Labels

Saturday, July 10, 2010

More on [a] conversation with Ibish:"I think it's obvious how much the Palestinian citizens of Israel have to gain in any peace agreement..."

More on conversation with Ibish
Media Mention of Hussein Ibish in The Meretz USA Blog - July 8, 2010 - 12:00am
http://www.americantaskforce.org/daily_news_article/2010/07/08/1278561600

The Web editor of In These Times required a 2,500 word limitation for the online article. The ISRAEL HORIZONS version, pending for the fall, will include almost all of my discussion with Hussein Ibish. What I particularly regret having had to exclude from the ITT piece is the following further response from Hussein Ibish to my question on how he felt about the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state:

... it's perfectly reasonable and morally appropriate for everybody to be concerned and interested about the rights of the Palestinian minority of Israeli citizens in Israel proper. But I don't think this is an appropriate subject for negotiations between Israel and the PLO. It introduces another complication in an already overburdened negotiation agenda and blurs the crucial distinction between Israel and the occupation that should be the basis for all Palestinian diplomacy.

People worry about the status of Palestinian citizens of Israel in the context of a two-state agreement, but I completely fail to understand the logic of this. Israel's Palestinian citizens already have a legal status that allows them to pursue their rights within the Israeli political and legal system, and they've been partly successful in doing that already. It strikes me that not only is this the path forward for them to secure their full rights as Israeli citizens, but that nothing conceivable could possibly strengthen their position more than the realization of a two-state end of conflict agreement. Of course there will always be ethnic and religious discrimination because of certain prejudices in Israel and everywhere around the world.

I don't think we should kid ourselves that human beings are suddenly going to become reasonable creatures across the board. However, it seems to me that most of the systematic and onerous forms of discrimination against the Palestinian citizens of Israel have their origins in the fact that these Israelis have kinship, narrative, cultural and ideological ties to the other side in a conflict. In other words, they're considered a possible fifth column, a potential security problem, as well as an anomaly within the "Jewish and democratic state."

It seems to me obvious that an end to the conflict would largely, and over time probably entirely, remove this powerful and definitive obstacle to the complete integration of Palestinian citizens as full citizens of Israel without legal forms of discrimination, and raise the barriers to their participation in all sectors of society. Moreover, Palestinian citizens of Israel would no longer be cut off from the Arab world, as they largely have been until now, but would rather be poised to be Israel's ambassadors to the Arabs, literally and figuratively, especially in terms of business and commerce, as well as culture. In fact, I think it's obvious how much the Palestinian citizens of Israel have to gain in any peace agreement, even if their specific issues are not subject to negotiation, and I just don't understand how people fail to see this. I think the issue is raised really in order to criticize the concept of negotiations and a negotiated agreement rather than out of any thoughtful, serious approach to advancing the real, practical interests of the Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Newsweek: How to sell Americans on the idea of Israeli settlements

"...talking about 'violations of building codes' when a TV station is showing the removal of a house that looks older than the modern state of Israel is simply catastrophic."

Chosen Words

A pollster's recommendations on how to sell Americans on the idea of Israeli settlements.

How do you sell the American public on the idea that Israel has the right to maintain or even expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank? Be positive. Turn the issue away from settlements and toward peace. Invoke ethnic cleansing.

Those are three of the recommendations made by Frank Luntz, a political consultant and pollster, in an internal study he wrote for the Washington-based group The Israel Project (TIP) on effective ways to talk to Americans about the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. The 117-page study, titled The Israel Project's 2009 Global Language Dictionary, was commissioned by the nonprofit group, which aims to promote Israel's side of the story, and leaked to NEWSWEEK....READ MORE

Friday, July 9, 2010

LATimes... ISRAEL: Six years later, UN says barrier is still a big problem

LATimes... ISRAEL: Six years later, UN says barrier is still a big problem

Six years ago, on July 9, 2004, the International Court of Justice in The Hague gave an advisory opinion on Israel's construction of a part-concrete, part-fence barrier running along its borders with the West Bank. The court stated that in addition to being "contrary to international law," the construction of the barrier does not justify Israel's security objectives.

