead, we mass vaccinate with an ineffective annual flu vaccine that is crippling hundreds of people a year (see: Government Pays Damages to Vaccine Victims: Flu Shot Most Dangerous with GBS and Death Settlements). The flu shot is being mandated for certain segments of the population as a condition for employment or school, with increasing pressure to mandate forced vaccinations for a greater segment of the population all in the name of “public health safety”.
Is this kind of government protection and mandated drug distribution on the horizon for cholesterol-lowering drugs? You can be sure they will try. It is up to you, the consumer, to stop buying their products now, and to stop voting for people to represent you in Washington D.C. who support Big Pharma.
We are currently living in the Dark Ages when it comes to health freedom, as today’s pharmaceutical companies are the biggest criminals in the marketplace, having reached settlements in criminal medical abuses that reach into the billions of dollars. Yet the government continues to not only recommend their products, but purchase and distribute them with YOUR tax dollars via government funded programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare.
As a consumer, you must resist purchasing these toxic products, and fight against any kind of mandated “health program” that forces you to purchase or take their products. History will look back on these Dark Days of medical tyranny with horror. In the meantime, don’t become a fatality and statistic to the cholesterol drug scam! If you are responsible for caring for any seniors, help them to not become a fatality or statistic as well, by being informed and taking a stand for your rights!
References
Statins and the Risk of Diabetes: Evidence From a Large Population-Based Cohort Study – Diabetes Care
FDA Expands Advice on Statin Risks – FDA.gov
MSD Italy is criticised for threatening legal action over prescription advice to GPs – British Medical Journal
Merck Threatened to Sue Doc Over Prescribing Advice – Wall Street Journal
Two Studies Suggest Risk of Diabetes with Statins Such As Crestor – LawyersandSettlements.com
Lipitor Lawsuits Continue to Be Filed in South Carolina Litigation – Benzinga.com
More on the Cholesterol Myth
More on the Statin Scam
Link: http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/thousands-sue-for-damages-against-cholesterol-drugs-as-big-pharma-defends-billion-dollar-industry/.
Thursday, August 14, 2014
Cholesterol drug risks 'being ignored'
14 August 2014
Eilish O'Regan
Source: Independent.ie
MEDICINES that lower cholesterol – hailed as wonder-drugs in the battle against heart disease – may be doing more harm than good to otherwise healthy people.
Statins are taken by more than 250,000 Irish people to help lower "bad cholesterol", a risk factor for heart disease and stroke.
However, a review by one of the country's leading vascular surgeons has found a lack of evidence to show that statins should be given as a means of prevention to healthy people who have high cholesterol but no heart disease.
Sherif Sultan, of University College Hospital in Galway, warned that statin use can increase the risk of diabetes, cataracts and male impotence.
"They can also significantly increase the risk of cancer and neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's disease in the elderly, along with a myriad of infectious diseases," he said.
Mr Sultan said there were benefits in prescribing some dosages of statins for certain patients already diagnosed with heart disease or who had a history of heart attack or stroke.
However, otherwise healthy people with high cholesterol would do better losing weight, improving their diet, taking exercise and stopping smoking to avoid heart disease.
Mr Sultan and his colleague Niamh Hynes based their findings on a review of studies involving nearly 400,000 patients published in the 'Journal of Endocrine and Metabolic Diseases'.
He said his findings showed major adverse effects had been under-reported, which he said was a "scientific farce".
There is ample evidence to show statins increase cardiovascular risk in women, patients with diabetes and the young.
Too many doctors had fallen into the marketing trap behind the over-selling of statins and ignored side-effects linked to different doses, said Mr Sultan.
SIDE-EFFECTS
Other potential side-effects include inflammation of the liver, muscle and joint pain and insomnia.
Eilish O'Regan
Source: Independent.ie
MEDICINES that lower cholesterol – hailed as wonder-drugs in the battle against heart disease – may be doing more harm than good to otherwise healthy people.
Statins are taken by more than 250,000 Irish people to help lower "bad cholesterol", a risk factor for heart disease and stroke.
However, a review by one of the country's leading vascular surgeons has found a lack of evidence to show that statins should be given as a means of prevention to healthy people who have high cholesterol but no heart disease.
Sherif Sultan, of University College Hospital in Galway, warned that statin use can increase the risk of diabetes, cataracts and male impotence.
"They can also significantly increase the risk of cancer and neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's disease in the elderly, along with a myriad of infectious diseases," he said.
Mr Sultan said there were benefits in prescribing some dosages of statins for certain patients already diagnosed with heart disease or who had a history of heart attack or stroke.
However, otherwise healthy people with high cholesterol would do better losing weight, improving their diet, taking exercise and stopping smoking to avoid heart disease.
Mr Sultan and his colleague Niamh Hynes based their findings on a review of studies involving nearly 400,000 patients published in the 'Journal of Endocrine and Metabolic Diseases'.
He said his findings showed major adverse effects had been under-reported, which he said was a "scientific farce".
There is ample evidence to show statins increase cardiovascular risk in women, patients with diabetes and the young.
Too many doctors had fallen into the marketing trap behind the over-selling of statins and ignored side-effects linked to different doses, said Mr Sultan.
SIDE-EFFECTS
Other potential side-effects include inflammation of the liver, muscle and joint pain and insomnia.
Patients
for whom Mr Sultan makes an exception are those with high cholesterol
because of an inherited faulty gene which cannot be reduced by lifestyle
changes. In that case, he would prescribe a statin.
He
advises his own patients to adjust their lifestyle and to exercise
regularly, go off wheat, increase their intake of greens, drink three
litres of water a day and try not to eat after their evening meal.
Around
250,000 prescriptions for statins are written every month, and they
account for 8pc of the HSE's €1.7bn annual drugs spend.
The Irish Medicines Board has received 59 reports of suspected adverse reactions to statins since the start of 2012.
Dr
Angie Brown, the medical director of the Irish Heart Foundation, said
the mainstay of preventing heart disease involved lifestyle changes
including stopping smoking, being active, having a healthy weight and
getting blood pressure and cholesterol checked.
"In some
individuals with a significant risk of developing cardiovascular
disease or with very high cholesterol levels, it may not be possible to
reduce levels sufficiently with lifestyle change alone, and in these
people the advice is to start a cholesterol-reducing tablet," she said.
Irish Independent
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
The (non) Islamic State: Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and the Challenge of Islamic Illiteracy
31 July 2014
Nicholas P. Roberts
Source: Middle East Monitor
In his book Islams and Modernities, renowned historian of religion Aziz Al-Azmeh argued that there are as many "Islams" as there are situations that sustain them. In the context of the contemporary Middle East, Azmeh's observation is readily apparent.
While definitive studies have demonstrated that the majority of the world's Muslims share the same desires and ideals as Americans and other Westerners, there are certain individuals who claim that "Western" and "Islamic" ideals (if such labels can even be applied appropriately) are antithetical. To be certain, such claims are made frequently by non-Muslim Westerners. In the Islamic context, such ideology is represented today most prominently by Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Al-Qaeda offshoot "the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria" (ISIS). Demonstrating his ultimate goal, on June 29, Baghdadi rebranded his group as the "Islamic State" (IS). Since well before their June declaration, however, Baghdadi and his troops had been making nearly unchallenged progress toward becoming just that: a state.
A recent article in the New York Times described the recent gains made by Baghdadi. "What I see in Raqqa proves that the Islamic State has a clear vision to establish a state in the real meaning of the word," the Times article quoted a resident of the city of Raqqa as saying. "It is not a joke."
It certainly is not a joke that Baghdadi is making concerted efforts to form a functioning state. However, it is a joke to describe this burgeoning state as "Islamic." To do so demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of Islamic history and law, and Baghdadi's proclamations and actions are indicative of his historical, religious and cultural illiteracy. As the eminent Islamic scholar Ebrahim Moosa has argued repeatedly, this lack of "Islamic literacy" is the primary cause of extremism in the Middle East.
Baghdadi's ideology, rooted in the concept of takfir, calls for transnational jihad to establish a new "Islamic caliphate." Takfiri ideology holds that any Muslim whose beliefs are different is an unbeliever and apostate and must, therefore, be killed. The concept of takfir in Islamic law is complex. Takfir refers to declarations of apostasy and excommunication from the faith. It is forbidden, considered heresy, for one Muslim to simply declare another Muslim an apostate because of differences of opinion over the faith. The process of takfir, which usually only occurs after a Muslim has declared himself a kafir, or unbeliever, is guarded by a labyrinth of stringent legal measures.
Many Westerners argue that Muslim leaders throughout the world are, to some degree, at fault for the proliferation of this ideology because they have failed to condemn it. However, this argument is superficial and does not pass the test of any serious analysis. For only one example, the 2005 Amman Message, the consensus of more than 500 Islamic scholars, including the Shaykh of Al-Azhar, the Shi'a cleric Ayatollah Sistani, and Shaykh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, reminded Muslims that it is forbidden to declare a fellow Muslim an apostate.
