Liberal Democrat Friends of Palestine

Remember universal jurisdiction? Before the last election, both Tories and Labour were falling over backwards in their pledges to Israel that, if elected, they would change the law so that Tzipi Livni, the Israeli leader of the opposition, could visit Britain without fear of arrest for alleged war crimes. She, it may be recalled, was Israeli minister of foreign affairs at the time of Operation Cast lead. She was the one who said she hoped the Israeli army would “go wild” in Gaza . Charming. The Israeli army duly did go wild.  According to B’Tselem, 1,385 Palestinians were killed in the conflict, of whom 716 did not take part in it and 318 were minors under the age of 18.

When she finally did make it here the other day – for official meetings with the government – an application was made for her arrest on war crimes charges. Now the law had been changed, she could come here with confidence that the arrest warrant would not be issued. Or could she?

It seemed last Autumn that the Liberal Democrats had caved in to Israeli pressure and joined the Tories and Labour. All three parties united to push the change to the law through Parliament in what has become Section 153 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act.  Yet, when an arrest warrant application was made for Livni, the District Judge examining the application suddenly had to stop work. An unprecedented and retroactive certificate that she was here on a “special mission” had been issued by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and he found his hands were tied.

We understand that the legality of the certificate may well be tested in the courts. Watch this space. But what actually happened?

It seems a little known compromise on the change to the law was reached between Nick Clegg and David Cameron. If the Tories (or Labour) had had an overall majority, the law would have been changed to require the consent of the Attorney General before an arrest warrant could be issued. The AG is a politician as well as a lawyer, and sits in the Cabinet. In reality, the consent would never have been given. But Nick made a difference – he insisted the consent should come from the Director of Public Prosecutions, not the AG.

Now, the DPP has to act independently – although he is under the “superintendence” of the AG and reports to him at least once a week. Hmm. A grey area if ever there was one.  How would it pan out when tested? Well, we now know some interesting things. When the application to arrest Livni reached the DPP, he did consult with the AG. We don’t know what they said to each other, but their conversation took place before the certificate was issued. This can only suggest that there was a risk that an arrest warrant would have been issued for Livni, despite the change in legislation, and that the Government needed to resort to very unusual steps to prevent it.

Will a similar certificate be issued next time an Israeli general, a colonel, or a bomber pilot against whom there are credible allegations decides to come here? If such an individual is prosecuted at the Old Bailey one day, and his victims get justice, they will owe it in part to Nick Clegg’s agreement with David Cameron. And what if Livni comes back for a lecture tour – perhaps to address the Zionist Federation or the Jewish National Fund? If she came here in such circumstances, would the Foreign Office still give her a certificate? I hope not.

Image: Creative Commons image from World Economic Forum.

share using:

The untried face of nineteen year old Gilad Shalit stares out from the front pages:  a face as yet unmarked by violence or hatred.  Shalit, the Israeli Defence Force soldier kidnapped in a border raid by Hamas, has been held prisoner for the last five years as a bargaining chip for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. It was Shalit’s bad luck to be kidnapped, but his considerably worse luck that the former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon was no longer in power in June 2006.  Sharon may have been a butcher who liked blood (motto: ‘’always escalate’’ ) but he  knew the score on negotiation. He would have released the requisite number of prisoners, acknowledging that such swaps are the stuff of warfare.  Instead the jumpy Olmert, as feeble in his lack of military experience as our own UK government, refused to deal.

Gilad Shalit French identification papers by 'Gisors' used under Creative Commons licence

But now Shalit and 1,000 plus Palestinian prisoners, including women and minors, are returning home to their rejoicing families.  Never mind how the deal was done or why now.   Let’s hear the conventional pieties from the pro-Israeli media and Friends.  The terms of Shalit’s imprisonment ‘contravened international law’. Oh dear.

True, Shalit was held without visits from his family or the Red Cross. However, it is likely that any hint of his whereabouts would have led to a rescue attempt which would almost certainly have resulted in his death.

Shalit was valuable. It is unlikely he will have experienced the brutality of the some 700 Palestinian children who are arrested every year and prosecuted in Israeli courts. They too are kidnapped, seized in the middle of the night, with no reason given for their arrest. Most are blindfolded, painfully shackled, and physically assaulted until they sign confessions, frequently putting their name  to a Hebrew text they cannot read. They are not allowed access to lawyers.  Families are not told where their children are taken and cannot visit them.  Children as young as twelve appear in court wearing leg irons, a fact the Jerusalem Post refused to believe until they saw the evidence.

