JUNE 2004

Saturday June 19, 2004

I wondered if I was going to make it   Lady Northover

Sunday petitions to challenge Mazuz decision on PM Sharon

By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent

Two petitions challenging Attorney General Menachem Mezuz's decision to scrap charges against Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his son Gilad in the Greek Island bribery case will be submitted to the High Court of Justice on Sunday.

One petition is authored by Yahad-Meretz MK Yossi Sarid and the other by Labor MK Eitan Cabel.

Mazuz on Tuesday announced there was not enough evidence to indict the prime minister and his son, despite a recommendation by former state prosecutor Edna Arbel to draw a charge sheet. Mazuz's announcement included open criticism of Arbel, which hinted she had targeted the prime minister and that her decision was not professional.

Arbel has since completed her tenure as state prosecutor and now serves on the Supreme Court.

Cabel's petition states that the High Court, due to its legal expertise, must critically review the attorney general's decision. The petition notes the sensitivity of the case, which deals with the indictment of a high ranking public official on charges of accepting a bribe or breach of trust.

Cabel's petition also claims the attorney general did not seek substantial advice before reaching his decision and asserts that since Mazuz assumed the position of attorney general he has shown nothing but hostility toward the state prosecutors.

Sarid will point to several aspects of Mazuz's decision which, according to the petition, indicated the attorney general may have been guided by extraneous considerations.

Justice Minister Yosef Lapid on Thursday entered the fray between Mazuz and Arbel, and accused Arbel of having a conceptzia ("concept") about bribery and public officials.

Mazuz himself meanwhile tried to tried to defuse the tension, telling senior prosecutors Thursday "I never said or hinted that Edna Arbel 'manufactured a case' against the prime minister or any other public official, or that she 'set herself a target' of getting a conviction."

Friday June 18, 2004

Arafat: Israel is a Jewish State

By David Landau and Akiva Eldar. Exclusive Interview for Haaretz

Arafat is ready to sign an agreement that would give Palestinians 97 per cent of the West Bank and Gaza - with the rest in a land swap, and the right of return of not all, but at least some refugees. In a free-ranging interview with Haaretz, conducted in the carefully preserved ruins of the Muqata, the PA Chairman also spoke of the historical family bonds between the two peoples.

"Definitely," says Yasser Arafat, waving his arm for emphasis. He definitely understands and accepts that Israel must be, and must stay, a Jewish state. The Palestinians "accepted that openly and officially in 1988 at our Palestine National Council," and they remain completely committed to it. Thus, the refugee problem needs to be solved in a way that will not change the Jewish character of the state. That is "clear and obvious."

"Definitely" was a word that kept recurring in our two-hour, free-wheeling conversation, which took place almost entirely in English with the chairman of the Palestinian Authority at his headquarters-cum-jail, the Muqata, in Ramallah on Tuesday. But Arafat was far from definite on key details of crucial issues. Hard though we tried to wrest from him categorical statements, he often veiled his precise thoughts in rambling reminiscences or digressions. A solicitous host and lively raconteur, he apparently feels he must still hold some cards close to his chest for that last, fateful hand that he plainly believes he alone will yet play, one day, with Ariel Sharon or another Israeli leader.

Perhaps that is why the dispute between former top Israeli intelligence officers over Arafat's true intentions, that has flared up on the pages of Haaretz during the last week, drew so much attention and interest. Even though Arafat is just half an hour from Jerusalem, accessible and loquacious, it takes intelligence professionals to penetrate the pall of mystery and ambiguity that envelopes him. And even they can't agree.

Amos Gilad, the former No. 2 at Military Intelligence (MI), who now heads the defense minister's strategic think-tank, says Arafat never meant peace with Israel. He was ever bent on the eventual demographic defeat of the Jewish state. Amos Malka, onetime MI commander, says the chairman would have done a deal at Camp David or Taba, had Israel offered even more generous terms than then prime minister Ehud Barak did. Malka says that readiness on the Palestinian leader's side is still there - if those terms were offered today.

Prompted by these differing assessments on such weighty questions, we tried our own hand at unraveling the riddle of Arafat. Some of his responses - all were carefully worded; the wily, seasoned chairman is no man for loose language - seemed more forthcoming than in the past. But much fog remains. Excerpts:

Haaretz: How are you?