Instead of the superficial Western argument, this ideology has been sustained and fed by very real factors, many of which have been created and/or made worse by United States policy and actions in the Middle East. For example, Baghdadi's group traces its origins to Iraq, where he used the destruction from the 2003 American invasion to give his ideology some legitimacy. Baghdadi argued that only Islam, as a total and complete way of life governing matters of state and matters of faith, could repel the American occupiers and begin to build a more pristine "Islamic" way of life.
Takfiri militants like Baghdadi attempt to legitimate their theoretical conceptualisation of an "Islamic State" as a return to the past; a return to some point in history when a purer, richer form of Islam was practiced. The example drawn upon is the experience of Prophet Muhammad at Madinah. While the Prophet's community there was not a "state," properly considered, it was the first instance of Islam being used politically, and the example of the Prophet as a religious and political leader remains the eternal model for all practicing Muslims to adhere by. However, an analysis of the actual historical experience of the Prophet and his followers at Madinah illuminates the religious and historical illiteracy of takfiri ideology.
First, the Qur'an expressly forbids declarations of apostasy between Muslims. "Oh, you who believe and live on the path of God, be discerning, and do not say to anyone who greets you with peace, 'You are not a believer'" [4:94]. The Qur'an also reveals that there shall be no compulsion in acceptance of religion [2:256]. Elsewhere, the Qur'an reveals that there will naturally be differences of opinion among Muslims and non-Muslims: "Say: 'Oh, you who disbelieve, I do not worship what you worship, and you do not worship what I worship, and I shall not worship what you worship, and you shall not worship what I worship. To you your religion, and to me, mine'" [109:1-6].
The Islamic State's demands that Iraqi Christians leave their territory, convert to Islam or face immediate death have no basis in either the Qur'an or the example of the Prophet. When the Prophet arrived in Madinah to establish the first Muslim community, the most powerful tribes there were Jewish. Especially after being harshly oppressed in Makkah before he fled to Madinah, the Prophet sought to establish a system of government that was based on the voluntary consent of the people, and that guaranteed them the freedom to worship and practice their faiths as they wished.
One of the first Muslim historians, Muhammad ibn 'Umar al-Waqidi, provided an illuminating account of this. He wrote that the inhabitants of Madinah "were a mixed lot" and, therefore, the Prophet "wished, when he arrived at Madinah, to establish peace/concord between them, all of them as a collective group, and to make peace with them. A man would be a Muslim and his father a polytheist."1
The political system that Muhammad ultimately established is enshrined in what has been labelled the "Constitution of Madinah." Though not strictly speaking a constitution, this collection of eight separate documents established a governing system of political and religious tolerance. The first document was written after a contract between Muhammad and the Madinan tribes known in English as the Treaty or Contract of Al-'Aqaba. The early Muslim historians Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hashim recorded Muhammad as having stated upon the conclusion of the treaty: "All things are now common between us; your blood is as my blood, your ruin is as my ruin."2
Ibn Ishaq, who wrote the first biography of the Prophet, described the "Constitution" as such: "The apostle [Muhammad] wrote a document concerning the emigrants and the helpers [the peoples of Madinah] in which he made a friendly agreement with the Jews and established them in their religion and their property, and stated the reciprocal obligations."3 The Constitution lists each tribe in Madinah one by one, and guarantees their rights and freedoms. Based on these documents as well as the written historical record, the Islamic city-state at Madinah was characterised by unprecedented political and religious tolerance, as guaranteed by law.
The example of the Prophet and the political model of his city-state at Madinah thus stands in stark contrast to Baghdadi's (non) "Islamic State." Muhammad guaranteed freedom of religion and worship in a set of written laws; conversely, Baghdadi and his troops are burning ancient Christian churches in Mosul and recently destroyed the ancient Shrine of Jonah.
By destroying the shrine of Prophet Jonah simply because he is associated with Christianity Baghdadi is, apparently, unaware that the Qur'an commands Muslims to revere all of the prophets who preached monotheism as prophets of Islam (submission to the Will of God) and to make no distinction between them. For example, the Qur'an commands Muhammad to acknowledge that his religion is the religion of Abraham, who worshipped no god but God (monotheism). "So, believers, say, 'We believe in God and in what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and what was given to Moses, Jesus, and all the prophets by their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we devote ourselves to Him'" [2:136].
Tolerance and pluralism in Muhammad's city-state at Madinah also characterised relations between men and women. Baghdadi and his fellow takfiris should remember that the Qur'anic revelations regarding affairs between men and women were revolutionary in the context of life in the seventh century, not just in the Arabian peninsula, but anywhere at that point in time throughout the world.
Consider, for example, the reports that IS fighters are forcing young women from conquered territories into marriage. If these reports are true, Baghdadi should know that his fighters are directly disobeying the Qur'anic injunction that forbids such acts: "You who believe, it is not lawful for you to inherit women against their will" [4:19]. Baghdadi should remember that the Qur'an granted women rights to inheritance, which was unprecedented in monotheism (and most of history). As the Qur'an reveals: "Men shall have a share in what their parents and relatives leave, and women shall have a share in what their parents and relatives leave, whether that legacy is small or large, this is commanded by God" [4:7].
The authority which Baghdadi believes he possesses to issue such decrees, namely, Caliph of all Sunni Muslims, is illegitimate in terms of Islamic law and historical practice. Many of the most prominent Islamic scholars today have condemned Baghdadi's declaration as such.
The system of the Islamic caliphate is a complex concept in Islamic history. It was conceived in the days immediately following Muhammad's death, which was a particularly tumultuous time for the Muslim community. During Muhammad's lifetime, he was, as the final Messenger of God, believed to be the indisputable leader of the faith. As such, he relayed revelations from God to the Muslim community to guide them throughout their lives. If Muslims had questions about certain things that were not covered by God's revelations, they looked to Muhammad for guidance. These examples eventually came to be one of the sources of law in Islam, known collectively as the sunnah, the sayings and way of life of the Prophet, made up of individual hadith, or examples.
Neither the Qur'an nor the sunnah contained instructions for Muslims regarding what to do politically after Muhammad's death. The community was left without a leader and no Divine Guidance on how to select one. Accordingly, the Prophet's closest companions met and drew upon the long-refined Arab traditions of shura (consultation), ijma'a (consensus) and bay'ah (voluntary oath of allegiance) in establishing a system for selecting political leaders. This new system, the Caliphate, was established the day after Muhammad's death, when one of his most trusted companions, Abdullah ibn Abi Quhafa, known more simply as Abu Bakr, received the voluntary consent of the Madinan community to serve as Khalifat Rasul Allah, or the successor to the Messenger of God.
Ibn Ishaq wrote perhaps the first historical description of this process. The acceptance of Abu Bakr as the successor to Muhammad was "an unpremeditated affair," he wrote, reflecting the lack of instructions from God or the Prophet on what to do after his death. Ibn Ishaq continued to write that Abu Bakr was chosen voluntarily because the community held him in the highest esteem. He then wrote, "He who accepts a man as ruler without consulting the Muslims, such acceptance has no validity for either of them."4
Abu Bakr's first speech (khutba) as caliph demonstrates the respect with which Muhammad's closest companions and the first Muslims regarded concepts such as consultation, consensus and accountability. Ibn Ishaq recorded Abu Bakr as stating: "I have been given authority over you but I am not the best of you. If I do well, help me, and if I do ill, then put me right. Truth consists in loyalty and falsehood in treachery... Obey me so long as I obey God and His apostle, and if I disobey them, you owe me no obedience."5
Granted, throughout history the caliphate did diverge from this original model. Understanding the model of the Prophet and his companions is, nonetheless, of ultimate importance today because all believing Muslims consider it to be the ideal model of human endeavour. This remains especially true for those Muslims, such as Baghdadi, who describe themselves as adhering to the salafi school of thought. Salafism is a complex and broad label that describes many different contemporary ideologies. However, it draws its name from al-salaf al-salih, which means the righteous or pious predecessors. The label refers to Muhammad, his companions (the Rashidun) and the first community of Muslims at Madinah. Though all Muslims look to the example of this generation for supreme human guidance, this is especially true for figures like Baghdadi, who often portray themselves as the purest representatives of this historical model.
Within this context, then, it is clear that Baghdadi is Islamically illiterate. The challenge of this Islamically illiterate ideology extends far beyond the relatively more simple matter of terrorism. An ideology, after all, cannot be defeated by counterterrorism. Therefore, the international community, if it is interested in defeating Baghdadi, must realise that this ideology was not created in a vacuum. Rather, it is sustained by a confluence of factors, such as poor quality of education, corruption and despotic governance. The challenge of Islamic illiteracy is not killing its ideologues; the challenge is killing the forces that sustain the ideology itself.
One of the most negative consequences of the proliferation of this ideology is that, unfortunately, it augments the Western perception that all Islamic activists are violent, intolerant and autocratic. It must be clear that this is not true. The Tunisian Islamic activist Rachid Ghannouchi, for example, frames his political, social and cultural reformist vision within a conceptual framework subsumed by Islam. He even calls for the establishment of an "Islamic state." However, Ghannouchi's "Islamic state" is in no way similar to Baghdadi's.
In terms of United States government policy, officials must not let the proliferation of takfiri ideology cloud their understanding of Islam and politics. Religion is, always has been and will remain an important factor in socio-political reform and democratic mobilisation in all societies throughout the world. For the United States government to view Baghdadi through a lens focused solely on counterterrorism, and for the United States government to allow a fear of takfiri ideology to preclude them from accepting and assisting peaceful Islamic activists like Rachid Ghannouchi or even the Muslim Brotherhood, is myopic, short sighted and superficial. Until the factors sustaining this particular interpretation of Islam are addressed, it will, despite its illiteracy, continue to spread.
1Muhammad ibn 'Umar al-Waqidi, Kitab al-maghazi, ed. Marsden Jones, vol. 1 (London: Oxford University Press, 1966), 184. As cited in R.B. Serjeant, "The 'Sunnah Jami'ah," Pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the 'Tahrim' of Yathrib: Analysis and Translation of the Documents Comprised in the So-Called 'Constitution of Madinah," Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1978).
2As cited in Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ed. J.B. Bury, vol. 5 (London: Methuen and Co., Ltd., 1911), 380-381. See also A. Guillaume, trans., Ibn Hashim, ed., The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah (London: Oxford University Press, 1955), 201-207.
3Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 222.
4Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 684-685.
5Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 687.
Mr. Roberts studies Islamic intellectual history and Islamic movements with Dr. John Voll at Georgetown University in the Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. He recently completed writing Political Islam and the Invention of Tradition, soon to be published, which explores the emergence of Political Islam and the concept of an Islamic state founded upon an indigenously Islamic concept of social contract. He has lived and studied in Tunisia and Yemen. Prior to his appointment at Georgetown, he was Special Assistant to the former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Department of State and worked in the private sector.
Nicholas P. Roberts
Source: Middle East Monitor
In his book Islams and Modernities, renowned historian of religion Aziz Al-Azmeh argued that there are as many "Islams" as there are situations that sustain them. In the context of the contemporary Middle East, Azmeh's observation is readily apparent.
While definitive studies have demonstrated that the majority of the world's Muslims share the same desires and ideals as Americans and other Westerners, there are certain individuals who claim that "Western" and "Islamic" ideals (if such labels can even be applied appropriately) are antithetical. To be certain, such claims are made frequently by non-Muslim Westerners. In the Islamic context, such ideology is represented today most prominently by Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Al-Qaeda offshoot "the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria" (ISIS). Demonstrating his ultimate goal, on June 29, Baghdadi rebranded his group as the "Islamic State" (IS). Since well before their June declaration, however, Baghdadi and his troops had been making nearly unchallenged progress toward becoming just that: a state.
A recent article in the New York Times described the recent gains made by Baghdadi. "What I see in Raqqa proves that the Islamic State has a clear vision to establish a state in the real meaning of the word," the Times article quoted a resident of the city of Raqqa as saying. "It is not a joke."
It certainly is not a joke that Baghdadi is making concerted efforts to form a functioning state. However, it is a joke to describe this burgeoning state as "Islamic." To do so demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of Islamic history and law, and Baghdadi's proclamations and actions are indicative of his historical, religious and cultural illiteracy. As the eminent Islamic scholar Ebrahim Moosa has argued repeatedly, this lack of "Islamic literacy" is the primary cause of extremism in the Middle East.
Baghdadi's ideology, rooted in the concept of takfir, calls for transnational jihad to establish a new "Islamic caliphate." Takfiri ideology holds that any Muslim whose beliefs are different is an unbeliever and apostate and must, therefore, be killed. The concept of takfir in Islamic law is complex. Takfir refers to declarations of apostasy and excommunication from the faith. It is forbidden, considered heresy, for one Muslim to simply declare another Muslim an apostate because of differences of opinion over the faith. The process of takfir, which usually only occurs after a Muslim has declared himself a kafir, or unbeliever, is guarded by a labyrinth of stringent legal measures.
Many Westerners argue that Muslim leaders throughout the world are, to some degree, at fault for the proliferation of this ideology because they have failed to condemn it. However, this argument is superficial and does not pass the test of any serious analysis. For only one example, the 2005 Amman Message, the consensus of more than 500 Islamic scholars, including the Shaykh of Al-Azhar, the Shi'a cleric Ayatollah Sistani, and Shaykh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, reminded Muslims that it is forbidden to declare a fellow Muslim an apostate.
Instead of the superficial Western argument, this ideology has been sustained and fed by very real factors, many of which have been created and/or made worse by United States policy and actions in the Middle East. For example, Baghdadi's group traces its origins to Iraq, where he used the destruction from the 2003 American invasion to give his ideology some legitimacy. Baghdadi argued that only Islam, as a total and complete way of life governing matters of state and matters of faith, could repel the American occupiers and begin to build a more pristine "Islamic" way of life.
Takfiri militants like Baghdadi attempt to legitimate their theoretical conceptualisation of an "Islamic State" as a return to the past; a return to some point in history when a purer, richer form of Islam was practiced. The example drawn upon is the experience of Prophet Muhammad at Madinah. While the Prophet's community there was not a "state," properly considered, it was the first instance of Islam being used politically, and the example of the Prophet as a religious and political leader remains the eternal model for all practicing Muslims to adhere by. However, an analysis of the actual historical experience of the Prophet and his followers at Madinah illuminates the religious and historical illiteracy of takfiri ideology.
First, the Qur'an expressly forbids declarations of apostasy between Muslims. "Oh, you who believe and live on the path of God, be discerning, and do not say to anyone who greets you with peace, 'You are not a believer'" [4:94]. The Qur'an also reveals that there shall be no compulsion in acceptance of religion [2:256]. Elsewhere, the Qur'an reveals that there will naturally be differences of opinion among Muslims and non-Muslims: "Say: 'Oh, you who disbelieve, I do not worship what you worship, and you do not worship what I worship, and I shall not worship what you worship, and you shall not worship what I worship. To you your religion, and to me, mine'" [109:1-6].
The Islamic State's demands that Iraqi Christians leave their territory, convert to Islam or face immediate death have no basis in either the Qur'an or the example of the Prophet. When the Prophet arrived in Madinah to establish the first Muslim community, the most powerful tribes there were Jewish. Especially after being harshly oppressed in Makkah before he fled to Madinah, the Prophet sought to establish a system of government that was based on the voluntary consent of the people, and that guaranteed them the freedom to worship and practice their faiths as they wished.
One of the first Muslim historians, Muhammad ibn 'Umar al-Waqidi, provided an illuminating account of this. He wrote that the inhabitants of Madinah "were a mixed lot" and, therefore, the Prophet "wished, when he arrived at Madinah, to establish peace/concord between them, all of them as a collective group, and to make peace with them. A man would be a Muslim and his father a polytheist."1
The political system that Muhammad ultimately established is enshrined in what has been labelled the "Constitution of Madinah." Though not strictly speaking a constitution, this collection of eight separate documents established a governing system of political and religious tolerance. The first document was written after a contract between Muhammad and the Madinan tribes known in English as the Treaty or Contract of Al-'Aqaba. The early Muslim historians Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hashim recorded Muhammad as having stated upon the conclusion of the treaty: "All things are now common between us; your blood is as my blood, your ruin is as my ruin."2
Ibn Ishaq, who wrote the first biography of the Prophet, described the "Constitution" as such: "The apostle [Muhammad] wrote a document concerning the emigrants and the helpers [the peoples of Madinah] in which he made a friendly agreement with the Jews and established them in their religion and their property, and stated the reciprocal obligations."3 The Constitution lists each tribe in Madinah one by one, and guarantees their rights and freedoms. Based on these documents as well as the written historical record, the Islamic city-state at Madinah was characterised by unprecedented political and religious tolerance, as guaranteed by law.
The example of the Prophet and the political model of his city-state at Madinah thus stands in stark contrast to Baghdadi's (non) "Islamic State." Muhammad guaranteed freedom of religion and worship in a set of written laws; conversely, Baghdadi and his troops are burning ancient Christian churches in Mosul and recently destroyed the ancient Shrine of Jonah.
By destroying the shrine of Prophet Jonah simply because he is associated with Christianity Baghdadi is, apparently, unaware that the Qur'an commands Muslims to revere all of the prophets who preached monotheism as prophets of Islam (submission to the Will of God) and to make no distinction between them. For example, the Qur'an commands Muhammad to acknowledge that his religion is the religion of Abraham, who worshipped no god but God (monotheism). "So, believers, say, 'We believe in God and in what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and what was given to Moses, Jesus, and all the prophets by their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we devote ourselves to Him'" [2:136].
