CIAO DATE: 10/2010
Volume: 39, Issue: 3
Spring 2010
From the Editor (PDF)
Rashid I. Khalidi
Muhammad Ali Khalidi
This article examines the content of and justification for a new "ethical code" designed for the Israeli army to take into account the "fight against terror." It argues that the code contains two innovations: it includes acts aimed exclusively at military targets in its definition of "terrorism," and it contains a principle of distinction that prioritizes the lives of citizen combatants over those of noncitizen noncombatants, contrary to centuries of theorizing about the morality of war as well as international humanitarian law. The article suggests that the principle of distinction played a direct role in Israel's offensive in Gaza in winter 2008-2009, as demonstrated by a preponderance of testimony indicating that Israeli military commanders explicitly instructed soldiers to give priority to their own lives over those of Palestinian noncombatants.
The Polarization of the Palestinian Political Field
Jamil Hilal
Arguing that the polarization of the Palestinian political field did not start with Hamas’s takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, the author analyzes the factors that have eroded the cohesiveness and vitality of the Palestinian polity, namely, the paralysis of Palestinian political institutions, territorial and social fragmentation, and egregious outside interference. In this context, and in the absence of an internal Palestinian debate about the objectives of holding elections under occupation, the author shows that the timing and circumstances of the 2006 legislative elections were bound to precipitate the current state of disarray. Finally, he considers the way forward, highlighting the potential of public pressure in promoting national reconciliation. NO ONE WOULD QUESTION today the utter disarray of the Palestinian political field [i], where two separate entities governed by bitterly rival factions are ensconced in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, one under Israeli occupation, the other under a suffocating Israeli siege. Each of the two governments, one primarily secular (controlled by Fatah), the other “Islamist” (controlled by Hamas), has its own security forces and, to the extent possible, bans the activities of members of the rival faction within “its” territory (if it does not arrest or imprison them). Both political “entities” are heavily dependent on external funding (from different donors) and are allied to different regional powers overtly or covertly opposed to one another. As time passes, the two entities grow further and further apart, threatening a repetition in some form of the Pakistan-Bangladesh experience. This state of polarization did not begin in June 2007 when Hamas installed itself as the dominant political, military, and administrative power in the Gaza Strip while Fatah took steps to tighten its control over the West Bank. Rather, these events deepened trends long in the making, enfeebling still further a political field that had been battered since the early 1990s by many changes and events, regional and international. The present essay [ii] seeks to highlight the factors underlying the precariousness and vulnerability of the Palestinian polity and its consequent polarization, the paralysis of its national institutions, and egregious foreign interference. Similar situations have been noted in other regional states subject to invasion and war (Lebanon, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, and the Sudan, among others), but the disarray is perhaps more visible in Palestine for reasons relating to its history, its specific regional and international context, and its ongoing subjection to settler-colonialism and territorial fragmentation. THE MAKING OF THE PALESTINIAN POLITICAL FIELD The Palestinian political field differs from most others in that it includes Palestinian communities with differing socioeconomic, state, and civil society structures, not only in historic Palestine (the 1967 occupied territories and Israel) but also in the diaspora (al-shatat) created by the 1948 Nakba. It was also formed outside the national territory, not by a state but by a national liberation movement that arose in the Palestinian shatat. From the outset, then, lacking a sovereign state, the Palestinian political field has been subject to powerful outside influences and pressures. Its leading institution, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), was founded at the initiative of the Arab states in 1964 and was initially under their control. It was only after the 1967 war, when the PLO was democratically taken over by Palestinian resistance organizations led by Fatah, that it became a popular mass movement and, several years later, the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.” For the next twenty-some years, the PLO and its constituent organizations conducted their political, military, and other activities from bases in countries bordering Israel and later from Tunisia. While this situation made it vulnerable to the machinations of various regional powers seeking to determine the political and economic shape of the Middle East, the fact that the pressures were conflicting helped the PLO maintain to a tangible degree its hegemony over a relatively autonomous Palestinian political field throughout the 1970s and 1980s. PLO hegemony over the Palestinian political field began to be challenged in the late 1980s with the emergence in the occupied territories of political Islam, whose main embodiment, Hamas, had been established at the start of the first intifada in 1987, and the smaller Islamic Jihad several years earlier. Both these organizations were indigenous, having grown out of local branches of the Muslim Brotherhood, and their prominence in the first intifada showed them to be a force to be reckoned with. However, it was not until the 1993 signing of the Oslo accords, which laid out the stages that were supposed to lead to full peace with Israel by the end of the decade, that the magnitude of the challenge posed by political Islam became fully apparent. Under the Oslo accords, the PLO leadership returned from its long exile to the Palestinian territories, thus moving the center of gravity of Palestinian politics to the “inside” for the first time since 1948. There it established the Palestinian Authority (PA), a self-governing body whose powers were sharply limited by the Israeli occupier but which was understood as the first step on the road to statehood. The accords were fiercely opposed by political Islam, as well as by a number of secular PLO factions, most importantly the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP). With a growing following, and already endowed with a high degree of discipline and organization, political Islam and especially Hamas found in opposition to Oslo a powerful cause around which to mobilize.