Since then, United Nations officials operating in the occupied Palestinian territories have marked the anniversary of this opinion with heartbreaking stories of the impact of the barrier on the lives and livelihood of almost three million Palestinians living in the West Bank, but mainly those caught between the barrier and the Israeli border, in what has been termed the "seam zone."

UN officials from the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs for the occupied Palestinian territories (OCHA), the World Health Organization and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees warned this week that unabated construction of the barrier continues to have adverse effects on the everyday lives of Palestinians.

They said the barrier and Israeli military laws associated with it had made it very difficult for Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to reach medical facilities in Jerusalem without first obtaining a permit from the army. They said it sometimes takes patients several days to get a permit for any of East Jerusalem's six specialized hospitals.

Farmers have also had difficulty reaching their farm land in the seam zone, officials said.

Currently there are 57 barrier gates which open on a daily, seasonal or seasonal-weekly basis, officials said.

The majority of the gates are open only during the olive harvest season and usually for limited periods during the day. As "visitors," farmers are not permitted to stay on their land overnight and must return at the last gate opening time, officials added.

The combination of the restricted allocation of visitor permits and the limited number and opening times of the barrier gates has severely curtailed agricultural practice and undermined rural livelihoods, officials said....READ MORE


Thursday, July 8, 2010

IBISHBLOG: What's lurking beneath the smiles at the Obama-Netanyahu lovefest?

IBISHBLOG: What's lurking beneath the smiles at the Obama-Netanyahu lovefest?

My letter to the Economist RE Palestine and Israel- Hamas thinks time is on its side

comment i left online
RE: Palestine and Israel- Hamas thinks time is on its side

http://www.economist.com/node/16542181?story_id=16542181&fsrc=rss

Dear Editor,

Time is on HAMAS's side, but is HAMAS really on Palestine's side? If Islamists manage to sabotage the current negotiations sovereign Israel wins more time to take more land and radicals win an avalanche of reasons to become even more radical.... Palestinians in exile will remain in exile, and
rather than investing in secular civil institutions and ideas Palestinians remaining in the impoverished fragments of what was once historic Palestine will be forced to fund and empower either Islamic or Jewish efforts to win sympathy and support.

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab


My letters 7-8-2010

RE: In Israel, the Noble vs. The Ugly
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/opinion/08kristof.html?ref=global

Dear Sir,

Regarding Nicholas D. Kristof's fawning "In Israel, the Noble vs. The Ugly": In short, an American Rabbi moving to Israel gets to be a hero because Israel is cruel to Palestinians.... The vast majority of Palestinians are refugees with most already living in forced exile as home wrecking Israel intentionally fragments and impoverishes Palestinian families in many different ways.

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab

*************************
RE: Trudy Rubin's Worldview: Politics come before peace: Domestic pressures are working against meaningful talks in the Middle East.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20100708_Worldview__Politics_come_before_peace.html

Dear Editor,

Obama was warm towards Abbas too- just last week... but Rubin did not write about that, or acknowledge it in her op-ed about Netanyahu's recent visit to the White House. Perhaps she did not get the memo that yes indeed there really is such a thing as a Palestinian- and there is a dire need for a real Palestinian state.


Actions speak louder than words: Israel's ongoing investments in projects that destroy Palestinian homes and communities are a rather obvious sign that Zionists will continue to destroy Palestine and Palestinians rather than working towards justice and peace. It is not just about leadership. Fact is every Israeli settler in the illegally occupied territories has chosen to violate international law and scorn the necessity of shaping a two state solution to end the Israel/Palestine conflict.

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab

*************************
RE: After the Meeting Between Obama and Netanyahu
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/opinion/l08mideast.html?ref=opinion

Dear Editor,

Good to see the excellent letter by Mohamed Khodr calmly and clearly stating the facts regarding Israel's refusal to respect UN Resolutions and peace plans.

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab

*************************
RE: President Obama's new Middle East course has promise
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/07/AR2010070704479.html

Dear Editor,

What has more promise than anything Obama might say, is the fact we live inundated by the information age and Israeli propagandists can no longer get away with what they once did: More and more Americans know beyond the shadow of a doubt that there really is such a thing as a Palestinian- and that Palestinians are being systematically oppressed, persecuted, impoverished and displaced by invading Zionists who want the land but not the people of that land.