Arafat: "Not bad!"

But you've had better days. These are difficult days?

"Definitely."

Have you followed the Haaretz reporting about the dispute within the intelligence community?

"Yes."

And do you think it contributes to the discussions?

"These are the facts and the realities. Not to forget: We started the peace process even before Oslo agreement. You remember, in Vienna we started these talks for peace through [then Austrian chancellor Bruno] Kreisky and Peres. You remember, and with the participation of the Socialist International leaders, and after that in Sweden, you remember, it was very successful ..."

But the most important decision you took was in `88 in Algiers.

"Yes, in Algiers, yes, very important ... And not just me, all of the PNC - Palestinian National Council - accepted it."

Could it ever be possible for any Palestinian leader, you included, to take a different course, a different policy from the `88 decision?

"Definitely [not], because it is a PNC decision, for all the Palestinians all over the world. And it was reconfirmed in the presence of President Clinton, in 1996."

In this debate between the intelligence officers, some say Mr. Arafat can make a deal based on the Algiers declaration of `88, which means the `67 borders with East Jerusalem, and with a solution for the refugees, now ...

"... and not to forget, we had agreed upon a swap ... of land of equal `quality and quantity.'"

Yes, that would add up to 100 percent of the territories ...

"Yes ... because, not to forget, this was the platform of the Madrid conference [in 1991]."

If your friend, your partner for peace of the brave, Mr. Rabin, could come back today and say: My friend, Chairman Arafat, I offer you the Geneva document, which means 100 percent including the swap, with the Geneva solution for the refugees, with Jerusalem, with the Temple Mount, can we say "mabruk" [congratulations]?

"Not to forget, I had sent my special envoy Manuel Hassassian [to deliver a speech at the Geneva signing ceremony] ..."

To deliver the speech ... yes, but for the Israeli public they would like to know if this means that Chairman Arafat is willing to make a deal based on Geneva.

"No doubt we had appreciated it, it is not official agreement, I had appreciated it, and I sent out my special envoy Dr. Hassassian, to give my speech."

If we take the main problem, the refugees, the right of return, are you willing to accept the Arab League proposal, which means a just and agreed-upon solution, based on United Nations Resolution 194?

[Arafat noted in his response that the Arab League proposal was put forward by Saudi Arabia. The Palestinians, like other Arab states, had accepted it. They had also accepted, he went on to note, the various American diplomatic initiatives: the Tenet report, the Zinni mission and the Mitchell report.]

The problem in Israeli public opinion is this issue of right of return, the right of return of the Palestinian refugees. People in Israel are afraid that there will be an influx of huge numbers of refugees. For instance our newspaper, Haaretz, has always been on the side of a peaceful agreement with the Palestinian people. We consistently supported the peace process. But when Camp David - Taba - broke up over ... refugees ...

"No, actually, no no no. It had not been broken because of the right of the refugees, at all. You remember after Camp David we had the Sharm al-Sheikh agreement with the participation of President Clinton, the participation of President Mubarak, the participation of King Abdullah, the participation of [Javier] Solana, the participation of Kofi Annan, and the two Palestinian and Israeli delegations. And later, and before Taba, we went also to Paris and also Albright was there, Kofi Annan was there, Solana was there, we started it in the American embassy and went to complete it in the office of President Chirac."

And then you refused to meet with Peres, Clinton asked you ...

"Give me a chance to complete my ..."

Sorry. [A lengthy disquisition on what transpired in Paris followed.] And who decided to stop the Taba talks?

"The Israelis. Not Taba talks; Taba agreement. The Egyptians were there, and the Europeans were there, in Taba."

What about a solution that can allay Israeli concerns about a flood of refugees?

"Look, look, I discussed this matter clearly and obviously in Camp David with President Clinton and with Barak. [After a long aside about student days in Cairo, Arafat referred to a purported clipping, from Haaretz, that he carries with him.] "It is still in my pocket, I will give it to you to see it: 62 percent of those who came [to Israel] from the Soviet Union, are not Jews; 90 percent of these are Christians and 10 percent are Muslims. And I told Clinton, okay, if they are accepting those 62 percent - they have become 70 percent by now - why not to give the chance for our people? Especially in Beirut, who are living in Lebanon, in a very very very bad circumstances."

All of them?

"Not all of them, a part of them who are still in refugee camps."

Amos Malka believes, I will quote exactly and tell me if he's right. He says, "Mr. Arafat always, and even now, will be willing to sign an agreement that will give him all the West Bank and Gaza with a swap ... 97 percent with a swap."

"Between 97 and 98."

Yes, and the rest of it, with a swap.

"Yes.

With East Jerusalem as capital, the Temple Mount, under the sovereignty of the Palestinians - he didn't mention this, but we know the Wailing Wall...

"The Wailing Wall, and not to forget, when I was living with my uncle in this area, I used to stay with those who were praying at the Wailing Wall. And every time my uncle used to come to take me from the Wailing Wall to his home upstairs ..."

And the most important thing Malka said, also, is that what Mr. Arafat needs is some Israeli recognition of responsibility for the refugees, the `48 refugees. Israel would admit some 20,000 or 30,000 refugees. He thinks you will be willing to sign this agreement.

"First of all, we had an agreement, after Oslo, we had an agreement that the displaced refugees of 1967 can to return openly, if they like to return back to Palestine."

To the new state of Palestine.

"Yes, and a committee from Egypt, from Jordan, from Israel and from Palestine [is to monitor their return]."

But this will be your country.

"But in spite of that not all of them have returned. They are living in many places, in Jordan, in Egypt, in north Europe, in Germany. They will not return."

So what's the analogy? Not all of the `67 refugees are coming back, so not all of the `48 refugees living under difficult circumstances in Lebanon will want to return. Is that what you are saying?

"When we left Lebanon, a big part of them came with ... President Clinton asked me how many they are. I told them I don't know, but when I was there they were around 480,000. But now they are less than that ... they are less than 200,000, all of them."

Can you say to the Israeli public that your strategy, your goal, is not to change the demography and to change the character of Israel as the Jewish state? Can you assure Israelis that you don't want to use the refugees in order to change the demographic balance and the character of the state?

"Why I don't speak about the other refugees? I speak about the refugees in Lebanon because they are living in very hard conditions. Without our help it is very difficult for them to carry on living."

Why don't you say that those 200,000 Palestinians in Lebanon are invited, most of them or some of them, to return to the state of Palestine, the West Bank and Gaza, and some, a small number, to the Jewish State of Israel?

"First of all, we are not forbidden, and you are not refusing any Palestinians, displaced or refugees, to come to the Palestinian territories; you are not, there is no problem. And as I mentioned there is a committee of the four countries to follow up the displaced refugees. But I was speaking about this tragedy of our Palestinians who are living in Lebanon, and had been accepted by Barak and by President Clinton that we have to find a solution for them."

But the solution has to be agreed upon also by Israel.

"Barak said we have to find a solution for them with the Israelis, with the Americans and with us."

And you accept a formula, a solution that will say - this is not going to change the character of Israel ...

"We had in `88 in our PNC, it is clear and obvious, we had agreed upon [UN Resolutions] 242 and 338 ... and definitely we are speaking also about a part of our people, our refugees ... Why the Muslim from Russia has a right to return and the Muslim from Palestine has not the right to return? And why the Christian from Russia has the right to come and the Palestinian Christian has not the right to come?"

You understand that Israel has to keep being a Jewish state?

"Definitely."

Definitely.

"Definitely, I told them we had accepted openly and officially in `88 in our PNC ..."

`We stayed, you went'

We want to follow up on this matter. You know, Shlomo Ben Ami has just published a book in which he basically says that he failed to reach an agreement with you, your people, at Camp David and Taba, and he believes that it's impossible to reach an agreement with you. There is one point which he dwells on very, very prominently in his book. He says that Israel under Barak was prepared to concede sovereignty over the Temple Mount to the Palestinian state, and the issue was archaeological excavation underneath the Temple Mount. And he says that the Palestinian side at Taba was prepared to undertake not to dig under the Temple Mount, but was not prepared that the agreement should mention a historical connection between the Jewish people and that place. Ben Ami says that to him, this meant that you, Yasser Arafat, don't recognize the historical connection between the Jewish people and this land.

"Joseph and his father and his brothers were living beside Nablus. It is historically or not ...

That's in the Bible.

"It is in our Koran. The holy story of Joseph before he went to Egypt, in our Koran, in the tales. Who can say, therefore, that there is no relation [between the Jews and the land]? Do you forget that we are not calling you our cousins? Actually you are my cousin. I am from Abraham, Hagar, my grandmother was Hagar, and you are from Sara ... yes or no?

Yes, I believe that, and do you believe that?

"Definitely. This is my grandfather - Abraham ... your grandfather, and he's my grandfather also. You are from ... Yitzhak and Jacob. So it is clear, historically ..."

So, therefore, it's clear historically, and do you extend that historical vision to

Jerusalem ... Nablus is not a practical question, a practical question is Jerusalem.

"The practical question, Jerusalem, means Salem - the king who were there when Abraham came, Lot ... yes? He received them in a very friendly, brotherly ..."

Malkitzedek, in the Bible he is called Malkitzedek - king of Salem.

"And you, when Sara died he got the cave in Hebron to bury her there, and still there is an agreement between us, that you have the right to go to visit this cave which is a part of the Abraham mosque in Hebron ... You are forgetting this ..."

What are you saying? Can I get a little bit deeper. What are you saying about the king of Salem? What are you implying? That you identify with with the king of Salem? But you said before that you descended from Abraham, from Abraham through Ishmael?

"Yes, yes but we and you were cousins."

Descendants from Abraham.

"Abraham, yes, but we became citizens. We stayed here and you went where?"

To Egypt.

"To Egypt!"

Jewish prayer agreements

When it comes to Jerusalem, and to Haram al-Sharif, if Yitzhak Rabin came to you and told you, you can have sovereignty on Haram al-Sharif, what kind of arrangements, practical arrangements, would you be willing to give the Jews who want to pray there?

"It is clear what I had accepted in Camp David: The Wailing Wall, the Jewish Quarter, with a passage freely under your control."

What about what we call the Temple Mount and you call Haram al-Sharif? Under your control, would you accept Jews to worship there, to pray? Or only at the Wailing Wall?

"Until now, you have not found anything [in archaeological excavations] referring to the [Solomonic] temple ... You found Herod's temple."

Well, what's the matter with that? Why isn't that old enough for you? Herod's temple stood 2,000 years ago. That's the temple that Jesus walked in, it was a Jewish temple. What's the difference to you ... With all due respect, what's wrong, what's inferior - in your eyes - the temple of Herod to the temple of Solomon? The Jews were praying in the temple of Herod more than 2,000 years ago. Is that a historical fact?

"... under your control the Wailing Wall ... I agreed upon in Camp David that the Wailing Wall ..." [Discussion of this issue continued]

Risking disunity

Are you happy with Ariel Sharon's plan now to disengage? Will you be able to take over Gaza and show the Israeli public that you can get your act together, that you can control Gaza?

"We have done many times. We have done it in Gaza when I was there, and you remember how many clashes we had with Hamas and with others, and in Bethlehem we succeed completely to take control."

So you will not hesitate, if Israel gets out, even to risk the unity of your camp, which means to fight against the Hamas?

"Even against anyone from Fatah who comes out against the law. I can't keep silent with him. You know, I am respecting my word, and my position."

You're working with the Egyptians on security in Gaza after the Israeli withdrawal?

"We [have worked with Egypt], not to forget, since we returned, ever since the Oslo agreement. We continued it in Cairo, the security agreement in Cairo, and even the details had been done in the office of President Mubarak himself."

As an example of his ability to takes decisions and take security control of an area, Arafat cited the case of Bethlehem. After the siege there of the Church of the Nativity, he recalled, the PA had faithfully implemented the agreement that ended the siege, deporting activists to Gaza and to various European countries and making sure they stayed there. Order in Bethlehem itself, moreover, was fully restored and maintained by PA security forces. It was entirely unjustified, therefore, he added, the Israel Defense Forces to retake control of the town in recent weeks.