Tolerance and pluralism in Muhammad's city-state at Madinah also characterised relations between men and women. Baghdadi and his fellow takfiris should remember that the Qur'anic revelations regarding affairs between men and women were revolutionary in the context of life in the seventh century, not just in the Arabian peninsula, but anywhere at that point in time throughout the world.
Consider, for example, the reports that IS fighters are forcing young women from conquered territories into marriage. If these reports are true, Baghdadi should know that his fighters are directly disobeying the Qur'anic injunction that forbids such acts: "You who believe, it is not lawful for you to inherit women against their will" [4:19]. Baghdadi should remember that the Qur'an granted women rights to inheritance, which was unprecedented in monotheism (and most of history). As the Qur'an reveals: "Men shall have a share in what their parents and relatives leave, and women shall have a share in what their parents and relatives leave, whether that legacy is small or large, this is commanded by God" [4:7].
The authority which Baghdadi believes he possesses to issue such decrees, namely, Caliph of all Sunni Muslims, is illegitimate in terms of Islamic law and historical practice. Many of the most prominent Islamic scholars today have condemned Baghdadi's declaration as such.
The system of the Islamic caliphate is a complex concept in Islamic history. It was conceived in the days immediately following Muhammad's death, which was a particularly tumultuous time for the Muslim community. During Muhammad's lifetime, he was, as the final Messenger of God, believed to be the indisputable leader of the faith. As such, he relayed revelations from God to the Muslim community to guide them throughout their lives. If Muslims had questions about certain things that were not covered by God's revelations, they looked to Muhammad for guidance. These examples eventually came to be one of the sources of law in Islam, known collectively as the sunnah, the sayings and way of life of the Prophet, made up of individual hadith, or examples.
Neither the Qur'an nor the sunnah contained instructions for Muslims regarding what to do politically after Muhammad's death. The community was left without a leader and no Divine Guidance on how to select one. Accordingly, the Prophet's closest companions met and drew upon the long-refined Arab traditions of shura (consultation), ijma'a (consensus) and bay'ah (voluntary oath of allegiance) in establishing a system for selecting political leaders. This new system, the Caliphate, was established the day after Muhammad's death, when one of his most trusted companions, Abdullah ibn Abi Quhafa, known more simply as Abu Bakr, received the voluntary consent of the Madinan community to serve as Khalifat Rasul Allah, or the successor to the Messenger of God.
Ibn Ishaq wrote perhaps the first historical description of this process. The acceptance of Abu Bakr as the successor to Muhammad was "an unpremeditated affair," he wrote, reflecting the lack of instructions from God or the Prophet on what to do after his death. Ibn Ishaq continued to write that Abu Bakr was chosen voluntarily because the community held him in the highest esteem. He then wrote, "He who accepts a man as ruler without consulting the Muslims, such acceptance has no validity for either of them."4
Abu Bakr's first speech (khutba) as caliph demonstrates the respect with which Muhammad's closest companions and the first Muslims regarded concepts such as consultation, consensus and accountability. Ibn Ishaq recorded Abu Bakr as stating: "I have been given authority over you but I am not the best of you. If I do well, help me, and if I do ill, then put me right. Truth consists in loyalty and falsehood in treachery... Obey me so long as I obey God and His apostle, and if I disobey them, you owe me no obedience."5
Granted, throughout history the caliphate did diverge from this original model. Understanding the model of the Prophet and his companions is, nonetheless, of ultimate importance today because all believing Muslims consider it to be the ideal model of human endeavour. This remains especially true for those Muslims, such as Baghdadi, who describe themselves as adhering to the salafi school of thought. Salafism is a complex and broad label that describes many different contemporary ideologies. However, it draws its name from al-salaf al-salih, which means the righteous or pious predecessors. The label refers to Muhammad, his companions (the Rashidun) and the first community of Muslims at Madinah. Though all Muslims look to the example of this generation for supreme human guidance, this is especially true for figures like Baghdadi, who often portray themselves as the purest representatives of this historical model.
Within this context, then, it is clear that Baghdadi is Islamically illiterate. The challenge of this Islamically illiterate ideology extends far beyond the relatively more simple matter of terrorism. An ideology, after all, cannot be defeated by counterterrorism. Therefore, the international community, if it is interested in defeating Baghdadi, must realise that this ideology was not created in a vacuum. Rather, it is sustained by a confluence of factors, such as poor quality of education, corruption and despotic governance. The challenge of Islamic illiteracy is not killing its ideologues; the challenge is killing the forces that sustain the ideology itself.
One of the most negative consequences of the proliferation of this ideology is that, unfortunately, it augments the Western perception that all Islamic activists are violent, intolerant and autocratic. It must be clear that this is not true. The Tunisian Islamic activist Rachid Ghannouchi, for example, frames his political, social and cultural reformist vision within a conceptual framework subsumed by Islam. He even calls for the establishment of an "Islamic state." However, Ghannouchi's "Islamic state" is in no way similar to Baghdadi's.
In terms of United States government policy, officials must not let the proliferation of takfiri ideology cloud their understanding of Islam and politics. Religion is, always has been and will remain an important factor in socio-political reform and democratic mobilisation in all societies throughout the world. For the United States government to view Baghdadi through a lens focused solely on counterterrorism, and for the United States government to allow a fear of takfiri ideology to preclude them from accepting and assisting peaceful Islamic activists like Rachid Ghannouchi or even the Muslim Brotherhood, is myopic, short sighted and superficial. Until the factors sustaining this particular interpretation of Islam are addressed, it will, despite its illiteracy, continue to spread.
1Muhammad ibn 'Umar al-Waqidi, Kitab al-maghazi, ed. Marsden Jones, vol. 1 (London: Oxford University Press, 1966), 184. As cited in R.B. Serjeant, "The 'Sunnah Jami'ah," Pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the 'Tahrim' of Yathrib: Analysis and Translation of the Documents Comprised in the So-Called 'Constitution of Madinah," Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1978).
2As cited in Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ed. J.B. Bury, vol. 5 (London: Methuen and Co., Ltd., 1911), 380-381. See also A. Guillaume, trans., Ibn Hashim, ed., The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah (London: Oxford University Press, 1955), 201-207.
3Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 222.
4Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 684-685.
5Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, 687.
Mr. Roberts studies Islamic intellectual history and Islamic movements with Dr. John Voll at Georgetown University in the Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. He recently completed writing Political Islam and the Invention of Tradition, soon to be published, which explores the emergence of Political Islam and the concept of an Islamic state founded upon an indigenously Islamic concept of social contract. He has lived and studied in Tunisia and Yemen. Prior to his appointment at Georgetown, he was Special Assistant to the former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Department of State and worked in the private sector.
Saudi king grants Sisi medal of honour
11 August 2014
Source: Middle East Monitor
Saudi's King Abdallah presented Egypt's President Abdel Fatah Al-Sisi with the highest medal of honour in the Kingdom during their meeting in Jeddah yesterday.
The visit by Al-Sisi is his first to the Kingdom since he assumed office on June 8. During the trip the leaders discussed bilateral relatios and issues of mutual concern, especially the developments in Gaza, Anadolu reported.
The two sides are expected to discuss the preparations for the donors' conference for Egypt, promised by the Saudi king and endorsed by the United Arab Emirates.
A day before his trip to the Kingdom, Al-Sisi called for the formation of an "Arab Alliance" to counter the danger of the Islamic State in Iraq and Sham (ISIS) which has seized control of vast swaths of Iraq and Syria.
Following the military's ouster of President Mohamed Morsi in July last year, Gulf countries were quick to lend support to the new regime, led by Al-Sisi. Gulf aid to Egypt since Morsi's ouster amounted to $15.9 billion, including $6.9 billion from the UAE, $5 billion from Saudi, and $4 billion from Kuwait.
Following his visit to Saudi, Al-Sisi is scheduled to pay a brief visit to Russia tomorrow based on an invite from Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Link: middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13389-saudi-king-grants-sisi-medal-of-honour.
Source: Middle East Monitor
Saudi's King Abdallah presented Egypt's President Abdel Fatah Al-Sisi with the highest medal of honour in the Kingdom during their meeting in Jeddah yesterday.
The visit by Al-Sisi is his first to the Kingdom since he assumed office on June 8. During the trip the leaders discussed bilateral relatios and issues of mutual concern, especially the developments in Gaza, Anadolu reported.
The two sides are expected to discuss the preparations for the donors' conference for Egypt, promised by the Saudi king and endorsed by the United Arab Emirates.
A day before his trip to the Kingdom, Al-Sisi called for the formation of an "Arab Alliance" to counter the danger of the Islamic State in Iraq and Sham (ISIS) which has seized control of vast swaths of Iraq and Syria.
Following the military's ouster of President Mohamed Morsi in July last year, Gulf countries were quick to lend support to the new regime, led by Al-Sisi. Gulf aid to Egypt since Morsi's ouster amounted to $15.9 billion, including $6.9 billion from the UAE, $5 billion from Saudi, and $4 billion from Kuwait.