Shalit was in uniform and part of an illegal occupying force. Since the beginning of Israel’s occupation in 1967, 20 per cent of the total Palestinian population has been imprisoned. Illegal administrative detention has been widespread. At least 202 prisoners have died in Israeli jails due to torture, deprivation of health treatment and deliberate killing. Israel’s response to an election result they did not like in Gaza, was to kidnap and imprison 64 cabinet members and Parliamentarians from the Hamas political wing.

share using:

It has been a momentous week. Events that one may witness a few times in ones’ own lifetime appear to have converged and compressed into a mere seven days.

A royal wedding. The death of the most wanted man in the world at the hands of a highly trained American SEAL team, and now, reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah.

Just as it was unthinkable not so long ago that the Liberal Democrats could form a coalition Government with the Conservative party, so to it was inconceivable that Hamas and Fatah would find a platform through which they could both agree a way forward for the political aspirations of the people they claim to represent.

But come to an agreement they did. And in such startling secrecy. Perhaps it was for the best that the talks were held secretly and apparently without the direct intercession of the US or Israel. Without media coverage and the pressure it produces, Egypt acted honourably as perhaps the most honest broker of them all.

We can only hope the rapprochement between two parties that have appeared at all times to be the most bitter of enemies lasts and is a progressive step on the path to a true Palestinian State.

Egypt this week also announced its intention to open its border with Gaza on a permanent basis. Now that its people have stood up and demanded that their voice be heard it can clearly be discerned that the issue of Palestine is high on the agenda of the Egyptians.

Perhaps it was the insistence of the Egyptian people upon political change in their own country that gave Hamas and Fatah the urgency to put their own houses in order lest they suffer the same fate as Mubarak. As others have noted, this reconciliation may be the Palestinian contribution to the ‘Arab Spring’.

Let us not forget that Hamas participated in – and won – free and fair elections. It is only since Hamas won democratic elections that Israel put in place the ongoing illegal blockade around Gaza – with the complicity of the previous Egyptian Government – in what could be perceived as a move to increase the distance – both physically and politically – between what is recognised internationally as Palestinian land and the people that populate it.

The reaction of Israeli politicians to the reconciliation agreement between Hamas and Fatah stands in stark contrast to the positive and non-violent steps being demanded and taken notably by Palestinian youth and Israeli civil society.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed that Mahmood Abbas cannot “have peace with both Israel and Hamas” and that Abbas should “choose peace with Israel”.

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman – who himself lives on a settlement deemed illegal under international law – has urged that the EU is cautious in its approach to the reconciliation, claiming that Hamas may use the agreement to “takeover” the West Bank in a replay of the virtual civil war in Gaza in 2007.

Lieberman conveniently sidesteps the well documented facts that it was the refusal of Fatah to relinquish power that initiated the fighting in Gaza, with the tacit support of the then U.S. President, George W. Bush.

Israeli opposition leader, Tzipi Livni is remarkably frank when framing the context in which Hamas and Fatah have seen fit to overcome their differences. She says that “The Palestinians made their decision because they looked at Israel and saw the unwillingness to cooperate for the sake of peace…”

But Livni goes further still. Her claim that it was a “critical mistake” to “allow” Hamas to take part in the election of 2006 should be met with the contempt it deserves from the liberal community.

It is not possible to hold free and fair elections if one picks and chooses which parties can participate and which cannot. That Livni does not seem to understand this simple principle of democracy perhaps explains why she, in her turn, failed to achieve peace.

The Palestine Papers show that when Livni was in Government rather than achieving a fair , equitable and sustainable peace, she was fixated with asserting the Jewishness of Israel, even if this meant moving Arab Palestinians with Israeli citizenship out of Israel and into a future Palestinian state as part of “inhabitant swaps”.

Returning from a recent visit to Israel, Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies re-iterates the distinct credentials of the Liberal Democrats when he states that “the EU must respond to the reform movement across the Middle East by pledging to respect the wishes of Palestinian voters expressed in free elections”.

Chris draws upon the experience of Britain negotiating with the IRA in Northern Ireland. You cannot make peace with your friends, he tells us. Indeed, time with Lord Alderdice at our fringe event in Sheffield which was concerned with “talking to Hamas”, convinced us of the central truth of this fact.

Hamas and Fatah have already recognised and responded to the tectonic shifts in the Middle East. They realise that the status quo will not change if they themselves refuse to change. It seems it still remains for Israeli politicians to reach a similar conclusion.

Creative Commons images by Olivier Pacteau and Trango

share using:

London Fashion Week offers a rare glimpse into art and culture with a firm Palestinian heritage:

To mark London Fashion Week, the Mosaic Rooms will showcase a new collection by one of the most promising young designers to recently emerge from the Arab world, OmarJoseph Nasser-Khoury.