The chairman also provided details of several recent episodes in which PA security had prevented terror attacks on Israel. These episodes have been meticulously reported and disseminated by British intelligence, which is monitoring the security situation on behalf of the Quartet. In one case, a 17-year-old Bedouin girl was arrested who had planned to blow herself up inside Israel.

"I sent my policemen, after contacting the Israelis, to permit them to go to arrest her. I contacted the leaders of the Bedouin and asked them, please, I want her from you. At five o'clock we brought her, and we handed her over, and this was under the complete control of the Israeli security." Israel knew full well of the PA's anti-terror efforts. But it seemed unwilling to make the information available to Israeli public opinion.

After the intifada started, why didn't you give clear orders to your people to stop it?

"I gave it, I gave it."

You know, Amos Gilad tells it like this: Mr. Arafat is calling Barghouti, he puts money, and says "Allah maak" [God be with you], and [Marwan] Barghouti understands that he has to start terrorism.

"First of all, first of all, it is a big lie, because Barghouti is not dealing with me directly. He is close friend to me. Do you know why? Because his cousin, Bashir Barghouti, was at my college, when we were together, students, in Egypt in Cairo. And we were together. He is a communist and I am not a communist, and in spite of that I insist for him to participate with me in the election of the Palestinian students. We were in that period 26,000 Palestinian students in Cairo ... [a lengthy reminiscence followed here]. And this is the relation between me and Marwan Barghouti.

But you never gave him ...

"No, but his direct contacts as one of the Fatah, he a friend of me, but his direct contact, not with me, and I don't give any order ... of this. Never."

Failed efforts

Once lunch was announced, the tape-recorders were switched off and everyone moved from the end of the long table to the middle. Arafat seated Eldar next to him and Landau opposite. The conversation continued to flow. The Haaretz reporters pointed out that the bulk of Israeli public opinion was convinced it was not possible "to do business with you."

Why, then, Arafat replied, had Ariel Sharon attended the Wye River negotiations (during Netanyahu's premiership) and favored signing the agreement with him over Hebron? Why, as prime minister, did Sharon repeatedly send his son, Omri, to meet with him? Why did he endorse the Mitchell Committee report (though he did not, Arafat claimed, implement its recommendations)? Why did he go along with then CIA director George Tenet's effort to bring about an end to the violence in cooperation with Arafat? Why did Sharon sign on to the U.S. road map (although, Arafat claimed, Israel's 14 reservations were "more than the road map itself").

This long saga of (failed) diplomatic efforts involving the Sharon government and the Palestinian Authority showed, in Arafat's view, that Israel did believe it could do business with him - despite the rhetorical claim that it cannot. At the end of the day, he added, it was he who had signed Oslo and he who had negotiated at Camp David. His implication was unmistakable: As long as he lived, he was he only man to do business with.

Would there be peace now had Yitzhak Rabin lived? "Definitely," Arafat fairly shouted his reply. It "must not be forgotten," he added pointedly, that whereas the peace with Egypt had brought Israel scant international rewards, the Oslo Accord with the Palestinians had resulted in a surge of international recognition "from China to India, from Malaysia to Indonesia." Israel's road to acceptance and prosperity ran through peace with the Palestinian people. Life under two years of siege was "definitely not easy," the rais said. He worked, ate, slept and received guests all in this one large room. Despite their leader's prolonged and undignified detention at Israel's hands, "our people still insist on following up the peace of the brave."

The room is in bad need of a coat of paint - as are the adjoining small rooms and the staircase leading up to them. There is little air or light - partly because the windows in the corridor are blocked by sandbags. Alongside this main building, a new building has gone up during the past year. But Arafat and his aides have kept to their half-ruined quarters, accentuating thereby his situation as a leader effectively under imprisonment, denied his freedom of movement. All around, carefully un-cleared piles of rubble and burned-out vehicles give stark witness to the past violence and present precariousness of Arafat's position.

"A museum of ruins," says Nabil Sha'ath, smiling. The urbane diplomat joined the lunch toward the end, and quickly weighed in with his recollections of the Taba talks and why they failed to clinch the deal that seemed so close. Yes, Arafat recalled, the two sides had issued an upbeat-sounding joint statement at the close the Taba conference, committing themselves "to implement an agreement after the elections ..."

Israel Goes Ahead with Expansion of Settlements and Fence

By Chris McGreal
Source: The Guardian

The US has objected to Israeli plans to expand the main Jewish settlements in the West Bank and extend construction of its controversial "anti-terror fence" to its deepest point inside the occupied territories.

Palestinian officials said both plans reinforced concerns that Mr. Sharon intended to use the removal of settlers from the Gaza strip as a pretext for entrenching Jewish towns in the West Bank and possibly annexing them to Israel.

Israel this week began construction on sections of the fence around Ariel settlement, extending the massive steel and concrete barrier about 12 miles into the occupied territories at a point where the West Bank is 33 miles wide.

Yesterday hundreds of Palestinian and foreign protesters temporarily brought work to a halt by stoning military bulldozers.

The US state department spokesman, Richard Boucher, said Washington was concerned about the political consequences of building the barrier so far into Palestinian territory.

"It's a problem to the extent that it prejudges final borders, that it confiscates Palestinian property, or that it imposes further hardship on the Palestinian people," he said.

Last year George Bush described the route of the fence as a "problem" and said it should follow the 1967 border, the "green line", or remain close to it. Mr. Sharon had assured him that construction around Ariel would be deferred.

The Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz reported that Mr. Sharon ordered work to go ahead as part of a deal with Binyamin Netanyahu to gain his support for the withdrawal of Jewish settlers from Gaza.

An Israeli official said fencing Ariel did not breach any understanding between Israel and the US because initially the fence would only be on three sides of the main settlement and some of its satellites, and not joined to the main barrier close to the green line.

But the defense ministry plans to close the gap early next year. The US has said it is opposed to that. It has also asked Israel to clarify new plans to expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

On Tuesday the Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv reported that the defense minister, Shaul Mofaz, had ordered faster building of the block of settlements in Etzion.

Etzion's council wants to build about 5,300 houses and is seeking permission for a further 7,500 by expanding the settlement boundaries.

Ma'ariv said Mr. Mofaz had told settler leaders that building permits would be issued soon for the other two main settlement blocks in the West Bank, Ma'ale Adumim, near Jerusalem, and Ariel.

The three blocks, which house most of the 420,000 Jews living in the West Bank, cut deep into Palestinian territory.

Israel had assured the US that it would not expand the settlements, but the two governments interpret the undertaking differently.

The US says there can be no further building of any kind because it would create additional "facts on the ground".

Mr. Sharon has said that the settlements are entitled to build to meet the natural growth of expanding families.

Israeli officials go further and say that more houses can be built within the municipal boundaries drawn when each settlement was founded. These often enclose an area several times bigger than the existing towns.

An Israeli official said yesterday that the plans were still being studied and no final decisions had been made.

A Palestinian spokesman, Michael Tarazi, said: "We knew from the beginning that the plan was to build the wall so as to maximize the amount of Palestinians on one side and the amount of land on the other.

"The construction of the wall around Ariel fits absolutely with that, as does expanding the settlements."

Mr. Sharon's hand has been strengthened by the attorney general's decision on Tuesday to stop investigating him for corruption without laying charges. That lifted a doubt about the survival of the government, but divided Israelis.

An anti-corruption watchdog lodged a petition yesterday asking the high court to reinstate the investigation on the grounds that the attorney general, Menachem Mazuz, had wrongly concluded that there needed to be a higher standard of proof before charging a prime minister with a crime.

Opinion polls yesterday showed that Israelis were almost evenly divided on whether Mr. Sharon should have been tried for corruption.

Thursday June 17, 2004

US Citizens Held by Israel

US citizen and San Diego resident Beatrice Dewing is being held at Lod airport ("Ben Gurion") near Tel Aviv for attempting to visit friends and holy sites in Bethlehem. A judge has already granted an 'infringement' against deportation but she is still being prevented from entering the country.

Beatrice has been held at the airport since Sunday. Her deportation hearing is scheduled for tomorrow. If she refuses to leave, she will be forced to leave 'accompanied' by Israeli security to Milan, Italy.

Another Californian, Brooke Atherton, from the Bay Area is also being held and threatened with deportation tomorrow. Brooke went to Jerusalem through a study program.

We are appealing for their release and entry into the country. Bea's lawyer has stated that a fax from a congressperson will go a long way to expediting their release and allowing them to continue their journey.

Thursday June 10, 2004

Palestinians Have Right To Normal Life: Richard Gere

By Samer Khuwayera

RAMALLAH, West Bank – Hollywood heartthrob Richard Gere said the Palestinian people have the right to a normal life, saying Palestinians have managed to preserve their vitality despite the bitterness he saw on the faces of children and young people.

Gere inaugurated in Ramallah Saturday, June 6, an exhibition of his photographs documenting the suffering of Tibetants under incessant occupation since 1949 – one year before the establishment of Israel on occupied Palestinian lands.

The American superstar had declined to organize the exhibition in an area of West Jerusalem after being told the Palestinians consider it "occupied territories."

Although Gere was too reserved to blame Israel for the deteriorating conditions of Palestinians, showcasing photos he had taken in Tibet over the last 20 years carried much comparison with a similar crisis under Israeli occupation.

"I express my solidarity with you and I am glad my exhibition is being shown here," the Palestinian Al-Ayyam daily quoted him as saying during the opening.

"I consider myself your brother."

Normal Life

Gere, on his third visit to the occupied territories, stressed it is time for the Palestinians to realize their ambitions and see an end to their suffering.

Every Palestinian has the right to wake up every morning and make a living for his children, the same as any person in any other part of the world, he added.

Gere's visit came a few days after Israel drew a world outcry when its army killed at least 62 Palestinians and left thousands displaced in a massive incursion into the southern Gaza Strip city of Rafah.

Amnesty International had described the military offensive as a part of "war crimes".

Gere vocalized opposition to Israel 's separation wall, saying it increases the suffering of Palestinians and threatens chances for peace.

More than 200,000 Palestinians are already suffering the humanitarian consequences of the separation wall, according to the United Nations.

Meeting Qorei

The American movie star met Saturday with Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qorei at the premier's office in Abu Dis on the outskirts of occupied Jerusalem .

The two reportedly exchanged gifts, and Gere presented Qorei with a book of photographs he has taken in Tibet over the last 20 years.

Source: Palestine Chronicle

Wednesday June 9, 2004

U.S. to Israel: No more excuses, remove outposts

By Nathan Guttman, Haaretz

SAVANNAH, Georgia - The United States expects Israel to act firmly to evacuate illegal outposts in the territories and remove checkpoints and barriers that impede Palestinian freedom of movement in the West Bank. The U.S. also wants Israel to act quickly to put the disengagement plan into motion to avoid a political vacuum between the implementation of one stage and another.

Speaking yesterday to a reporter for Haaretz, a senior administration official, traveling with President Bush to the G-8 summit in Georgia, said that the U.S. understands it is impossible to publish an exact date for the dismantling of the outposts. However, the official also stated, "You can't come up with excuses all the time," and added that "the time has come."

With regard to delays in the dismantling of settlements, the official said, "Sharon talked about it a year ago in Aqaba, then in Herzliya, but in our view, very little has been done about it," the official noted. "They said the timing was bad, but you can't come up all the time with excuses."

The commitment to dismantle illegal outposts is contained in a letter given by the prime minister's bureau chief Dov Weisglass to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice after Sharon's meeting with President Bush on April 14. The U.S. is also trying to move ahead on the issue of increased freedom of movement for the Palestinians, to which the letter also refers.

Gaza's economic future

The U.S. is also demanding that discussion be opened on economic issues in the Gaza Strip after the Israeli withdrawal. Among the issues the U.S. wants raised are access to the sea for exporting goods, movement between Gaza and the West Bank, improvement of the operation of checkpoints, and of the transfer of goods in shipping containers. "It doesn't have to happen overnight, but you do have to begin discussing these issues," the official said.

According to the official, the administration is satisfied with the discussions between Israel and Egypt on security cooperation after Israel withdraws from the Gaza Strip. "We think it is getting off to a good start," he said.

The U.S. does not intend at this time to hold senior level meetings with the Palestinians. Last month, Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice met with Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia. However, talks will now return to the working level; discussions coordinated by the American consul in Jerusalem with the Palestinian Authority will continue, for the purpose of putting together plans for the future after disengagement.

Undiluted

According to the official, the U.S. sees no problem with the formula of the revised disengagement plan approved by the cabinet, and does not view it as a diluted or softening of Sharon's original proposal. "Do you see the cabinet resolution as a decision to dismantle settlements?" the senior official was asked, to which he answered in the affirmative. According to the official, the U.S. understands that the process is in any case long and involves legislation and arrangements; from the U.S. perspective, therefore, the cabinet's decision does not constitute a delay.

The all-important first evacuation

The U.S. sees the initial evacuation of settlements, even if it is relatively limited, as having the greatest regional implications. Likud sources see the importance with which the administration views this initial evacuation as a sign that a dramatic move ahead with disengagement will not be necessary; for this reason, the Likud sources say, there is no need for a national unity government. "It is preferable for Sharon to avoid shock waves in the Likud and instead focus on the first stage of disengagement," a senior Likud official said yesterday. Ministers Shalom, Limor Livnat, and Benjamin Netanyahu are said to fear for their cabinet seats if Labor enters the coalition.

However the administration is stressing that at the end of the process, Israel must stand by the commitment Sharon gave Bush with regard to the evacuation of settlements from Gaza and four settlements from the West Bank. "If in nine months it becomes apparent that Israel is not undertaking this seriously, this would be a big mistake that would affect Israel's relations with many countries, including the U.S.," the official stressed.

U.S. pleased with the passing of the plan

In a phone conversation yesterday between U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, Shalom updated Powell on the details of the disengagement plan, and Powell congratulated him on its approval by the cabinet. Shalom also updated Powell regarding arrangements reached with Egypt in recent weeks concerning security cooperation between Egypt and Israel in Gaza and on his visit to Cairo Monday. Shalom praised the part played by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

Concern over the "political vacuum" has led low-level administration officials to express concern that Sharon's political situation might lead Israel to elections that would delay implementation of the disengagement plan, or threaten its viability. The concerns were not officially transmitted by the administration to Israel, so as not to appear to be interfering in Israel's internal politics.

According to the prime minister's bureau, "The work of moving ahead with the plan at this point is not at the level of the Knesset and the cabinet, but in various professional committees, and even if there are elections these committees will continue to operate.

International support for disengagement

Meanwhile, the U.S. has informed Israel that it is working to garner support for the disengagement plan among the G-8, as well as Egyptian involvement. Israel is also working to encourage the publication of a joint statement by the heads of European Union countries meeting next week. In Europe and the Arab world, however, the disengagement plan has been met with skepticism because it does not include a commitment to remove settlements. Israel is also working to have President Bush's April letter to Ariel Sharon strengthened by resolutions from Congress and the Senate that would adopt it and the concessions it contains in return for disengagement.

Friday June 4, 2004

UNRWA calls for taking Israeli soldiers to court

GAZA, June 2 (Xinhuanet) -- The United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) called on Wednesday to sue Israeli soldiers who shot and wounded two school children in the southern Gaza Strip town of Rafah.

Israeli soldiers shot and wounded two 10-year-old Palestinian children as they were sitting in their classroom in the al-Omareya elementary school on Tuesday.

The school, located in the Tal al Sultan neighborhood, is one of those run by the UNRWA in the town.

UNRWA chief Peter Hansen called for an immediate investigation to the attack on the school and take those responsible to court.

One of the injured children was shot in the neck and he was in serious conditions, said Palestinian medics in Rafah, adding that the other was moderately injured.

A UNRWA statement said Wednesday that the two children were injured by the fragments of the gunshots penetrated into one of the classrooms.

It was the second time in less than a year that UNRWA schools were under Israeli fire, the relief agency said.

"This is a clear violation of schools and all human rights laws and conventions," it said.

In March last year, one of the UNRWA schools in the town of Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip was hit, and a 12-year-old Palestinian girl was shot in the head and became blind for life afterwards.