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab
NOTES
In 1948 United Nations (page 4 on the PDF file http://unispal.un.org/pdfs/AC1SR207.pdf ) Mediator Count Folke Bernadotte pointed out that "It would be an offence against the principles of justice if those innocent victims [Palestinian refugees] could not return to their homes while [Zionist] immigrants flowed into Palestine to take their place."

UN Resolution 194 from 1948 : The refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible

"The United Nations had certainly not intended that the Jewish State should rid itself of its Arab citizens" 5 May 1949 Application of Israel for admission to membership in the United Nations http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/85255e950050831085255e95004fa9c/1db943e43c280a26052565fa004d8174?OpenDocument


Refugees and the Right of Return

"Palestinian refugees must be given the option to exercise their right of return (as well as receive compensation for their losses arising from their dispossession and displacement) though refugees may prefer other options such as: (i) resettlement in third countries, (ii) resettlement in a newly independent Palestine (even though they originate from that part of Palestine which became Israel) or (iii) normalization of their legal status in the host country where they currently reside. What is important is that individual refugees decide for themselves which option they prefer – a decision must not be imposed upon them." http://www.plomission.us/index.php?page=core-issues-3

THE Arab Peace Initiative

Refugees, Borders & Jerusalem...

"Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world."Eleanor Roosevelt

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

ADC Supplements NY Times Report on Tax-Exempt Funds Aiding Illegal Settlements

ADC Supplements NY Times Report on Tax-Exempt Funds Aiding Illegal Settlements

Washington, DC | www.adc.org | July 6, 2010 | ADC welcomes the NY Times article, which reemphasizes ADC's on-going campaign in addressing the role American NGO's play in funding illegal Israeli settlements. The article titled, "Tax-Exempt Funds Aid Settlements in West Bank," highlighted the issue of American non-profit organizations (NGO's) funding illegal settlement activity in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). The full article can be read here.


Although the article is fair and balanced, there are more components pertaining to the legality of the issue, which supplement the claims raised by the NY Times. Two key points not mentioned at length in the article are the engagement of the NGO's in discriminatory practices and deceptive fundraising. Research by ADC has uncovered that these NGO's are engaged in discriminatory practices by funding projects and activities which cannot be used by Palestinians. Such discriminatory practices are against American public policy, and NGO's are prohibited from engaging in such activity as described in the US Supreme Court Case of Bob Jones University v. The United States. In the case, the High Court agreed that the IRS can disqualify organizations that act contrary to public policy from receiving tax-exempt status from the federal government. The court upheld the IRS's disqualification of Bob Jones University as a tax-exempt organization, despite its educational mission, because its racially discriminatory practices were found to be contrary to public policy.

Further, many American NGO's are engaging in deceptive fundraising. These organizations solicit donations by claiming they are raising funds for things such as "educational purposes" or "community development" when in reality the funds are used in some cases for the purchase of weapons and paramilitary material. Deceptive fundraising can lead to an organization losing its 501(c)(3) status, as well as possible criminal actions against those perpetrating the fraud.

The article attempts to distinguish between "outposts" and "settlements;" however, it is ADC's position that there is no difference between the two, as both are illegal under international law and amount to a continuous and unjust occupation of the OPT. Any peace agreement must include the immediate freeze and dismantlement of all settlements.

ADC has been engaging with a broad range of coalition partners in addressing the issue of illegal funding of settlements. Over the past year, ADC has filed numerous complaints with the Department of Treasury against organizations believed to be in violation of their 501(c)(3) status.

Prior releases about ADC's work on this matter:
ADC will continue looking into American NGO's funding of illegal settlement activity, and hopes to file more complaints in the very near future.
For more information about the campaign, please contact the ADC Legal Department by calling 202-244-2990 or via e-mail to aayoub@adc.org.
###

Contact: legal@adc.org
202-244-2990

NOTE TO EDITORS: The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), which is non-profit, non-sectarian and non-partisan, is the largest Arab-American civil rights organization in the United States. It was founded in 1980 by former Senator James Abourezk to protect the civil rights of people of Arab descent in the United States and to promote the cultural heritage of the Arabs. ADC has 38 chapters nationwide, including chapters in every major city in the country, and members in all 50 states.

The ADC Research Institute (ADC-RI), which was founded in 1981, is a Section 501(c)(3) educational organization that sponsors a wide range of programs on behalf of Arab Americans and of importance to all Americans. ADC-RI programs include research studies, seminars, conferences and publications that document and analyze the discrimination faced by Arab Americans in the workplace, schools, media, and governmental agencies and institutions. ADC-RI also celebrates the rich cultural heritage of the Arabs.

ADC Research Institute (ADC-RI) | www.adc.org
1732 Wisconsin Ave., NW | Washington, DC | 20007
Tel: 202-244-2990 | Fax: 202-333-3980 | E-mail: media@adc.org

Monday, July 5, 2010

Jordan's King Abdullah reiterates that the region will not enjoy peace and security without resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

AMMAN (JT) –– His Majesty King Abdullah on Monday met with UK Foreign Minister William Hague and discussed means to achieve progress in efforts to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict.

King Abdullah and Hague underscored the need to end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict on the basis of the two-state solution and within a comprehensive regional context that ensures the restoration of Arab rights and brings about peace and security to the region, a Royal Court statement said.

The King underlined the need for the international community to take effective action to move peace efforts forward, warning that a continuation of the current dangerous situation will increase tensions and ignite violence.

The Monarch reiterated that the region will not enjoy peace and security without resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This will be achieved, he said, by ending the Israeli occupation and establishing an independent and viable Palestinian state on its national soil that lives side-by-side with Israel.

His Majesty's visit to the UK comes on the heels of a trip to the Kazakh capital, Astana, where he held talks Sunday with President Nursultan Nazarbayev on bilateral ties and the latest developments in the Middle East.

King Abdullah is scheduled to travel to the US where he will be joined by Her Majesty Queen Rania to participate in an economic forum in Idaho.

Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh said that Jordan and other Arab and Muslim countries have a shared vision for a permanent peace, the Jordan News Agency, Petra, reported. In a lecture delivered at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, the minister said that the end of the Arab-Israeli conflict only comes through the establishment of an independent and viable Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital within the 1967 borders, an agreed-on and just solution to the Pal?stinian refugees issue based on UN Security Council Resolution 194, and returning the Golan Heights to Syria as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories.


6 July 2010


IBISHBLOG: The Palestinians have set the stage for Netanyahu's Washington trip

http://www.ibishblog.com/blog/hibish/2010/07/05/palestinians_have_set_stage_netanyahus_washington_trip

This week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his entourage will be visiting Washington and meeting with Pres. Obama tomorrow, but it all comes very much in the context of last month's highly successful trip by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and an entourage of PLO leaders, the centerpiece of which was a meeting on June 9 with Obama in the White House. The logical of the Abbas visit, which had originally been scheduled to follow one week after a similar meeting between Obama and Netanyahu, originally seemed lost due to Netanyahu's cancelation of the meeting. He returned to Israel from Canada, rather than continuing on the United States, as scheduled, probably to avoid causing yet another embarrassment to Obama, given the Gaza flotilla attack. Theoretically, no one would have scheduled a meeting between Obama and Abbas before the aborted Netanyahu meeting, but neither party had any grounds or reasons to postpone it, so the Palestinians came as scheduled. As it turns out, the visit could hardly have been more successful under existing circumstances and proved to be an impressive surprise. More importantly, it has raised a significant set of challenges for the Israeli prime minister as he prepares for his delayed appearance.

The most important aspect of the Palestinian visit was the striking demonstration of Palestinian forthcomingness on peace, especially from Abbas personally. Crucially, when the PLO came under fairly heavy pressure from predictable quarters not to return to proximity talks after the flotilla attack, it firmly pointed out that while it condemned Israel's actions, no purpose would be served by bowing out of the American-brokered talks. The two issues were separate and not connected, they pointed out, and could have added that refusing to continue with diplomacy on final status issues would actually reward rather than punish Israel and pointlessly damage the Palestinian national interest. The wisdom of this decision became clear during the visit, which would not even have taken place if Palestinians walked away from the talks or put them on hold.