Silk Thread Martyrs was conceptually inspired by the history and contemporary realities of the designer’s homeland, Palestine. Structurally and technically, the work draws inspiration from the traditional costumes and fabrics of that region and specifically the work of traditional Palestinian embroiderers, many of them refugees living in Lebanon or Jordan, who have maintained and developed the ancient skills of their lost homeland. Nasser-Khoury was inspired by the wonderful quality, rigorous detail and dedication of their work and, whilst creating his own collection, worked closely with them and with other local artisans and craftspeople. The result is a unique collection of outfits for men and women reflecting Palestine’s traditional and contemporary culture and its people: the farmer, the fighter, the martyr, the social worker, the refugee and, above all, the individual. Silk Thread Martyrs creates a new, transformed and subverted look that explores gender, duty and social constraints.

The collection features 22 individual garments, each unique in construction and design and made with the minimum use of machinery: embroidery, fabric, colouring and dyeing is carried out by hand, using natural materials such as indigo and tea. The design and production process of each garment will be explored through the exhibition.

OmarJoseph Nasser-Khoury was born in Al Quds (Jerusalem) in 1988 and grew up in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. His experiences of living under occupation and the restrictions imposed on his family and community have profoundly influenced his work. After finishing school in Ramallah, he went to the UK to take a foundation course in art and design at Camberwell College of Art before completing a BA degree at the London College of Fashion in Fashion Design and Technology.

The exhibition is running until 9th March 2011, more information and images are available from the Mosaic Rooms.

You can also hear OmarJospeh talking about the inspiration behind his exhibition on the BBC World Service arts programme, The Strand. Particularly striking is the description of a collar, which OmarJoseph acknowledges is not nowhere near practical, but which, in his words is “an oppressive collar inspired by an oppressive wall”.

Photograph by Tarek Moukaddem

share using:

Liberal Democrat life peer Lord Andrew Phillips OBE will be the Chair at a seminar titled ‘The Palestine Papers Under The Spotlight’ organised by Middle East Monitor and the Federation of Students Islamic Societies on the leaked Palestine Papers.

The papers, which were previously secret, were jointly released in January by the Guardian and Al-Jazeera and contain revelations which have serious implications. The papers span an entire decade and contain records of secret meetings and private e-mails and memos between Palestinian, Israeli and American leaders.

In addition to Lord Phillips, there will be a panel of experts offering their own analysis and insights into the contents of the papers and what they could mean for the future. More information is available on the MEMO website.

Venue: Senate House, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HU

Date: Tuesday 22nd Feb

Time: The event will start at 4.30pm at Senate House with registration starting promptly at 4pm.

(Image of Lord Andrew Phillips created by Keith Edkins and licensed under Creative Commons)

share using:

A short film showing how difficult economic and social development is within Gaza whilst under blockade.

share using:

“Nick Clegg: we got it wrong on Israel” , screamed the Jewish Chronicle headline, following the Deputy Prime Minister’s speech to the Lib Dem Friends of Israel on 11 November.

But what precisely is Mr Clegg apologising for?

He believes that we have been wrong to speak up for Palestinian justice and not cry ‘equally loudly’ for Israeli justice: that is ‘the right of Israel to defend itself against the threats it continually faces’.

He has thus bought into two central and specious mantras of Israeli propaganda: the first, that this is an equal conflict. The second: that Israeli attacks on Gaza and the West Bank are motivated by Israel’s security needs.

There is nothing equal about this conflict. Not grievances, not armaments, not  crimes, not casualties. Israel is in clear breach of international law and specifically UN Resolution 242 in continuing her 43-year long (and ongoing) occupation of Palestinian land. Israel is not the victim here. In the recent ‘Operation Cast Lead’, Israel’s attack upon Gaza in 2008/2009, Palestinian casualties numbered 1,397 (345 of whom were minors) and Israeli casualties 13, four of whom were the victims of friendly fire, according to the Israel Human Rights organisation B’Tselem. ‘Disproportionate force’, the stated strategy of the Israeli Defence Force, articulated by Major General Eisenkot, during the 2006 assault on south Lebanon, is illegal in itself.

Nor did Mr Clegg explain how targeted missile strikes on the only bread producing factory in Gaza, and the  bulldozing of 100,000 chickens underground in order to destroy a rich source of protein for a starving population,  (Report of the UN Fact Finding Mission to the Gaza Conflict, paragraphs 939-958) makes Israeli citizens safer.