Following his visit to Saudi, Al-Sisi is scheduled to pay a brief visit to Russia tomorrow based on an invite from Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Link: middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/13389-saudi-king-grants-sisi-medal-of-honour.
Monday, August 11, 2014
Erdogan's victory welcomed in Egypt
11 August 2014
Source: Middle East Monitor
Egyptian commentators and former politicians have welcomed the electoral victory of outgoing Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyib Erdogan on Sunday.
Former advisor to the ousted president Mohamed Morsi and political scientist Dr Seif Abdel-Fattah welcomed the victory in a congratulatory note on Facebook, while former minister of investment under Morsi, Yehia Hamed, congratulated Erdogan, haling his "persistence in supporting causes of liberty and democracy and standing against oppressive regimes."
Human right activist Haitham Abu Khalil hailed the "principled competition" between Erdogan and his rival candidates, as the opposition's candidate Ekmelettin Ihsanoglu congratulated Erdogan for his victory.
Similarly, political activist and Coptic youth leader Rami Jan congratulated Erdogan and the Turkish people. "Erdogan, this unique man has changed the political system in Turkey for good," he said on Facebook.
Link:
www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/africa/13385-erdogans-victory-welcomed-in-egypt.
Source: Middle East Monitor
Egyptian commentators and former politicians have welcomed the electoral victory of outgoing Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyib Erdogan on Sunday.
Former advisor to the ousted president Mohamed Morsi and political scientist Dr Seif Abdel-Fattah welcomed the victory in a congratulatory note on Facebook, while former minister of investment under Morsi, Yehia Hamed, congratulated Erdogan, haling his "persistence in supporting causes of liberty and democracy and standing against oppressive regimes."
Human right activist Haitham Abu Khalil hailed the "principled competition" between Erdogan and his rival candidates, as the opposition's candidate Ekmelettin Ihsanoglu congratulated Erdogan for his victory.
Similarly, political activist and Coptic youth leader Rami Jan congratulated Erdogan and the Turkish people. "Erdogan, this unique man has changed the political system in Turkey for good," he said on Facebook.
Link:
www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/africa/13385-erdogans-victory-welcomed-in-egypt.
Palestine tragedy and Allah’s Help
July 27, 2014
by The Haqq Seeker
Source: muslimvillage.com
The Muslim Ummah is like one body
In a hadith Rasulullāh (Sallallāhu ‘alaihe wasallam) is reported to have said:
“The Muslim Ummah is like one body. If the eye is in pain then the whole body is in pain and if the head is in pain then the whole body is in pain.”
The above hadith clearly signifies that the Muslim Ummah are like one body, immaterial of where we are, what nationality or gender we belong to or what colour is our skin. If we hear that any part of this Ummah is being oppressed, then we should all feel this pain.
Today in many parts of the world Muslims are being oppressed and persecuted. Foremost in the list is Palestine. Let us all join in making Du’ah to Allāh Ta’ala to bring an end to the sufferings of the innocent Palestinian men, women and children. Also, let us all join hands in boycotting the Israeli products in their entirety.
A very pertinent question arises here: Islam being Deen-ul-Haqq why is it that today its adherents, viz. the Muslims, are going through the state of utter disgrace and humiliation?
The answer is: Allāh Subhānahu wa Ta’ala has held back His Nusrat (Divine Help). He has held back His Nusrat due to fact that the Ummah of the noble Prophet (Sallallāhu ‘alaihe wasallam) has invoked Allāh’s wrath by their actions. We have strayed from the straight path, the path that Allāh has defined in His Book as Swirat al Mustaqīm, and as a result we are not only denied Allāh’s Nusrat, we are actually being punished by Allāh through the Kuffār. The unfortunate thing is we are not even aware that we have gone astray.
There are a number of transgressions brazenly committed by us today due to which we have invoked Allāh’s wrath upon us. Given below are only a few of them.
Love of the World
On the authority of Thawbān , the Prophet (Sallallāhu ‘alaihe wasallam) said:
“The People will soon summon one another to attack you as people when eating invite others to share their food.” Someone asked, “Will that be because of our small numbers at that time?” He replied, “No, you will be numerous at that time: but you will be froth and scum like that carried down by a torrent (of water), and Allāh will take the fear of you from the breasts (hearts) of your enemy and cast al-wahn into your hearts.” Someone asked, “O Messenger of Allāh, what is al-wahn?” He replied, “Love of the world and dislike of death.” (An authentic hadith recorded by Abu Dawud and Ahmad).
Hadhrat Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi (Rahmatullāhi ‘alayh) in a tafseer once said that Allāh Ta’ala has kept different systems for Masjidul Harām in Makkah and Masjidul Aqsa in Palestine. The system that Allāh Ta’ala has kept for Masjidul Harām is that it will always be under divine protection no matter what the condition of the Muslims may be. Allāh Ta’ala will never allow the Kuffār to take control of the Ka’bah Shareef. That is why, when Abraha and his army of elephants went to attack the Ka’bah, Allāh Ta’ala protected His house using small birds which destroyed Abraha and his powerful army.
However, the system of Masjidul Aqsa is very much different.
The condition of Masjidul Aqsa is based on the condition of the Muslim Ummah. If Muslims live in the obedience of Allāh Ta’ala then Allāh Ta’ala will bless them with the control of the Masjid. But Allāh forbid, if the Muslims move away from the obedience of Allāh Ta’ala, He will take away the control of the blessed lands and hand it over to our enemies.”
While the Barbarian Israel is busy battering the innocent Gaza civilians the Islamic countries are busy building world’s tallest buildings (e.g. Bruj Khalifa) and the world’s first climate-controlled city that will also have the world’s largest shopping center. Isn’t this a manifest display of love of the world?
Emulating the Kuffār
Today we (Muslims) have resolutely entrenched ourselves in the Western ideologies. We have firmly accepted the Western culture to dominate our lives and as time passes the Western influence penetrates more and more deeply into the fiber of Islamic society. In fact, some of us actually take pride in following the Kuffār culture. Rasulullāh (sallallāhu alaihe wasallam) never hated Kuffār, but he detested their ways. Today we are deeply in love with their ways. We have let the West choose for us our lifestyle, the literature that we read, the way we dress-up, the food that we eat with all its harām or doubtful ingredients, the way we perform our wedding ceremonies and so on and so forth.
One of the worst things that the Western Culture has ‘presented’ to us is the constant urge to be entertained. As a result today we have become enslaved to the electronic media that thrives on entertainment. Watching TV (equipped with wide screen TVs, some of our Muslim homes’ living rooms have actually become like ‘theatres’), browsing the filth on the Internet, socializing via Facebook and other social networks – all these vices have become today’s accepted norms. Hours and hours of our precious time is wasted on WhatsApp. Our kids’ spare time is spent in busying themselves with play stations and ipads and we parents watch them with approval.
In a bayān (lecture) Moulana Sulaiman Khatani says during the time he spent in Jordan, they visited an Islamic University while on a gasht (Jawla or visiting Muslim brothers), in the company of two doctors from Syria. When they entered the University they saw students carrying Bukhari, Muslim and Tirmidhi in their hands but all of them were dressed in jeans and T-shirts and they were all clean shaven. Outwardly there was no display of apparent Sunnah in them. When they entered the Director’s office they met the Head of the Islamic University and he was clad in a suit and a tie and there was a big self-portrait in the office. When the mahol (environment) is wrong then we witness such disregard of Islamic ways of life.
What a great irony it is that we Muslims love imitating and aping the very people that are killing and maiming our brothers and sisters and their children! We are not even aware that in itself, this is one of the reasons we are being punished.
Not Fulfilling the Obligation of Amr Bill Ma’roof – Nahy Anil Munkar
Amr Bil Ma’roof and Nahy Anil Munkar (commanding righteousness and forbidding evil) is a sacred obligation on every Muslim. Regarding this obligation, it is mentioned in the Hadith narrated by Hadhrat Abu Dardaa’ (radhiAllāhu anhu): “Hadhrat ‘Aishah (RadhiAllāhu ‘anha) says:
‘
Once the Holy Prophet (Sallallāhu ‘alaihe wasallam) entered the house and I guessed from his face that something of great importance had occurred. He did not talk to anyone, and after making Wudhu he entered the Masjid. I stood behind the wall to hear what he said. He sat at the pulpit and after praising Allāh, he said, “O Muslims! Allāh has commanded you to call people to good deeds and prevent them from committing sins; otherwise a time will come when you will pray to Him; but He will not listen to you; you will ask your needs of Him, but He will not grant them; you will appeal to Him for His help against your enemies, but He will not help you.” After saying this, he came down from the pulpit.”’
Aren’t we witnessing the situation that is described in the above hadith? How many of us are involved in the effort of Da’wat and Tabligh (Amr Bil Ma’roof and Nahy Anil Munkar)? In fact, once we involve ourselves in this effort, inshaAllāh, the first two vices, and many more, will automatically fade away from our lives.
What Muslims all over the world are going through today is a dire wake-up call for the entire Ummah. Let us totally migrate from the above vices and start obeying Allāh’s commands, bringing the Mubarak Sunāh of our beloved Prophet (sallallāhu alaihe wasallam) into our lives. Let us all make Taubāh and Istighfar and Du’ā in abundance that may Allāh save the Ummah from His wrath…Ameen.
And Allāh Ta’ala Knows Best.
Link: http://muslimvillage.com/2014/07/27/56330/palestine-tragedy-allahs-nusrat/.
by The Haqq Seeker
Source: muslimvillage.com
The Muslim Ummah is like one body
In a hadith Rasulullāh (Sallallāhu ‘alaihe wasallam) is reported to have said:
“The Muslim Ummah is like one body. If the eye is in pain then the whole body is in pain and if the head is in pain then the whole body is in pain.”
The above hadith clearly signifies that the Muslim Ummah are like one body, immaterial of where we are, what nationality or gender we belong to or what colour is our skin. If we hear that any part of this Ummah is being oppressed, then we should all feel this pain.
Today in many parts of the world Muslims are being oppressed and persecuted. Foremost in the list is Palestine. Let us all join in making Du’ah to Allāh Ta’ala to bring an end to the sufferings of the innocent Palestinian men, women and children. Also, let us all join hands in boycotting the Israeli products in their entirety.
A very pertinent question arises here: Islam being Deen-ul-Haqq why is it that today its adherents, viz. the Muslims, are going through the state of utter disgrace and humiliation?
The answer is: Allāh Subhānahu wa Ta’ala has held back His Nusrat (Divine Help). He has held back His Nusrat due to fact that the Ummah of the noble Prophet (Sallallāhu ‘alaihe wasallam) has invoked Allāh’s wrath by their actions. We have strayed from the straight path, the path that Allāh has defined in His Book as Swirat al Mustaqīm, and as a result we are not only denied Allāh’s Nusrat, we are actually being punished by Allāh through the Kuffār. The unfortunate thing is we are not even aware that we have gone astray.
There are a number of transgressions brazenly committed by us today due to which we have invoked Allāh’s wrath upon us. Given below are only a few of them.
Love of the World
On the authority of Thawbān , the Prophet (Sallallāhu ‘alaihe wasallam) said:
“The People will soon summon one another to attack you as people when eating invite others to share their food.” Someone asked, “Will that be because of our small numbers at that time?” He replied, “No, you will be numerous at that time: but you will be froth and scum like that carried down by a torrent (of water), and Allāh will take the fear of you from the breasts (hearts) of your enemy and cast al-wahn into your hearts.” Someone asked, “O Messenger of Allāh, what is al-wahn?” He replied, “Love of the world and dislike of death.” (An authentic hadith recorded by Abu Dawud and Ahmad).
Hadhrat Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi (Rahmatullāhi ‘alayh) in a tafseer once said that Allāh Ta’ala has kept different systems for Masjidul Harām in Makkah and Masjidul Aqsa in Palestine. The system that Allāh Ta’ala has kept for Masjidul Harām is that it will always be under divine protection no matter what the condition of the Muslims may be. Allāh Ta’ala will never allow the Kuffār to take control of the Ka’bah Shareef. That is why, when Abraha and his army of elephants went to attack the Ka’bah, Allāh Ta’ala protected His house using small birds which destroyed Abraha and his powerful army.
However, the system of Masjidul Aqsa is very much different.
The condition of Masjidul Aqsa is based on the condition of the Muslim Ummah. If Muslims live in the obedience of Allāh Ta’ala then Allāh Ta’ala will bless them with the control of the Masjid. But Allāh forbid, if the Muslims move away from the obedience of Allāh Ta’ala, He will take away the control of the blessed lands and hand it over to our enemies.”
While the Barbarian Israel is busy battering the innocent Gaza civilians the Islamic countries are busy building world’s tallest buildings (e.g. Bruj Khalifa) and the world’s first climate-controlled city that will also have the world’s largest shopping center. Isn’t this a manifest display of love of the world?
Emulating the Kuffār
Today we (Muslims) have resolutely entrenched ourselves in the Western ideologies. We have firmly accepted the Western culture to dominate our lives and as time passes the Western influence penetrates more and more deeply into the fiber of Islamic society. In fact, some of us actually take pride in following the Kuffār culture. Rasulullāh (sallallāhu alaihe wasallam) never hated Kuffār, but he detested their ways. Today we are deeply in love with their ways. We have let the West choose for us our lifestyle, the literature that we read, the way we dress-up, the food that we eat with all its harām or doubtful ingredients, the way we perform our wedding ceremonies and so on and so forth.
One of the worst things that the Western Culture has ‘presented’ to us is the constant urge to be entertained. As a result today we have become enslaved to the electronic media that thrives on entertainment. Watching TV (equipped with wide screen TVs, some of our Muslim homes’ living rooms have actually become like ‘theatres’), browsing the filth on the Internet, socializing via Facebook and other social networks – all these vices have become today’s accepted norms. Hours and hours of our precious time is wasted on WhatsApp. Our kids’ spare time is spent in busying themselves with play stations and ipads and we parents watch them with approval.
In a bayān (lecture) Moulana Sulaiman Khatani says during the time he spent in Jordan, they visited an Islamic University while on a gasht (Jawla or visiting Muslim brothers), in the company of two doctors from Syria. When they entered the University they saw students carrying Bukhari, Muslim and Tirmidhi in their hands but all of them were dressed in jeans and T-shirts and they were all clean shaven. Outwardly there was no display of apparent Sunnah in them. When they entered the Director’s office they met the Head of the Islamic University and he was clad in a suit and a tie and there was a big self-portrait in the office. When the mahol (environment) is wrong then we witness such disregard of Islamic ways of life.
What a great irony it is that we Muslims love imitating and aping the very people that are killing and maiming our brothers and sisters and their children! We are not even aware that in itself, this is one of the reasons we are being punished.
Not Fulfilling the Obligation of Amr Bill Ma’roof – Nahy Anil Munkar
Amr Bil Ma’roof and Nahy Anil Munkar (commanding righteousness and forbidding evil) is a sacred obligation on every Muslim. Regarding this obligation, it is mentioned in the Hadith narrated by Hadhrat Abu Dardaa’ (radhiAllāhu anhu): “Hadhrat ‘Aishah (RadhiAllāhu ‘anha) says:
‘
Once the Holy Prophet (Sallallāhu ‘alaihe wasallam) entered the house and I guessed from his face that something of great importance had occurred. He did not talk to anyone, and after making Wudhu he entered the Masjid. I stood behind the wall to hear what he said. He sat at the pulpit and after praising Allāh, he said, “O Muslims! Allāh has commanded you to call people to good deeds and prevent them from committing sins; otherwise a time will come when you will pray to Him; but He will not listen to you; you will ask your needs of Him, but He will not grant them; you will appeal to Him for His help against your enemies, but He will not help you.” After saying this, he came down from the pulpit.”’
Aren’t we witnessing the situation that is described in the above hadith? How many of us are involved in the effort of Da’wat and Tabligh (Amr Bil Ma’roof and Nahy Anil Munkar)? In fact, once we involve ourselves in this effort, inshaAllāh, the first two vices, and many more, will automatically fade away from our lives.
What Muslims all over the world are going through today is a dire wake-up call for the entire Ummah. Let us totally migrate from the above vices and start obeying Allāh’s commands, bringing the Mubarak Sunāh of our beloved Prophet (sallallāhu alaihe wasallam) into our lives. Let us all make Taubāh and Istighfar and Du’ā in abundance that may Allāh save the Ummah from His wrath…Ameen.
And Allāh Ta’ala Knows Best.
Link: http://muslimvillage.com/2014/07/27/56330/palestine-tragedy-allahs-nusrat/.
Resistance to Israeli occupation can and must take many forms
01 August 2014
Susan Abulhawa
Source: Middle East Monitor
Propaganda for world consumption aside, Israelis have never minced their words about their ultimate aim of Eretz Israel, so-called "Greater Israel", from the Mediterranean to the River Jordan. This is alluded to in the Israeli flag, the two blue lines of which each represent a body of water, with only Jews between them, symbolised by the lone Star of David. Their opposition to a viable, contiguous, autonomous Palestinian state has always been explicit and adamant. Everything they've done to-date has been to achieve Jewish dominance in all of Palestine and the region as a whole, demographically in the former as well as economically and militarily in the latter. The Palestinian body and stubborn will to exist have posed the only hindrance to these supremacist aspirations. However, through rapacious construction of illegal Jewish-only colonies, regular military destruction of Palestinian institutions, extrajudicial executions, massive random incarceration, institutionalised oppression in all aspects of life, social engineering and more, Israel has effectively managed Palestinian resistance. All of Israel's wars, except the Yom Kippur War, were initiated by the Zionist state for the purpose of regional hegemony and territorial expansion. Expecting Israel to negotiate in good faith for Palestinian autonomy, therefore, is naive in the extreme. Equally absurd is the belief that world powers, including the United States, are honest brokers for justice which might usher-in even the minimal dignity of demilitarised Palestinian self-determination on the mere 22 per cent of historic Palestine comprising the West Bank and Gaza.
It has been clear to most of us for a very long time that the Palestinian struggle must be waged on the grassroots level, both in Palestine and abroad. Israel's current onslaught on Gaza, a repetition of the carnage inflicted on this seaside prison twice before in the past six years, should remove all doubt that we have to rely solely on ourselves and people of conscience around the world to effectuate our own liberty. As with every national liberation struggle, Palestinian resistance occurs on multiple levels and is evolving constantly in response to ever-unfolding challenges and changing political winds. The reality now is that we cannot wait for world leaders to save us and time is running out. The older generation with indigenous memory, knowledge and wisdom is dying; the land is shrinking under our feet; and it is being sucked dry, making desert what once bloomed. Now, watching Gaza burn and bleed again and again, the national impulse to organise and intensify resistance feels more urgent. What follows, in a top line overview, is an attempt to summarise current and proposed resistance strategies, including boycott tactics, active resistance within Palestine, including sabotage operations, my layperson's grasp of legal pursuits, and the need for an inclusive, representative leadership body.
Somewhere between these two forms of active resistance are tatbeesh and sabotage. Tatbeesh refers to rock-throwing demonstrations, where Palestinian youth hurl stones at invading Israeli jeeps, tanks and armed soldiers. This tactic, although symbolic, is embedded deeply in Palestinian resistance. However, it is costly in terms of human life, expected (even welcomed) by bored occupation soldiers, and sometimes works to dissipate the anger and frustration of Palestinian youth, which could be harnessed for more strategic resistance.
Unlike non-violent, armed or tatbeesh resistance, sabotage is not widespread; where it happens, it has an impact, even if disorganised or reactionary. Sabotage resistance targets the apparatus of Israeli oppression, taking care not to harm life. In Palestine, this apparatus is vast, encompassing a sophisticated infrastructure of apartheid that relegates the Palestinian natives to encircled, deprived ghettos in order to accord comfort, exclusivity and privilege to Jews. It includes a web of Jewish-only roads connecting Jewish-only colonies with Jerusalem, a network of checkpoints and roadblocks, the 20-foot concrete separation wall, watchtowers and electric fences. These are what lie above ground; below lies a system of pipes that divert Palestinian water to Israel and its illegal colonies. There are cables and other connections that run beneath our feet to maintain these segregated colonies, built on confiscated Palestinian land. This infrastructure curtails Palestinian liberty, movement and access to natural resources; it should be a legitimate target.
The aim of sabotage resistance would be to make it very costly and inconvenient for Israel to maintain the physical framework of apartheid. At a minimum, Palestinians could remove the unmanned roadblocks that wreak havoc for so many communities when they're set up.
In a recent essay, Richard Falk, legal scholar and former UN Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights, outlined the potential advantages and challenges to pursuing legal action at the International Criminal Court (ICC) to address Israeli violations of the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions. According to Falk, despite the associated challenges and pitfalls, "the evidence overwhelmingly supports basic Palestinian allegations" including, among others, the crime of apartheid; "recourse to the ICC remains a valuable trump card in the PA deck... playing it might begin to change the balance of forces bearing on the conflict that has for decades now denied the Palestinian people their basic rights under international law." There have been previous calls to prosecute Israelis at the ICC, but thus far no concrete action has been taken. On the other hand, a July 2014 letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon from legal experts and legal networks called on the UN and contracting parties to the Geneva Convention to take action pursuant to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion, which deemed Israel's construction of a separation wall on occupied Palestinian land to be illegal.
Legal remedies are also available to individual Palestinians who are citizens of other countries. The recent beating of 15-year old US citizen Tariq AbuKhdeir by Israeli police, recorded on camera, raises the possibility of filing civil suits in America against Israel, the greatest single recipient of US foreign aid. Further, based on private correspondence with legal experts, there may be a legal basis for law suits against Netanyahu and the many Israeli ministers and Knesset members who called openly for violence, murder and revenge against Palestinians. Their hysteria fuelled a national clamour for vengeance that led to the beating of AbuKhdeir and the gruesome burning to death of his cousin Muhammad AbuKhdeir. Additionally, there may be a legal precedent for US citizens of Palestinian descent to sue Israeli institutions in respect of stolen property.
Finally, the concept of universal jurisdiction opens endless possibilities to prosecute Israelis for war crimes or companies for complicity in war crimes. The most famous application of universal jurisdiction was the Spanish prosecution of Augusto Pinochet for crimes committed in Chile. The potential (or absurdity) of pursuing such avenues is at least worthy of further discussion and strategising among legal experts and activists concerned with holding Israel to account for its crimes.
The PA's rejection of the 2006 election results that replaced Fatah with Hamas members in leadership positions severed the West Bank from Gaza. Since then, the Palestinian populace has longed for what has been termed a "unity government" that would bring Fatah and Hamas together. While uniting these two leading Palestinian political parties is an important step, their coalescence represents neither Palestinian unity nor government. An autonomous government cannot exist under occupation; at most it becomes a subcontractor of the occupation. Nor can Fatah and Hamas alone represent the Palestinian people. For a start, there are other Palestinian parties to be considered. More importantly, voices from other segments of Palestinian society, including refugees, diaspora Palestinians and 1948 Palestinians must be heard and their opinions included. In all of these segments, space (currently unavailable or restricted) must also be carved out for women and the youth. The need to hold truly inclusive national elections cannot be overstated.
Palestine is being wiped off the map. Our communities are dying a slow death of deliberate attrition, neglect and ghettoisation. Israel continues to steal our lands, heritage, homes and history, and while Palestinian resistance is the only reason that its colonial project is still incomplete, time is not on our side. What we do have on our side, though, our truest strength, is truth and the moral high ground of an indigenous people fighting a system of colonial apartheid and ethnic cleansing. All resistance tactics available to us that maintain this fundamental strength should be explored or intensified.
Susan Abulhawa is a Palestinian-American writer and human rights activist. She is the author of a bestselling novel, Mornings in Jenin, and the founder of a non-governmental organisation, Playgrounds for Palestine.
Link: www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/guest-writers/13156-resistance-to-israeli-occupation-can-and-must-take-many-forms.
Susan Abulhawa
Source: Middle East Monitor
Propaganda for world consumption aside, Israelis have never minced their words about their ultimate aim of Eretz Israel, so-called "Greater Israel", from the Mediterranean to the River Jordan. This is alluded to in the Israeli flag, the two blue lines of which each represent a body of water, with only Jews between them, symbolised by the lone Star of David. Their opposition to a viable, contiguous, autonomous Palestinian state has always been explicit and adamant. Everything they've done to-date has been to achieve Jewish dominance in all of Palestine and the region as a whole, demographically in the former as well as economically and militarily in the latter. The Palestinian body and stubborn will to exist have posed the only hindrance to these supremacist aspirations. However, through rapacious construction of illegal Jewish-only colonies, regular military destruction of Palestinian institutions, extrajudicial executions, massive random incarceration, institutionalised oppression in all aspects of life, social engineering and more, Israel has effectively managed Palestinian resistance. All of Israel's wars, except the Yom Kippur War, were initiated by the Zionist state for the purpose of regional hegemony and territorial expansion. Expecting Israel to negotiate in good faith for Palestinian autonomy, therefore, is naive in the extreme. Equally absurd is the belief that world powers, including the United States, are honest brokers for justice which might usher-in even the minimal dignity of demilitarised Palestinian self-determination on the mere 22 per cent of historic Palestine comprising the West Bank and Gaza.
It has been clear to most of us for a very long time that the Palestinian struggle must be waged on the grassroots level, both in Palestine and abroad. Israel's current onslaught on Gaza, a repetition of the carnage inflicted on this seaside prison twice before in the past six years, should remove all doubt that we have to rely solely on ourselves and people of conscience around the world to effectuate our own liberty. As with every national liberation struggle, Palestinian resistance occurs on multiple levels and is evolving constantly in response to ever-unfolding challenges and changing political winds. The reality now is that we cannot wait for world leaders to save us and time is running out. The older generation with indigenous memory, knowledge and wisdom is dying; the land is shrinking under our feet; and it is being sucked dry, making desert what once bloomed. Now, watching Gaza burn and bleed again and again, the national impulse to organise and intensify resistance feels more urgent. What follows, in a top line overview, is an attempt to summarise current and proposed resistance strategies, including boycott tactics, active resistance within Palestine, including sabotage operations, my layperson's grasp of legal pursuits, and the need for an inclusive, representative leadership body.
1. Boycott
The Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign has been one of the most effective Palestinian resistance strategies in recent times. The movement has grown exponentially since its inception in 2005, making huge strides into mainstream discourse and political action around the world. Its success has proven enough of a threat to Israeli hegemony to prompt a well-funded, multi-pronged attack on BDS organisations and individual supporters, including smear campaigns, law suits and surveillance. However, despite the success of BDS internationally, boycott tactics are not well adopted at home within Palestine. It has been suggested that this is due to the post-Oslo logic and ensuing realities in the homeland which have worked to minimise Palestinian national values regarding the struggle for liberation. However, a more likely explanation has to do with the logistics of internal boycott and the lack of local pro-boycott organising. In addition to Mahmoud Abbas's public opposition to boycotting Israel, Palestinians in the West Bank, including Jerusalem, and Gaza, are both physically and economically captive, often having no choice but to buy Israeli products. Despite this economic bondage, there is still much that can be done to spur a culture of boycott within the homeland. Spending by Palestinians has been estimated at billions of dollars annually for Israel's economy. Campaigning and organising for the removal of Israeli products, particularly those for which there are local alternatives, could prove to be a fruitful resistance tactic, as it would have an immediate economic impact on some Israeli companies. It would also contribute to fostering less reliance on Israel and greater self-sufficiency.2. Active and passive resistance, sabotage and "tatbeesh" in the West Bank, Palestine
Active and passive resistance against the Israeli occupation are deeply rooted in Palestinian society. The passive resistance of sumud, or steadfastness, can be found in daily activity, where Palestinians continue to attend school, work, till their lands, marry, give birth and live their lives despite the daily humiliations of endless waiting, checkpoints, colour-coded IDs and license plates, or confinement to a specific radius. Active resistance has been armed and unarmed/non-violent, although the former has diminished greatly in the past decade, with the exception of acts of self-defence by resistance groups in Gaza, including Hamas, the PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) and Islamic Jihad. Non-violent resistance tactics, while largely invisible, have a long tradition in Palestinian society, where they have developed naturally over the decades, taking many forms. The most widely noted in the west has been the example of weekly protests against Israel's apartheid wall in Bil'in.Somewhere between these two forms of active resistance are tatbeesh and sabotage. Tatbeesh refers to rock-throwing demonstrations, where Palestinian youth hurl stones at invading Israeli jeeps, tanks and armed soldiers. This tactic, although symbolic, is embedded deeply in Palestinian resistance. However, it is costly in terms of human life, expected (even welcomed) by bored occupation soldiers, and sometimes works to dissipate the anger and frustration of Palestinian youth, which could be harnessed for more strategic resistance.
Unlike non-violent, armed or tatbeesh resistance, sabotage is not widespread; where it happens, it has an impact, even if disorganised or reactionary. Sabotage resistance targets the apparatus of Israeli oppression, taking care not to harm life. In Palestine, this apparatus is vast, encompassing a sophisticated infrastructure of apartheid that relegates the Palestinian natives to encircled, deprived ghettos in order to accord comfort, exclusivity and privilege to Jews. It includes a web of Jewish-only roads connecting Jewish-only colonies with Jerusalem, a network of checkpoints and roadblocks, the 20-foot concrete separation wall, watchtowers and electric fences. These are what lie above ground; below lies a system of pipes that divert Palestinian water to Israel and its illegal colonies. There are cables and other connections that run beneath our feet to maintain these segregated colonies, built on confiscated Palestinian land. This infrastructure curtails Palestinian liberty, movement and access to natural resources; it should be a legitimate target.
The aim of sabotage resistance would be to make it very costly and inconvenient for Israel to maintain the physical framework of apartheid. At a minimum, Palestinians could remove the unmanned roadblocks that wreak havoc for so many communities when they're set up.
3. Resistance within 1948 Palestine
While Palestinians with Israeli citizenship ("1948 Palestinians") have the right to vote in the Zionist state, they are subject to at least 50 racist laws that exclude them from rights and privileges afforded to Jewish citizens, including the right of return, the right to reclaim property, to buy or lease land designated for exclusive Jewish use, to live with his/her spouse in Israel if he or she has Palestinian ID, and more. Although this segment of Palestinian society is often overlooked, the 1948 Palestinians have waged their own resistance against institutionalised Israeli racism and often demonstrate (and are killed) in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank when Israel embarks on military sprees which terrorise the local populations. A recent noteworthy example of resistance includes the inspiring efforts of the villagers of Kufr Bir'em to reclaim their original village. Greater communication, coordination and reciprocal solidarity with 1948 Palestinians is needed.4. Legal Remedies
Although Israel has waged an absurd "lawfare" campaign against Palestinians and their supporters abroad, by attempting to equate political activism with anti-Semitism, Palestinians have not explored legal options in international courts sufficiently to hold Israel to account for its criminal actions. In 2009, the Palestinian Authority (PA) abandoned a rare opportunity to refer an audit of Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity, as outlined in the UN's Goldstone Report following the 2008-2009 massacre in Gaza, to the UN Security Council for further action. Despite this apparent mistake by the PA, ample legal venues remain viable options for the Palestinians.In a recent essay, Richard Falk, legal scholar and former UN Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights, outlined the potential advantages and challenges to pursuing legal action at the International Criminal Court (ICC) to address Israeli violations of the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions. According to Falk, despite the associated challenges and pitfalls, "the evidence overwhelmingly supports basic Palestinian allegations" including, among others, the crime of apartheid; "recourse to the ICC remains a valuable trump card in the PA deck... playing it might begin to change the balance of forces bearing on the conflict that has for decades now denied the Palestinian people their basic rights under international law." There have been previous calls to prosecute Israelis at the ICC, but thus far no concrete action has been taken. On the other hand, a July 2014 letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon from legal experts and legal networks called on the UN and contracting parties to the Geneva Convention to take action pursuant to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion, which deemed Israel's construction of a separation wall on occupied Palestinian land to be illegal.
Legal remedies are also available to individual Palestinians who are citizens of other countries. The recent beating of 15-year old US citizen Tariq AbuKhdeir by Israeli police, recorded on camera, raises the possibility of filing civil suits in America against Israel, the greatest single recipient of US foreign aid. Further, based on private correspondence with legal experts, there may be a legal basis for law suits against Netanyahu and the many Israeli ministers and Knesset members who called openly for violence, murder and revenge against Palestinians. Their hysteria fuelled a national clamour for vengeance that led to the beating of AbuKhdeir and the gruesome burning to death of his cousin Muhammad AbuKhdeir. Additionally, there may be a legal precedent for US citizens of Palestinian descent to sue Israeli institutions in respect of stolen property.
Finally, the concept of universal jurisdiction opens endless possibilities to prosecute Israelis for war crimes or companies for complicity in war crimes. The most famous application of universal jurisdiction was the Spanish prosecution of Augusto Pinochet for crimes committed in Chile. The potential (or absurdity) of pursuing such avenues is at least worthy of further discussion and strategising among legal experts and activists concerned with holding Israel to account for its crimes.
5. Inclusive, comprehensive elections for representative unity leadership
Whatever it was or hoped to be, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has become a reactionary, ineffective bureaucracy. It has proven itself woefully incapable of protecting Palestinians from Israeli terror and unable or unwilling to implement or advance resistance initiatives. In fact, the PA's ironclad security coordination with Israel's occupation forces has made Palestinians more vulnerable, and on several occasions it has acted to sabotage promising avenues of resistance. In addition to thwarting action on the Goldstone Report, they have also been a hindrance to the growing success of the BDS campaign, speaking publicly against it.The PA's rejection of the 2006 election results that replaced Fatah with Hamas members in leadership positions severed the West Bank from Gaza. Since then, the Palestinian populace has longed for what has been termed a "unity government" that would bring Fatah and Hamas together. While uniting these two leading Palestinian political parties is an important step, their coalescence represents neither Palestinian unity nor government. An autonomous government cannot exist under occupation; at most it becomes a subcontractor of the occupation. Nor can Fatah and Hamas alone represent the Palestinian people. For a start, there are other Palestinian parties to be considered. More importantly, voices from other segments of Palestinian society, including refugees, diaspora Palestinians and 1948 Palestinians must be heard and their opinions included. In all of these segments, space (currently unavailable or restricted) must also be carved out for women and the youth. The need to hold truly inclusive national elections cannot be overstated.
Palestine is being wiped off the map. Our communities are dying a slow death of deliberate attrition, neglect and ghettoisation. Israel continues to steal our lands, heritage, homes and history, and while Palestinian resistance is the only reason that its colonial project is still incomplete, time is not on our side. What we do have on our side, though, our truest strength, is truth and the moral high ground of an indigenous people fighting a system of colonial apartheid and ethnic cleansing. All resistance tactics available to us that maintain this fundamental strength should be explored or intensified.
Susan Abulhawa is a Palestinian-American writer and human rights activist. She is the author of a bestselling novel, Mornings in Jenin, and the founder of a non-governmental organisation, Playgrounds for Palestine.
Link: www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/guest-writers/13156-resistance-to-israeli-occupation-can-and-must-take-many-forms.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)