What the Palestinians were able to do, for the first time in many years, arguably since the late 1990s, was position themselves as a real diplomatic and political partner in peace to the US administration, something the present Israeli government has most certainly failed to do. The Americans and Palestinians found themselves in broad agreement on the most pressing points. They agreed that a way has to be found to relive the suffering of the people of Gaza without strengthening Hamas and that breaking down the commonality of interests between Gazans and their rulers is crucial. On vexed question of negotiations, it was expected that the Palestinians were going to be harangued with a mantra of returning to direct talks as soon as possible and without conditions. The Palestinian position was unusually serviceable: they told the Americans that while they are all in favor of direct talks, the proximity talks should yield some progress of some kind first to demonstrate that there is, in fact, a point to negotiating with this Israeli government. The essential point they were making, and that was accepted by the administration, is that direct talks are desirable and important, but that more diplomatic and political groundwork is needed before they can successfully be launched. The Palestinian suggestion to the Americans is that they work out with Israel what, exactly, is going to be tackled in the early stages of direct talks, and that when the US is satisfied that the talks will have merit and substance and can explain how to the Palestinians, they will agree to resume direct negotiations. It has also helped that while the Israelis have been insisting that the proximity talks focus on procedural issues and water, Palestinians have been pushing the issues of borders and security, which is an agenda that is very compatible with the White House approach....READ MORE
A Palestinian child runs down the stairs in Jerusalem's Old City July 5, 2010 REUTERS/Ammar Awad (JERUSALEM - Tags: SOCIETY)

My letters to CSM & the LATimes re Locked out & Clock is ticking on Israeli-Palestinian negotiations

CSM: A Palestinian in Beirut, Lebanon, holding a symbolic key during a commemoration of the dispersal of Palestinians when Israel was created in 1948. Palestinians are among the 12 million stateless people worldwide who need to become a citizen. (Bilal Hussein/AP)

RE: Locked out: The 12 million people without a country, and their need to become a citizen: The victims of shifting borders, politics, or the happenstance of birthplace, the world's 12 million stateless people and their need to become a citizen are rising on the international human rights agenda.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-Issues/2010/0704/Locked-out-The-12-million-people-without-a-country-and-their-need-to-become-a-citizen

Dear Editor,

Good to see that telling photo of a Palestinian holding a very symbolic key. However too little was said in the article about the very real plight of the Palestinians and the largest, longest running refugee crisis in the world today as Israel continues to push Palestinians into poverty and forced exile day after day after day... Is this to be the future of every modern nation- an escalating trend with sovereign powers worldwide electing to harass and evict targeted individuals and groups in order to shape a favored demographic "balance" for their state.

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab


********************
RE: Clock is ticking on Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, With the U.S. as a mediator, the two have until September to prevent a diplomatic meltdown.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-danin-bibi-20100705,0,3873589.stor

Dear Editor,

Negotiations (direct or indirect) to end the Israel/Palestine conflict can not and should not be about how to dismiss and/or ignore the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but how to best respect it: Yes the clock is ticking on Israeli-Palestinian negotiations- but the onus is not on Obama or the Palestinians. The onus is fully on sovereign Israel as it stands in long term and flagrant violation of international law and the Palestinians basic human rights.

Sincerely,
Anne Selden Annab

NOTES

In 1948 United Nations (page 4 on the PDF file http://unispal.un.org/pdfs/AC1SR207.pdf ) Mediator Count Folke Bernadotte pointed out that "It would be an offence against the principles of justice if those innocent victims [Palestinian refugees] could not return to their homes while [Zionist] immigrants flowed into Palestine to take their place."