The Deputy PM repeated also, word for depressing word, the intention of our coalition partners to amend the Geneva Convention legislation on Universal Jurisdiction (UJ) in order to give safe conduct to Israeli ministers visiting this country:

‘Politically motivated arrest warrants … accusations based on poorly justified grounds’

No: arrest warrants are motivated by those for whom international law is the only basis for Middle East peace, and who are sickened by the deliberate assault on a civilian population. The shelling of hospitals, schools and ambulances, the  refusal of medical treatment, which allowed 4-year old Ahmad  al-Samouni to bleed to death while the ambulance and its paramedic staff were strip searched, found clean, then ordered back to Gaza city without him,  puts Israel into a place where ordinary morality has long departed.

It is political motivation which makes these crimes ‘OK’.

And ‘poorly justified grounds’? Judge Richard Goldstone and his team conducted 188 individual interviews, and reviewed more than 300 reports, submissions and other documentation amounting to more than 10,000 pages, over 30 videos and 1,200 photos. Interviews were conducted in Jordan and Geneva and by telephone as well as in Gaza.  Mr Clegg probably knows this as well as anyone else.

He must also know that of the 17 Lib Dem ministers in the coalition government, 16 signed Jeremy Corbyn’s EDM during the last Parliament to keep the law on UJ unaltered.

For the vast majority of party members, international law and human rights are fundamental to Liberal Democrat belief, ‘woven into our DNA’ as Ros Scott a former President of the party expressed it, and not to be given away at the first whiff of power.

Mr Clegg is making new friends: but he will lose old ones. Among them will be the Jewish lobby from Jews for Justice for Palestinians (JfJfP) and other Jewish organisations, who refuse to be silenced when they criticize Israeli aggression and call for justice in the Occupied Territories.  He will lose a mass of voters for whom the Lib Dem party was their conscience: the only party not to be bullied into turning a blind eye to human rights violations because the perpetrators happen to be allies.

And he will lose respect, inside and outside the party, that he will probably never recover.

(Creative Commons image by Iain Forbes)

share using:

It is a little known fact – even amongst those who campaign for the human rights of Palestinians – that November 15 is Independence Day for Palestine. On that day in 1988 the Palestine National Council (PNC), the legislative body of the PLO, made a declaration of independence in Algiers.

Mirroring the Israeli Declaration of Independence 40 years earlier, the PNC cited United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 as the basis for their claims to independence:

… it is this Resolution that still provides those conditions of international legitimacy that ensure the right of the Palestinian Arab people to sovereignty.

The Palestinian Declaration of Independence stated that:

Governance will be based on principles of social justice, equality and non-discrimination in public rights of men or women, on grounds of race, religion, color or sex, under the aegis of a constitution which ensures the rule of law and an independent judiciary. Thus shall these principles allow no departure from Palestine’s age-old spiritual and civilisational heritage of tolerance and religious coexistence.

An opportunity for peace based upon United Nations resolutions and social justice within a State of Palestine was missed in 1988. Today, over 20 years later, many are still working towards a just solution.

Photo by Gideon LichField (Creative Commons)

share using:

Eden Abarjil & Palestinian prisoners

The IDF are attempting to limit the damage caused by Eden Aberjil, an ex-IDF soldier who published pictures of herself with Palestinian prisoners who were blindfolded and handcuffed. The photos were published under the heading ‘IDF – the best time of my life’.

Reminiscent of the damning pictures of Abu Ghraib, (though no-one is implying the Palestinian prisoners were tortured by Aberjil), the IDF are currently at pains to point out that the internal ethical code of the IDF (‘The Spirit of The IDF‘) does not allow such things as the conduct of Aberjil, though no doubt the US Army has a similar code of conduct.

After publishing the pictures Aberjil and her friends commented on them in ridicule of the helpless prisoners.

As Aberjil left the IDF upon completion of her compulsory service before making the photographs public, it is not yet known if or how she will be subject to legal proceedings following the publication of the pictures.

In response to the revelations, Breaking The Silence - an organisation of veteran IDF soldiers who demand accountability regarding Israel’s military actions in the Occupied Territories – have released pictures on facebook demonstrating that far from being an isolated case, the behaviour of Aberjil appears to be not uncommon within the IDF.

Breaking the Silence - images of IDF behaviour towards prisoners

The head of the Israeli Committee Against Torture, Yishai Menuchim, said that Aberjil ”reflects an attitude which has become the norm and consists in treating Palestinians like objects, not like human beings”, whilst the Palestinian Authority commented that the pictures of Abergil show “the mentality of the occupier to be proud of humiliating Palestinians”.

The IDF styles itself as ‘the most ethical army in the world’. It is hard to see how that self-image can be reconciled with the insistence of Aberjil that she still does not “understand what was wrong” with taking the pictures, or her apparent lack of remorse or plain empathy for the victims of her exploits.

The IDF has rightly condemned the pictures as “shameful”, although Aberjil herself asserts that taking such trophy pictures is “something that happens every day in the army”.

share using: