Some news clips from Israel and Palestine today:
1) Dozens of Israeli rabbis forbid renting to Arabs.
A letter signed by dozens of leading rabbis demands that Jews not rent to Arabs (Arab citizens of Israel, that is) inside Israel:
A number of leading rabbis who signed on to a religious ruling to forbid renting homes to gentiles – a move particularly aimed against Arabs – defended their decision on Tuesday with the declaration that the land of Israel belongs to the Jews.
...
Signatories include the chief rabbis of Ramat Hasharon, Ashdod, Kiryat Gat, Rishon Letzion, Carmiel, Gadera, Afula, Nahariya, Herzliya, Nahariya and Pardes Hannah, among a number of other cities.
Ynet states the signatories, all of whose salaries are paid by the Government of Israel, number about 50. While this letter was first written about three months ago, the rabbis have today stepped forward to explain their reasoning, just in case you might have considered their position extremist. Again from Haaretz:
"We don't need to help Arabs set down roots in Israel," Rabbi Shlomo Aviner of the Beit El settlement, said on Tuesday. Aviner explained that he supported the move for two reasons: one, a Jew looking for an apartment should get preference over a gentile; and two, to keep the growing Arab population from settling too deeply.
...
"Racism originated in the Torah," said Rabbi Yosef Scheinen, who heads the Ashdod Yeshiva.
...
He added that he did not see the move as racist so much as segregationist.
This move is just the latest outburst of open racism against Arabs in Israel. Remember, we are talking about racism within Israel against Palestinian citizens of the state of Israel, not against Palestinians in the West Bank, East Jerusalem or Gaza. Many folks acknowledge the numerous similarities between Israel’s occupation in the West Bank and South African Apartheid. However, as this move highlight, that Apartheid (or, as one rabbi above describes it, segregation) is growing both stronger and more open inside Israel itself. Again, these are state-funded rabbis across Israel making this broad declaration.
2) Brazil and Argentina recognize a Palestinian State within the 1967 borders; others to follow?
On Dec. 1st, Brazil announced it formally recognized a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. Note that the PLO and PA have been seeking recognition for many years, and "More than 100 countries, including almost all the African and Arab ones, had recognized it."
This move was shortly followed by Argentina recognizing Palestine as well. Much of the rest of South America may follow suit:
Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Malki rejoiced at Argentina's decision, which comes three days after Brazil's recognition. He told The Associated Press on Monday that he expects Uruguay and Paraguay to recognize Palestinian statehood in the next few days, followed by Bolivia and Ecuador.
Many folks here know that I am no fan of PA President Abbas; however this is clearly an impressive diplomatic victory for him, and he deserves great kudos. In passing, I would also expect that this is a message from Brazil to the US. Brazil is here reminding the US that it will not forever be content to be a bit player. Either the US can help Brazil play a larger role (read: permanent member status on the UN Security Council), or Brazil can go a different route, aligning itself as a leader of third world countries.
3) Israel denounces such action as undermining the foundation of the "peace process."
The government of Israel responded to increasing support for a Palestinian state (which Israel officially supports as well) in a way that is sadly predictable:
Israel warns Argentina: Recognizing Palestinian state shatters peace process
Israel's Foreign Ministry on Tuesday condemned as "highly regrettable" Argentina's announcement of the previous day that it recognized Palestine as "a free and independent state" within its borders prior to the 1967 Six-Day War.
The decision was highly "damaging," foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said, "because they are in fact shattering the foundation of the peace process."
I do not really disagree with this statement. The fact that increasing recognition of a Palestinian state is, in Israel’s view, a reversal of the peace process, tells you what the peace process is actually for from the Israeli government’s perspective: it is to inhibit the formation of a Palestinian state, not to advance it. And in that goal, it has been successful. Negotiations have gone on for 20 years with no appreciable progress.
4) Israel –Turkish diplomatic crisis nears its end?
On a separate track, there are reports that in the wake of Turkish aid in fighting Israel’s Carmel fires, the two nations are close to ending their diplomatic crisis. I’ll let the article speak for itself:
Israel agreed in principle to apologize and pay compensation, and the Turks agreed that if these two aspects are adhered to they would "normalize" relations with Israel and return their ambassador to Tel Aviv.
Nonetheless, both the apology and compensation remain problematic from legal and political perspectives.
A European diplomat familiar with the discussions said the apology is the toughest of the two issues. The two sides are trying to find a formula that would let Erdogan claim that the statement was an apology, but for Netanyahu to argue that it was not - only an expression of appreciation for Turkey's assistance in putting out the fires in the Carmel region.
I’m a little suspicious that everything is wrapped up so well for three reasons: (1) both governments have worked very hard to increase antagonism, (2) both governments can win easy domestic political points by attacking the other at any point, and (3) these disputes are not entirely manufactured or based on a few incidents - both nations are evolving in different directions that will increase distance and thus tension over time. In other words, the disputes will both continue to be manufactures, and at the same time will represent a real distance. Nonetheless, we can hope they work things out, at least for now.
5) Wikileaks: Was the attack on the Mavi Marmara long planned?
No diary would be complete without reference to Wikileaks, so here is something that caught my attention that I generally didn’t see mentioned elsewhere. According to a cable dated Feb. 13, 2009:
8.(C) Williams and his UNSCOL colleagues assessed that Israel handled carefully the release of crew and passengers aboard the MV Tali, the "Brotherhood" ship that attempted to break the Israeli blockade and deliver humanitarian goods to Gaza February 5 [2009]. However, they worried that the Israeli government would not be as "lenient" in the future should similar incidents occur, based on the statements of their Israeli interlocutors. Williams feared continued such incidents could spark provocation in Lebanon. He also noted Israel's message to the GOL that Israel would take retaliatory measures in Lebanon if Hizballah took any action, anywhere in the world to commemorate the death of Imad Mughniyeh.
A less "lenient" Israeli response (than seizing the vessel and arresting the passengers) appears to have been the plan for the last year and a half. Israel seemed intent on sending a message that would intimidate future attempts to break the Gaza siege. Such a message was clearly sent, although it is not clear that Israel benefited from the sending.