UN Resolution 194 from 1948 : The refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible

"The United Nations had certainly not intended that the Jewish State should rid itself of its Arab citizens" 5 May 1949 Application of Israel for admission to membership in the United Nations http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/85255e950050831085255e95004fa9c/1db943e43c280a26052565fa004d8174?OpenDocument


Refugees and the Right of Return

"Palestinian refugees must be given the option to exercise their right of return (as well as receive compensation for their losses arising from their dispossession and displacement) though refugees may prefer other options such as: (i) resettlement in third countries, (ii) resettlement in a newly independent Palestine (even though they originate from that part of Palestine which became Israel) or (iii) normalization of their legal status in the host country where they currently reside. What is important is that individual refugees decide for themselves which option they prefer – a decision must not be imposed upon them." http://www.plomission.us/index.php?page=core-issues-3

THE Arab Peace Initiative

Refugees, Borders & Jerusalem...

"Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world."Eleanor Roosevelt

Sunday, July 4, 2010

FOCUS: OPINION Jordan is not Palestine By Lamis Andoni

Jordan absorbed many Palestinians during the Arab-Israeli war in 1948 [GETTY]

FOCUS: OPINION : Jordan is not Palestine By Lamis Andoni

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/2010/07/2010748131864654.html

George Mitchell, the US special envoy to the Middle East, has recently expressed his frustration at the lack of progress in the stalled "peace process".

But it may be time for Mitchell to move aside, as Geert Wilders, the leader of the Netherlands' third-largest party, seems to have found a 'creative solution' to the conflict: Jordan should be renamed Palestine and become a homeland for the Palestinians.

Unfortunately for Wilders - and the Israeli right - this 'solution' is neither original nor acceptable and Jordanian officials have responded with a resounding condemnation of the proposal.

The 'Jordan option'

The plan to turn Jordan into a Palestinian homeland and to give Israel complete control over the historic land of Palestine is regularly rehashed by the Israeli right whenever there is international pressure, however minimal, on Israel to stop its expansionism. Last month, around half of the 120-member Israeli knesset, submitted "a two states for two peoples on both sides of River Jordan" proposal for discussion. In practice the proposal entails an expulsion of Palestinians to Jordan so that the kingdom becomes a de facto Palestinian homeland.

Last month, around half of the 120-member Israeli knesset, submitted "a two states for two peoples on both sides of River Jordan" proposal for discussion. In practice the proposal entails an expulsion of Palestinians to Jordan so that the kingdom becomes a de facto Palestinian homeland.

The forceful revival of what has historically been referred to as the "Jordan option" comes amid growing international pressure over the building of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.

The Israeli right, many of whom belong to the Likud party of Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, see the Jordanian option as an adequate and practical solution to plans to establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Dying 'two-state' solution

The Israeli right's fear of a Palestinian state comes at a time when many Palestinians, including officials, believe that the two-state solution is all but dead.

The rapid expansion of Israeli settlements, the erection of the separation wall, and the ongoing annulment of residency permits for Arabs in East Jerusalem, has left little room, if any, for a Palestinian state.

But many in the Israeli right are concerned by the plan of Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian prime minister, to establish a de facto state by building institutions and housing across the lands of the West Bank, including in areas where Israeli forces remain.

While many Palestinians are concerned that Fayyad's plan will only serve to transform the currently fragmented Palestinian territories into an entity that lacks contiguity and sovereignty, the Israeli right are afraid that any kind of Palestinian state, however distorted, will threaten their claim to the entire historic land of Palestine.

Buffer state


The "Jordan option" is deeply rooted in the idea that the eastern part of Jordan is part of the historic land of Palestine. Consequently many Israeli leaders, mostly but not solely from the Likud party, argue that the Palestinian population should be transferred "to that part of Palestine".

The idea, however, was given little credence before 1977, when the Likud party came to power for the first time. The Likud promoted the idea as an alternative to a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

In 1982, Yitzhak Shamir, who became the Likud prime minister in 1983, wrote that, "reduced to its true proportions, the problem is clearly not the lack of a homeland for the Palestinian Arabs. That homeland is Trans-Jordan, or Eastern Palestine .... A second Palestinian state to the west of the River is a prescription for anarchy."

But the "Jordan option" contravenes the tacit understanding reached by the founders of Israel and King Abdullah I that Israel would accept the establishment of a Hashemite-run state in east Jordan.

In fact, Israel's early leaders saw the Hashemite entity as both a buffer between Israel and the rest of the Arab world, and a state that could absorb those Palestinian refugees who fled or were expelled during the Arab-Israeli war of 1948 and the Six Day war in 1967.

But it is precisely the fact that Israeli leaders intentionally turned Jordan into the absorber of the largest Palestinian refugee population that is now being used to justify transforming it into a substitute homeland for the Palestinians and forcibly sending more.

Immoral and illegal

Today Jordan is home to about 1.9 million Palestinian refugees, more than 337,000 of whom live in the country's 10 official refugee camps.

The argument that the majority of Jordanians are of Palestinian origin and that Jordan is therefore already the de facto homeland of the Palestinians is hypocritical and erroneous.

There are no precise statistics but it is true that at least half of Jordan's population of about 6.2 million people are of Palestinian origin. But that is a result of Israeli expansionism and a deliberate policy of emptying Palestinian lands of Palestinians.

If Jordan was the original home of the Palestinian people, Israel would not have had to demolish around 450 Palestinian villages or to devise policies to expel the Palestinian population.

Moreover, there was already a community with its own traditions, costumes and dialect specific to the east of Jordan before the establishment of Israel.

Furthermore, the whole principle of evicting a population, erasing their villages, and bringing in settlers so as to change an area's demographics is simply immoral and illegal under international law.

Perpetual war

The fulfillment of the right wing dream of turning Jordan into Palestine cannot happen without a gradual or mass expulsion of Palestinians from Israel, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, along with the use of force against Jordanians.

It presents, therefore, a scenario of continuous war and conflict that cannot possibly end Israel's "Palestinian problem".

But even though this 'vision' cannot be easily fulfilled without resorting to all out war, it must be taken seriously as it offers an excuse to force yet more Palestinians from their homeland.

Over the years, two variations of the "Jordan option" have developed. The first is based on "transferring" the Palestinian population of the East Bank and even Israel "proper" to Jordan, where the Palestinian homeland is to be established. The second scenario is based on establishing a Palestinian state in Jordan, which would also include the Arab-populated areas of the West Bank.

Both options have been rejected, but the proposals have remained alive as a stick with which to threaten the Palestinians and the Jordanians and to counter perceived threats or the international community's verbal support for the establishment of a Palestinian state. In other words, Israeli leaders use the "Jordan option" whenever Israel is in time of crisis.

Dispossessing 'infiltrators'

The fact that 53 knesset members have been strongly pushing the "Jordan option" is testimony to the level of isolation Israel currently feels. But, instead of addressing the core issue of Palestinian national rights, the leaders of the Israeli right are raising the spectre of further dispossession of the Palestinian people.

What has made this proposal more threatening to both Jordan and the Palestinians is that was preceded by a new military order that allows Israel to expel those deemed not to have the 'right' Israeli paperwork as "infiltrators". As the Israeli daily Haaretz reported, according to this order residents of East Jerusalem, Palestinian citizens of other countries and even those who hold Israeli passports could be classified as "infiltrators" and expelled.

Under the guise of assuring "judicial oversight of the extradition process", Israel has effectively established a new plan for the gradual but large scale expulsion of Palestinians to Jordan, thus making the "Jordan option" all the more real.

In rationalising his controversial proposal, Wilders argued that "the West has to protect Jerusalem" and "to stop the offensive by leftists and Muslims to destroy Israel".

Spoken in the tradition of his party's anti-Muslim views, Wilders both exposed and echoed the concept underlying the "Jordan option": That, like so many other racist ideas, it cannot be implemented without resorting to force and the exclusion of "the other".

Lamis Andoni is an analyst and commentator on Middle Eastern and Palestinian affairs.


Refugees cross the remains of the Allenby Bridge over the River Jordan in 1967 [GETTY]

Vintage American Art: The First Sunday

Vintage magazine cover and advertising art from the Golden Age of American Illustration

You can help Magazineart.org: Subscribe to magazines; buy books about magazine design or books about American illustrators; or simply visit our advertisers.