The Palestinian Economy and Future Prospects: Interview with Mohammad Mustafa, Head of the Palestine Investment Fund
Salim Tamari, Khalid Farraj, Nasr Abdul Karim
Dr. Mohammad Mustafa is chairman and CEO of the Palestine Investment Fund (PIF) and an economic adviser to Palestinian Authority President Mahmud Abbas. PIF, the leading investor in Palestine, is a publicly limited company fully owned by the people of Palestine. It was established in 2003 with the transfer of assets managed by the Palestinian Authority. Financially and administratively autonomous, it is governed by an independent board of directors and a general assembly representing civil society, nongovernmental organizations, academia, and the public and private sectors. In pursuit of its mandate—which is to strengthen the local economy through investments that foster sustainable economic development while maintaining and increasing existing national reserves—PIF owns direct majority and minority stakes in companies and follows a business model based on public-private partnerships. Currently, PIF has approximately $800 million in assets under management and is leading a $4 billion investment program aimed at stimulating economic growth and creating over 100,000 new job opportunities within the next five years. The interview was conducted in Amman, Jordan, in mid-December 2009 by Nasr Abdul Karim, former dean of economics at An-Najah University, Nablus, and by Salim Tamari and Khalid Farraj, respectively director and associate director of the Institute for Palestine Studies, Ramallah. Abdul Karim: We wanted to start by asking about the current state of the Palestinian economy, particularly after the 2007 split [between Fatah and Hamas]. There have been reports of significant improvement in the gross domestic product (GDP). Is the improvement due to government action or to Israeli steps to facilitate trade and economic development after Netanyahu’s call for “economic peace”? Mustafa: There’s been a marked improvement in the Palestinian economy in the West Bank in the last three years. Obviously, it hasn’t reached where we want it to be. The Israeli occupation and its harsh and arbitrary policies negatively impact its performance and make it heavily dependent on the Israeli economy. Despite our recent efforts to decrease trade with Israel, it still constitutes 90 percent of total Palestinian trade. The result is an economy with only limited self-reliance and high donor dependency. And even though it is stable at present, it’s still below its 1967 and 1999 levels. Let me go into some detail with regard to the current economic indicators. According to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund [IMF], the growth rate for the first half of 2009 was about 5 percent. Without Israeli restrictions, it would have been higher, perhaps as much as 12 percent. There is no question that the very considerable international support received by the [Palestinian] Authority—which amounted to $1.7 billion in 2008 and a bit less in 2009—played a large part in realizing this growth, but a significant part also resulted from the political stability and improved security in the West Bank, and from institutional, legal, and economic reforms. These two factors—international support and the improved situation on the ground—led to the recovery, albeit partial, of the private sector. One factor that had very adverse effects on the economy this year—especially on small investors whose ventures depend on Israel—was the difference in the exchange rate of the U.S. dollar against the Israeli shekel. The world economic downturn also had an impact on inflation, which decreased by 2 percent in 2009 relative to 2008 thanks to a drop in the price of certain commodities, specifically oil and some foodstuffs. It could decline further in 2010. Finally, unemployment remains extremely high, reaching 26 percent overall—40 percent in Gaza, 18 percent in the West Bank. These figures do not even include disguised unemployment. For the West Bank, however, we expect to see the rate begin to fall soon. We still have a long way to go, of course, before we reach our goal of an independent, sustainable economy, but this requires not only continuing the program of reform but also removing Israeli restrictions. Farraj: You mentioned unemployment in Gaza. What about the economic situation there? Mustafa: Gaza’s economy is in a catastrophic state as a result of Israel’s embargo and the absence of Palestinian legitimacy. The economy has been totally destroyed, particularly the private sector. The organized destruction of the economy in the past two years has completely done away with the economic wealth it took decades to build. Some enterprises established in the 1920s and 1930s have now been destroyed and cannot be rebuilt without huge effort. At present, Gaza’s economy is based on three sources: (1) the salaries paid by the Authority to nearly 60,000 employees, which support about a million people; (2) the salaries and donor aid paid by the government in Gaza to its employees and members of its security forces; and (3) informal trade—in other words, the tunnels. I think Israel’s ongoing embargo and policy of collective punishment of the entire Gaza population is utterly disgraceful. Even a partial reconstruction of Gaza has not been allowed to take place. The Sharm al-Shaykh donor conference [held on 2 March 2009] raised $4 billion, which was allocated for reconstruction, yet to this day there is no mechanism for getting even a fraction of these funds into Gaza. Furthermore, the Israeli embargo prevents materials, such as cement, steel, and wood, needed to restore destroyed homes and buildings from entering. Certainly Gaza’s economy was already bad before the blockade, but with the ongoing embargo and the catastrophic destruction of the Israeli invasion it continues to get worse. In my view, the Palestinian economy will never be strong until the two halves of the nation are reunited, national reconciliation is achieved, and Palestinian legality in Gaza is restored.
Remembering Hasib Sabbagh (1920-2010)
Walid Khalidi
Hasib Sabbagh, who died on 12 January 2010 after a long illness, was arguably the preeminent Palestinian entrepreneur in the business and contracting fields in the post-1948 period. Born to an old and distinguished Greek Catholic family of Safad in Eastern Galilee, Sabbagh established the Consolidated Contractors Company (CCC) in 1945 in Haifa with several partners after graduating in engineering from the American University of Beirut. Under his dynamic leadership and with the cooperation of his life-long partner, Said Khoury, the CCC (which Sabbagh reconstituted in Lebanon after the fall of Palestine) evolved from a modest local enterprise into the giant global multinational corporation that it is today. Using the CCC as his base, he began as of the early 1970s to devote his great energy to the service of Palestine, not only through his philanthropic ventures promoting social and educational causes, but also through his behind-the-scenes political mediation and reconciliation efforts. The following reminiscences trace the unusual partnership and friendship between the author, whose orientation was largely academic, and Sabbagh, whose approach reflected his big-business milieu. The two met in 1972 around the time when Sabbagh was embarking on his public service phase. They became fast friends and remained so until Sabbagh’s death, joined by their common dedication to Palestine. The memoir includes Sabbagh’s own account of his departure from Palestine in 1948 and sheds light on some relatively little known activities of the Palestinian business and academic elite in the post-1967 period. I met Hasib Sabbagh for the first time in 1972 in Beirut, but his name had been familiar to me since the late 1930s when he was a student at the Government Arab College in Jerusalem, whose principal was my father. The principal’s residence was just behind the main college building, and I heard his name mentioned while eavesdropping on a faculty meeting held in my father’s study. The fact that Hasib was a pupil at the Arab College already says a lot about him. The college was the apex of the Arab, male, public (in the American sense) educational system. Admission to it was based exclusively on merit and the most stringent entrance qualifications. Although a boarding institution, its fees were nominal. Entrants were at the top of their class at the mid-high school level, where the college classes began. Its recruitment network encompassed the entire country, generating the stiffest competition among applicants and tapping the best Arab talent, rural and urban, irrespective of social or financial status. The faculty, graduates of the best British universities, were mostly Arab, and the curriculum was a balanced synthesis of the humanities and the sciences as well as of Arab Islamic culture and the Western classical heritage, both Greek and Latin being taught. . . . Had Palestine not fallen in 1948, the college would have become its national university. In most ways, the Arab College was unique in the Arab world, and possibly in the third world. Its graduates constitute to this day an elite with their own esprit de corps. Between the 1930s and 1972, when our very different paths finally converged, the watershed year in Hasib’s life and mine—as for all Palestinians—was, of course, 1948. The events of that year have remained a permanent item on our agenda as, day after day and over the years, Hasib and I “tired the sun with talking and sent it down the sky.” Coaxing his memory, the following is what I have pieced together from Hasib’s reminiscences of how he left Haifa, his adopted city, which in his mind was second only to the true capital of Palestine, his hometown Safad. Hasib’s Tale When the final Jewish onslaught came on 23 April, Arab morale broke down and there started a panicky flight from the city by land and sea. The British forces escorted convoy after convoy out of town, encouraging the evacuation of Haifa. We lived in the Abbas quarter, and close by was the house of George Mu`ammar, a business partner and an active member of Haifa’s National Committee. Mu`ammar was distraught by the flight of Haifa’s residents, and I can still see him standing on his balcony, haranguing the crowds surging by below, pleading with them not to leave. When I saw this I ran up to him and shouted: “What on earth are you doing? Leave these people alone! Can’t you see that if they stay and get killed, you will be blamed?” He persisted, but I pulled him down and made him stop. I myself had decided to go to Safad, my hometown, which was in the middle of Arab territory and strongly held by us. But with the fighting in eastern and western Galilee at the time, the easiest way to reach Safad was from the north, through south Lebanon, which meant I had first to go to Beirut. Our company had lorries in Haifa, and I invited anybody who wanted to travel to Beirut to climb on board. Soon the lorries were crammed to capacity, and the British escorted us to the Lebanese frontier. We arrived in Beirut on the afternoon of 23 April. There I met Captain Emile Jumay`an, who was with the Transjordanian Arab Legion and an old family friend. I told him I had just come from Haifa, which had fallen, and he asked me what I intended to do. I said I was going to Safad after seeing my brother Habib and my sister Suad, who had just come [to Beirut] from there. He told me not to go, although he was on his way there himself on a mission involving the garrison under the command of the Arab League’s military committee based in Damascus. When my brother Habib, who had been sent by the Safad National Committee to get arms and ammunition, heard what Jumay`an had said, he decided to stay behind in Beirut. But my sister Suad, who had come to Beirut on behalf of the Red Crescent to take back medicines and bandages, insisted on completing her mission regardless. After two weeks in Beirut, I set off for Safad myself. But when I reached the border on 9 May, masses of people were coming from the direction of Safad, among them my brother Munir and my sister Suad, who was disheveled, barefooted, and with torn clothing. Safad had fallen, so we returned to Beirut, and, as I contemplated our situation, I decided that what the family most urgently needed was money. We had plenty in Barclays Bank in Haifa, so I made up my mind to return there, and set off by sea from Tyre. The journey was stormy and the boat was packed, with everybody vomiting over everybody else. The boat docked in the harbor near the government hospital on 10 May, five days before the end of the British Mandate. Arriving in the city we saw both British and Haganah forces. The Haganah troops looked at our identity cards and, the Mandate still being in force, allowed us in. I made my way to our house in Abbas. Shops were closed, the streets were empty, and Haganah troops were all over. Our house had not been touched. Soon after my arrival, I went to call on Mu`ammar, who was delighted to see me. He chided me for leaving and tried to convince me to stay: “If you stay behind, you and I can do a lot of business together.” I said I had come only to withdraw money from the bank.
Trip Notes on a Return to Israel and the West Bank: Reflections on U.S. Peacemaking, the Security Mission, and What Should be Done
Col. (USA Ret.) Philip J. Dermer
The following document, previously unpublished, was written in March 2010 by a recentlyretired (June 2009) U.S. Army colonel with thirty years experience in the Middle East, including tours of duty and advisory roles (in both military/security and civilian domains) from North Africa to the Persian Gulf. The subject of the informal report is the author's first two trips as a "civilian" to Israel and the West Bank, where he had served two tours of duty, most recently as U.S. military attaché in Tel Aviv during Israel's 2005 unilateral disengagement from Gaza and the formation of the U.S. Security Coordinator's (USSC) mission to reform Palestinian Authority (PA) security forces. Written as an internal document for military colleagues and government circles, the report has been circulating widely-as did the author's earlier briefings on travel or missions in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, and especially Iraq-among White House senior staff, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Defense Intelligence Agency, CENTCOM (U.S. Central Command), EUCOM (U.S. European Command), and the USSC team. The document's focus is the state of the "peace process" and the current situation in the West Bank, with particular attention to the PA security forces and the changes on the ground since the author's last tour there ended in mid-2007. But the real interest of the paper lies in the message directed at its intended audience of military and government policy officials-that is, its frank assessment of the deficiencies of the U.S. peace effort and the wider U.S. policy-making system in the Israel-Palestine arena, with particular emphasis on the disconnect between the situation on the ground and the process led by Washington. The critique has special resonance in light of the emerging new thinking in the administration fueled by the military high command's unhappiness (expressed by CENTCOM commander General David Petraeus and Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Admiral Michael Mullen) with the State Department's handling of Middle East diplomacy, especially with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, on the grounds that diplomatic failures are having a negative impact on U.S. operations elsewhere in the region. For most JPS readers, the report has additional interest as an insider's view of the U.S. security presence in the Israel-Palestine arena. It also reflects a military approach that is often referenced but largely absent in public discourse and academic writings. The author, in addition to his tours of duty and peacekeeping missions in various Middle Eastern countries, has served as advisor to two U.S. special Middle East envoys, the U.S. negotiating team with Syria, General Petraeus, Lieutenant General Keith Dayton, Vice President Dick Cheney, and, more generally, to CENTCOM, the Department of Defense, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, among others. In retirement, he has worked with CENTCOM as a key primary subject matter expert in the development of analyses and solutions for its area of responsibility, leads predeployment briefings for army units heading to Iraq, and travels frequently to Iraq and elsewhere in the region as an independent consultant. He is currently in Afghanistan with the CENTCOM commander's Afghanistan-Pakistan Center of Excellence. The report, made available to JPS, is being published with the author's permission.
Sand: The Invention of the Jewish People
Adam Sutcliffe
The Invention of the Jewish People, by Shlomo Sand (translated from the Hebrew by Yael Lotan). London and New York: Verso, 2009. xi + 313 pages. Index to p. 334. $34.95 cloth. Adam Sutcliffe, senior lecturer in European history at King’s College London, is the author of Judaism and Enlightenment (Cambridge University Press, 2003).
Sand: The Invention of the Jewish People
Adam Sutcliffe
The Invention of the Jewish People, by Shlomo Sand (translated from the Hebrew by Yael Lotan). London and New York: Verso, 2009. xi + 313 pages. Index to p. 334. $34.95 cloth. Adam Sutcliffe, senior lecturer in European history at King’s College London, is the author of Judaism and Enlightenment (Cambridge University Press, 2003).
Pappe: The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
Ephraim Nimni
The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, by Ilan Pappé. Oxford: Oneworld, 2007. 320 pages. $27.50 cloth; $14.95 paper. Ephraim Nimni is a reader on nationalism and ethnic conflict resolution at the School of Politics, International Studies and Philosophy, Queen’s University, Belfast.
Sufian: Healing the Land and the Nation: Malaria and the Zionist Project in Palestine, 1920-1947
Philippe Bourmaud
Healing the Land and the Nation: Malaria and the Zionist Project in Palestine, 1920–1947, by Sandra M. Sufian. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2007. xx + 348 pages. Bibliography to p. 372. Index to p. 385. $40.00 cloth. Philippe Bourmaud is a professor of modern and contemporary history at Lyon 3 University, France, and a fellow at the Laboratoire de Recherche Historique Rhône-Alpes (Lyon).
Mayer and Mourad: Jerusalem: Idea and Reality
Wendy Pullan
Jerusalem: Idea and Reality, edited by Tamar Mayer and Suleiman A. Mourad. London and New York: Routledge, 2008. xv + 320 pages. Index to p. 332. 37 figures. n.p. Wendy Pullan, senior lecturer in architecture and urbanism at the University of Cambridge and fellow of Clare College, is the director of the research project Conflict in Cities and the Contested State
Lundquist: The Temple of Jerusalem: Past, Present, and Future
Mick Dumper
The Temple of Jerusalem: Past, Present, and Future, by John M. Lundquist. London and Westport, CT: Praeger, 2008. xviii + 231 pages. Notes to p. 264. Bibliography to p. 286. Index to p. 298. $49.95 cloth. Mick Dumper is professor of Middle East politics at Exeter University. He is the author of The Future of the Palestinian Refugees: Towards Equity and Peace (Lynne Rienner, 2007) and The Politics of Sacred Space: The Old City of Jerusalem and the Middle East Conflict (Lynne Rienner, 2001).
Naguib: Women, Water and Memory: Recasting Lives in Palestine
Isabelle Humphries
Women, Water and Memory: Recasting Lives in Palestine, by Nefissa Naguib. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009. xvi +162 pages. Bibliography to p. 167. Index to p. 173. $87.00 paper. Isabelle Humphries has conducted doctoral research on the politics of memory among Palestinian refugees in the Galilee and coauthored a chapter on gendered Nakba memory with Laleh Khalili in Ahmad Sa’di and Lila Abu-Lughod (eds.), Nakba: Palestine, 1948, and the Claims of Memory (Columbia University Press, 2007).
Hovsepian: Palestinian State Formation: Education and the Construction of National Identity
Betty S. Anderson
Palestinian State Formation: Education and the Construction of National Identity, by Nubar Hovsepian. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2008. x + 188 pages. Notes to p. 222. Appendices to p. 226. Bibliography to p. 254. Index to p. 269. $52.99 cloth. Betty S. Anderson, associate professor of Middle East history at Boston University, is the author of Nationalist Voices in Jordan: The Street and the State (University of Texas Press, 2005) and Proselytizing and Protest: A History of the American University of Beirut (AUB) (University of Texas Press, 2011).
Nashif: Palestinian Political Prisoners: Identity and Community
Elia Zureik
Palestinian Political Prisoners: Identity and Community, by Esmail Nashif. London and New York: Routledge, 2008. Routledge Studies on the Arab-Israeli Conflict. xi + 207. Notes to p. 217. Bibliography to p. 225. Index to p. 232. $120 cloth. Elia Zureik is professor emeritus of sociology at Queen’s University in Ontario, Canada.
Rahman: Literary Disinheritance: The Writing of Home in the Work of Mahmoud Darwish and Assia Djebar
Hosam Aboul-Ela
Literary Disinheritance: The Writing of Home in the Work of Mahmoud Darwish and Assia Djebar, by Najat Rahman. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2008. xxiii + 112 pages. Bibliography to p. 128. Appendices to p. 142. Index to p. 146. $65 cloth. Hosam Aboul-Ela, associate professor of English at the University of Houston, is the author of Other South: Faulkner, Coloniality, and the Mariátegui Tradition (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2007) and the translator of Stealth by Sonallah Ibrahim (Aflame Books, 2010).
Arab Views (cartoons from al-Hayat)
This section aims to give readers a glimpse of how the Arab world views current events that affect Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict by presenting a selection of cartoons from al-Hayat, the most widely distributed mainstream daily in the Arab world. JPS is grateful to al-Hayat for permission to reprint its material.
Selections from the Press
This section includes articles and news items, mainly from Israeli but also from international press sources, that provide insightful or illuminating perspectives on events, developments, or trends in Israel and the occupied territories not readily available in the mainstream U.S. media.
Photos from the Quarter
This small sample of photos, selected from hundreds viewed by JPS, aims to convey a sense of the situation on the ground in the occupied territories during the quarter.
Quarterly Update on Conflict and Diplomacy : 16 November 2009 - 15 February 2010
Michele K. Esposito
The Quarterly Update is a summary of bilateral, multilateral, regional, and international events affecting the Palestinians and the future of the peace process. More than 100 print, wire, television, and online sources providing U.S., Israeli, Arab, and international independent and government coverage of unfolding events are surveyed to compile the Quarterly Update. The most relevant sources are cited in JPS's Chronology section, which tracks events day by day.
Settlement Monitor
Geoffrey Aronson
This section covers items—reprinted articles, statistics, and maps—pertaining to Israeli settlement activities in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. Unless otherwise stated, the items have been written by Geoffrey Aronson for this section or drawn from material written by him for Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories (hereinafter Settlement Report), a Washington-based bimonthly newsletter published by the Foundation for Middle East Peace. JPS is grateful to the foundation for permission to draw on its material.
Congressional Monitor : 111th Congress: January - December 2009 (PDF)
Paul James Costic
CongressionalMonitor.org, the companion site to this JPS section, provides in-depth summaries of all bills and many resolutions listed here. Published each spring, the Congressional Monitor provides summaries of all relevant bills and resolutions (joint, concurrent, and simple) introduced during the previous session of Congress that mention, even briefly, Palestine, Israel, or the broader Arab-Israeli conflict. It is part of a wider project of the Institute for Palestine Studies that includes the Congressional Monitor Database available at CongressionalMonitor.org. The database contains all relevant legislation from the 107th Congress through the first session of the 111th Congress (2001–2009) and will be updated on an ongoing basis to include legislation prior to 2001 and after 2009. You'll also find an in-depth set of FAQs which provide a guide to the database, how to use it, and the legislative process. The Monitor helps to identify major themes of legislation related to the Palestine issue as well as initiators of specific legislation, their priorities, the range of their concerns, and their attitudes toward the regional actors. Material in this compilation is drawn from www.thomas.loc.gov, where readers can also find a detailed primer on the legislative process entitled “How Our Laws Are Made.” The first session of the 111th Congress convened on 6 January 2009 and adjourned on 24 December of the same year. A total of 108 bills and resolutions relating to Palestine, Israel, or the wider Arab-Israeli conflict were introduced this session, representing roughly 1% of bills and resolutions introduced this term. Twenty-four of the 108 were passed. Democrats enjoyed wide majorities in both chambers this session following victories in the fall 2008 elections, which also saw the election of Democrat Barack Obama as president. In 2009, Democrats held 59 seats in the Senate (supplemented by two Independent senators, who caucus with them) to the Republicans’ 39, and 257 seats in the House to the Republicans’ 178. In this session, a number of measures were introduced by conservative Republicans aimed at restricting U.S. relief efforts (such as aid for Gaza in the wake of Operation Cast Lead) and at pressuring the Obama administration to take a harder line toward Iran and other U.S. opponents in the region (see especially H.R. 3832 of 10/15/09, the Peace Through Strength Act). Many of these efforts dovetailed with aggressive Republican opposition to domestic Democratic legislative initiatives. Some, such as an amendment to prohibit reconstruction assistance to Gaza until assurances could be secured that it would not be diverted to Hamas (S. Amendment 631 to H.R. 1105 of 2/23/09), drew support from some otherwise moderate Democrats. Other initiatives demonstrate the degree to which Democrats and Republicans remained in alignment with respect to Israel-Palestine. Bills and Joint Resolutions Sixty-three of the 108 measures introduced this session were bills or joint resolutions that have the force of law if passed. Six of these, each involving funding for Israel, were passed by both the House and Senate and signed into law by President Obama. The National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2647 of 6/2/09) granted legal authority for the Defense Department to conduct joint research and development with Israel for Israeli missile defense systems, while the Department of Defense Appropriations Act (H.R. 3326 of 7/24/09) provided funding for these programs (see “Notes on Legislative Procedure” below for more on the distinction between authorization and appropriation bills). The annual funding bill for U.S. agricultural agencies and programs (H.R. 2997 of 6/23/09) contained an earmark providing funding to the Ohio-Israel Initiative, a project promoting technical and economic cooperation between farmers and agriculture firms in Ohio and the Negev. The remaining three bills provided funding for the State Department and U.S. foreign assistance programs for fiscal year 2009 (H.R. 1105 of 2/23/09 and H.R. 2346 of 5/12/09) and fiscal year 2010 (H.R. 3288 of 7/22/09). All three of these bills provided grants for Israel to purchase military equipment from the United States (and, significantly, from Israeli defense contractors; see these bills for explanation) at levels agreed to in the August 2007 Memorandum of Understanding between the two governments. The foreign aid bills also provided assistance to the Palestinian Authority and financed other aid programs in the West Bank and Gaza. The Supplemental Appropriations Act (H.R. 2346 of 5/12/09) provided a large aid package pledged by the Obama administration in the wake of Operation Cast Lead. Funding measures for West Bank and Gaza programs, especially for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and programs in Gaza, were passed despite repeated attempts by the Republican right to cut the funding entirely or greatly restrict it for fear that it would aid Hamas or other terrorist groups (see amendments SA 631 and SA 657 to H.R. 1105 of 2/23/09 below, as well as H.R. 557 of 1/15/09, H.R. 1062 of 2/13/09, H.R. 2475 of 5/19/09, and amendments 44, 60, and 83 to H.R. 3081 of 6/26/09 online at CongressionalMonitor.org). Congressional Priorities: Iran, Terrorism, and the Holocaust Of all the bills and joint resolutions relevant to Israel-Palestine introduced this session, 25 (40%) sought to provide military, financial, or diplomatic aid for Israel or to otherwise confer privileges on the Israeli government, Israeli citizens, or Israeli exports. In addition to the six bills passed into law, other bills sought to set U.S. policy to pursue a nuclear power cooperation agreement with Israel (H.R. 2475 of 5/19/09); amend U.S. arms export control laws to allow expedited arms sales to Israel (H.R. 2410 of 5/12/09 and H.R. 2475 of 5/19/09); provide diplomatic support for Israel at the United Nations, specifically in the Human Rights Council (H.R. 2376 of 5/12/09) and with regard to the Durban Review Conference (H.R. 1920 of 4/2/09 and H.R. 3231 of 7/16/09); provide privileged immigration status for Israeli citizens seeking to conduct business in the United States (H.R. 4406 of 12/6/09); allow Israeli prescription medications to be imported to the U.S. (S. 80 of 1/6/09); exempt Israeli citizens from the prohibition on the U.S. government employing foreign nationals (H.R. 3170 of 7/10/09); and eliminate the duty on a type of Israeli tobacco (S. 2042 of 10/29/09). Another major priority this session was Iran, with a number of bills introduced to impose sanctions aimed at stopping its nuclear program. Two of these bills, the Senate and House versions of the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act (S. 908 of 4/28/09 and H.R. 2194 of 4/30/09), which would require the president to impose sanctions designed to cripple the Iranian economy, were the primary focus of American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) lobbying efforts this session. These two bills had (and still have) overwhelming support in both chambers; their passage was delayed only to allow the Obama administration time to address Iran’s nuclear program diplomatically. Other bills sought to declare U.S. policy to be in support of Israel’s right to defend itself from Iran, where self-defense is interpreted to include a preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities (H.R. 2475 of 5/19/09 and H.R. 3832 of 10/15/09); or invoked the Iranian threat to Israel to authorize the Defense Department to develop ballistic missile defense systems for Israel (H.R. 2410 of 5/14/09, H.R. 2475 of 5/19/09, and H.R. 2647 of 6/2/09). Twenty-two bills (35% of relevant bills) dealing with terrorism were introduced, the most important of which being the three appropriations bills passed into law providing aid to the West Bank, Gaza, and Lebanon (H.R. 1105 of 2/23/09, H.R. 2346 of 5/12/09, and H.R. 3288 of 7/22/09). These bills provided money to train Palestinian security forces and to train and equip Lebanese security forces to conduct counter-terror operations. These bills also contained numerous provisions placing conditions on the aid to ensure that it does not go to terrorist groups. Other bills sought to impose sanctions on North Korea (S. 837 of 4/20/09, H.R. 1980 of 4/21/09, and S. 1416 of 7/8/09), Saudi Arabia (H.R. 1288 of 3/3/09), and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (H.R. 2375 of 5/12/09), and to continue sanctions against Syria (H.R. 1206 of 2/26/09), until these countries ceased support for Hamas, Hizballah, and others; withhold funding for UNRWA until the secretary of state certifies that the Agency does not employ or aid terrorists (H.R. 557 of 1/15/09); and prohibit funding for the United Nations Human Rights Council since it has failed to condemn nations that sponsor terrorism (H.R. 2376 of 5/12/09). Thirteen bills (20% of relevant bills) dealt with the Holocaust, including three to allow U.S. courts to hear cases brought by Holocaust survivors or their heirs seeking restitution from railroads that transported people to concentration camps (S. 28 of 1/7/09 and H.R. 4237 of 12/8/09) or to recover unpaid Holocaust-era insurance policies (Title XV of H.R. 2475 of 5/19/09). Others sought to establish a commission to review the U.S. government’s decision to deny asylum to Jewish and other refugees fleeing Europe during the Holocaust (H.R. 1425 and S. 564 both of 3/10/09); encourage foreign governments to try or extradite Nazi war criminals (H.R. 1439 of 3/11/09 and S. 1704 of 9/24/09); or provide funding for Holocaust education programs (H.R. 2089 and S. 892 both of 4/23/09) or for the Museum of the History of Polish Jews (H.R. 1590 of 3/18/09). Another cited Iranian pres. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s denials of the Holocaust as reason to impose crippling economic sanctions on Iran and ensure that the U.S. possesses the military means to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons (H.R. 3832 of 10/15/09). Simple and Concurrent Resolutions In addition to the measures that have the force of law if passed, 45 simple and concurrent resolutions were introduced this session. Simple resolutions (designated H./S. Res.) are debated and passed in only one chamber, while concurrent resolutions (designated H./S. Con. Res.) are debated and passed by both chambers. Neither type of resolution is presented to the president for signature or veto, and thus neither can become law. Pertinent here are resolutions used to express the views, opinions, and (on occasion) the demands of Congress. (Resolutions are also used to set parliamentary rules and procedures for each chamber.) A resolution passed in one or both chambers not only represents the opinion of one chamber or the legislative branch as a whole, but in most cases the opinion of one or both political parties and their leadership. While not legally binding, then, resolutions can carry significant political weight. When the 111th Congress convened, Operation Cast Lead was still underway, and four resolutions were introduced in the first four days of the session declaring “strong support for Israel,” recognizing its right to defend itself from Hamas’s “unceasing aggression,” and condemning Hamas’s rocket attacks. The two most important of these measures, H. Res. 34 and S. Res. 10 (both of 1/8/09), were introduced by the top Democratic leaders in the House and Senate and passed overwhelmingly within one day. One additional resolution called for an immediate cease-fire and for Israel and Hamas to allow unrestricted humanitarian assistance to Gazans (H. Res. 66 of 1/15/09). Later in the session another resolution was passed deeming the Goldstone report irredeemably biased and calling on the Obama administration to oppose it in all international fora. The most common theme of resolutions this session, however, was Iran, with twelve introduced (27% of all relevant resolutions). Among these, four resolutions addressed the lack of religious freedom in Iran, with three condemning its persecution of its Baha’i minority as agents of Israel (H. Res. 175 of 2/13/09, S. Res. 71 of 3/9/09, and H. Res. 840 of 10/15/09) and two citing Ahmadinejad’s denial of the Holocaust and statements against Israel as having created a climate of fear among Iranian Jews (H. Res. 33 of 1/8/09 and H. Res. 840 mentioned above). Two resolutions cited Iran’s possession of ballistic missiles capable of striking Israel as justification for calls for President Obama to deploy ballistic missile defenses in Europe (H. Res. 319 of 4/2/09 and H. Res. 581 of 6/25/09), and one expressed support for Israel’s right to defend itself from an imminent threat posed by Iran (H. Res. 557 of 6/18/09). Eleven resolutions (24% of relevant resolutions) dealt with the Holocaust, with three urging European countries to compensate Holocaust victims for lost property (H. Con. Res. 89 of 3/30/09, S. Res. 153 of 5/19/09, and S. Con. Res. 23 of 5/19/09) and others commemorating specific events or individuals, and permitting the use of the Capitol rotunda to hold a Holocaust remembrance ceremony. Ten resolutions addressed the topic of terrorism, of which three passed. Four resolutions, mentioned above, addressed terrorism leading up to and during Operation Cast Lead. Further resolutions expressed support for Israel’s right to defend itself from imminent threats from terrorist organizations and states that harbor them (H. Res. 557 mentioned above), called on the president to designate Venezuela as a state sponsor of terrorism for its support of Iran and Hizballah (H. Res. 872 of 10/27/09), and called on the secretary of state to take measures to certify that UNRWA is not using American funds to support terrorism (H. Con. Res. 29 of 1/28/09). Notes on Legislative Procedure In terms of process, for a bill to become law it must be agreed to in identical form by the House and the Senate, and signed by the president. The president may refuse to sign and thus veto a bill, but the veto can be overturned by a two-thirds majority vote in each chamber. If Congress is not in session, the president can veto a bill simply by not taking action for ten days after its presentation. (This action is called a “pocket veto.”) As already noted, simple or concurrent resolutions have no legal force if passed. Simple resolutions can be passed by either the House or the Senate, whereas both chambers must pass concurrent resolutions. Among the most important bills passed by Congress are authorization and appropriations bills. Authorization bills provide the legal authority for federal agencies and departments to exist and carry out their various programs. Appropriations bills allow agencies to draw funds from the U.S. Treasury in order to pay for their activities. Understanding the Congressional Monitor Presented here is a list of all relevant bills and resolutions introduced in 2009. Measures are listed in the order in which they were first introduced, with a brief title provided after the date. The second line of each entry provides the bill or resolution number, the name and affiliation of the original sponsor, and the number of cosponsors. Due to the large number of bills and resolutions introduced this session and to our space limitations, summaries are provided only for those bills that passed into law this session or for bills or resolutions whose context or relevance is not clear. In-depth summaries of all bills and most resolutions are available at CongressionalMonitor.org, IPS’s online database of bills and resolutions from 2001 forward dealing with Palestine, Israel, and the Arab-Israeli conflict. For many bills and resolutions, a “See also” entry has been added to refer readers to similar or related measures. Under this entry, measures listed in boldface contain text that is similar or identical and also include a summary description. The “Last major action” entry indicates where the bill or resolution stood at the end of the session in December 2009. Until the Congress ends in 2011 or the measure is passed or withdrawn, it remains “live” and can be amended repeatedly. Various versions of legislative initiatives are often in play simultaneously, and the differences are reconciled in the final passage. For example, the House version of the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act (H.R. 2194 of 4/30/09) was amended by the Senate in March 2010 to include the text of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2009 (S. 2799 of 11/19/09), and is likely to be amended further and passed later in 2010.
Council of the European Union, Conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process, Brussels, 8 December 2009
EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Catherine Ashton, Statement at the European Parliament Debate on the Middle East Peace Process, Strasbourg, 15 December 2009 (excerpts)
UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), "Restricting Space: The Planning Regime Applied by Israel in Area C of the West Bank," East Jerusalem, 15 December 2009 (excerpts)
Campaign to Preserve Mamilla Jerusalem Cemetery, Petition for Urgent Action on the Desecration of Mamilla Cemetery, Jerusalem, 10 February 2010 (excerpts)
PA Pres. Mahmud Abbas, Interview with al-Sharq al-Awsat, Ramallah, 22 December 2009 (excerpts)
PLO Chief Negotiator Saeb Erakat, "The Political Situation in Light of Developments with the U.S. Administration and the Israeli Government and Hamas's Continued Coup d'Etat," Ramallah, December 2009 (excerpts)
Palestinian Center for Human Rights, "23 Days of War, 928 Days of Closure: Life One Year after Israel's Latest Offensive on the Gaza Strip, 27 December 2008 - 18 January 2009" Gaza City, December 2009 (excerpts)
Dep. FM Daniel Ayalon, Open Letter to the Arab World, al-Sharq al-Awsat, 15 December 2009 (excerpts)
Aluf Benn, Ehud Olmert's Plan for Peace with the Palestinians, Ha'Aretz, 17 December (excerpts)
B'Tselem and Bimkom, "The Establishment and Expansion Plans of the Ma'ale Adumim Settlement: Spatial and Human Rights Implications," Jerusalem, December 2009 (excerpts)
Vera Michlin, Working Paper on "Winning the Battle of the Narrative" for the 2010 Herzliya Conference, Herzliya, 31 January - 3 February 2010 (excerpts)
U.S. Special Envoy George Mitchell, Remarks on the Middle East Peace Process to PBS, New York, 6 January 2010 (excerpts)
Pres. Barack Obama, Remarks on Middle East Issues to Time magazine, New York, 21 January 2010 (excerpts)
Secy. of State Hillary Clinton, Address at the U.S.-Islamic World Forum, Doha, 14 February 2010 (excerpts)
Chronology : 16 November 2009 - 15 February 2010
Michele K. Esposito
This section is part of a chronology begun in JPS 13, no. 3 (Spring 1984). Chronology dates reflect Eastern Standard Time (EST). For a more comprehensive overview of events related to the al-Aqsa intifada and of regional and international developments related to the peace process, see the Quarterly Update on Conflict and Diplomacy in this issue. 16 NOVEMBER As the quarter opens, Israel’s siege of Gaza continues, with Israel barring all exports, all but limited humanitarian imports, and most cross-border transit by individuals (with very limited exceptions for extreme medical cases, VIPs, and international NGO workers). Violence in the West Bank is low and restrictions on Palestinian movement between major population centers have eased noticeably. Israeli-Palestinian peace talks are on hold as Palestinian Authority (PA) Pres. Mahmud Abbas refuses to resume negotiations until Israel implements a comprehensive settlement freeze (which Israel rejects).Today in Gaza, 4 Palestinians are injured when a smuggling tunnel under the Rafah border collapses. In the West Bank, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) conducts late-night arrest raids, house searches in and around Tubas, in Bayt Fajjar nr. Bethlehem, and in Qalandia refugee camp (r.c.) nr. Ramallah. Of note, 6 IDF soldiers refuse orders to dismantle structures at an unauthorized settlement outpost; they are relieved of duty pending a court-martial hearing. (NYT 11/17; OCHA, WP 11/18; PCHR 11/19) 17 NOVEMBER The Israeli Interior Min. approves construction of 900 new housing units in Gilo settlement in East Jerusalem, precipitating sharp criticism from the White House not only for the Gilo project but for “the continued pattern of evictions and demolitions of Palestinian homes” in Jerusalem; UN Secy.-Gen. Ban Ki-moon “deplores” the decision. In the West Bank, the IDF conducts late-night arrest raids, house searches nr. Bethlehem, Hebron (evicting 1 Palestinian family from their home, occupying it as an observation post), Jericho, Nablus. In the Jerusalem environs, Israeli forces demolish 2 Palestinian homes (1 in Wadi Qaddum, housing 30 Palestinians; 1 in Bayt Hanina, displacing 11 Palestinians). (IFM, NYT, OCHA, PLONAD, WP, WT 11/18; PCHR 11/19) 18 NOVEMBER New York State assemblyman Dov Hikind leads a delegation of 50 Jewish Americans to lay the cornerstone of a new settlement housing project (Nof Zion) in the Palestinian neighborhood of Jabal Mukabir in East Jerusalem (see Quarterly Update for details). Meanwhile, the IDF demolishes a Palestinian home and store in Issawiyya (14 residents) on the outskirts of Jerusalem, 4 Palestinian structures in other Arab areas of East Jerusalem, including Silwan. In the West Bank, the IDF searches greenhouses nr. Jenin, looking for unlicensed wells; conducts late-night arrest raids, house searches in Tulkarm and nr. Jenin. Also in East Jerusalem, an Israeli youth stabs, wounds a Palestinian laborer in Ramat Eshkol settlement. The IDF also makes 2 incursions into s. Gaza nr. Abasan and Khuza to bulldoze land along the border fence, clearing lines of sight. Late in the day, unidentified Palestinians fire a rocket into Israel, causing no damage or injuries. In response, the IDF makes air strikes on 2 smuggling tunnels along the Rafah border (injuring 1 Palestinian) and on a Hamas training site in Khan Yunis (destroying 2 structures). (NYT, XIN 11/19; PCHR 11/25; JPI 11/27) 19 NOVEMBER In the West Bank, the IDF stages synchronized late-night raids on the homes of 5 PA intelligence officers in villages nr. Nablus and Salfit, detaining the men (including the PA’s Salfit regional intelligence cmdr. Lt. Col. Muhammad `Abd al-Hamid Bani Fadil), marking Israel’s first arrest of senior PA security officials in 3 yrs.; the IDF also relays to the PA a request to turn over a 6th intelligence officer, but the PA does not comply; the Israeli DMin. confirms the arrests but refuses to comment, with Palestinian security sources speculating (YA 11/20) that Israel was pressuring the PA to back off investigation of a suspected collaborator; all 5 are released on 11/20 after talks between Israel and the PA. The IDF also stages synchronized late-night house searches in 3 villages w. of Jenin, making no arrests. IDF undercover units traveling in a car with Palestinian license plates enter Bil`in village, arrest a Palestinian on an Israeli wanted list. (YA 11/20; OCHA, PCHR 11/25) 20 NOVEMBER In the West Bank, the IDF fires rubber-coated steel bullets, stun grenades, tear gas at stone-throwing Palestinians taking part in weekly protests against the separation wall in Bil`in (10s suffer tear gas inhalation) and against Palestinian, Israeli, and international activists taking part in weekly nonviolent demonstration against the separation wall in Ni`lin (injuring 3 Palestinians); fires stun grenades and tear gas at Palestinian and international activists taking part in the weekly nonviolent demonstration against the separation wall in al-Ma`sara s. of Bethlehem (injuring 3 Palestinians, including a 9-yr.-old boy); conducts late-night arrest raids on several coffee shops nr. Qalqilya, detaining 3 PA security officers and 3 teenagers (including a 14-yr.-old boy). In Hebron, Jewish settlers fr. Ma’on in Hebron beat 4 Palestinian youths tending sheep nearby, chasing them off the land; Jewish settlers fr. Carmiel attack and vandalize a Palestinian home nearby, attempting to drive the Palestinian family off the land. (OCHA, PCHR 11/25) 21 NOVEMBER In Gaza, unidentified Palestinians fire a rocket into Israel, causing no damage or injuries. The IDF retaliates with air strikes on 2 suspected weapons factories and a smuggling tunnel on the Rafah border, injuring 8 Palestinians (2 seriously, 2 moderately, 4 lightly) and damaging another 2 factories and 4 homes nearby. Hrs. later, Hamas announces that it has secured renewed pledges from all Gaza factions to halt all rocket and mortar fire toward Israel, to preserve the stability in Gaza and prevent further Israeli retaliation, though the factions say they will respond to any IDF incursion into Gaza. (YA 11/21; HA, WT 11/22; WT 11/23; OCHA, PCHR 11/25; WJW 11/26) 22 NOVEMBER In the West Bank, the IDF makes a late-night incursion into Bayt Liqiya nr. Ramallah, patrolling the streets and firing rubber-coated steel bullets at stone-throwing youths who confront them, causing no reported injuries; conducts late-night arrest raids, house searches nr. Jenin, Qalqilya. (OCHA, PCHR 11/25) 23 NOVEMBER Unidentified Palestinians fire a rocket fr. Gaza into Israel, causing no damage or injuries. Late in the evening, the IDF carries out air strikes on smuggling tunnels on the Rafah border in retaliation, causing no reported injuries. In the West Bank, the IDF conducts late-night arrest raids, house searches nr. Qalqilya; conducts late-night patrols inside Jenin town. Jewish settlers stone Palestinian vehicles traveling on the Nablus–Qalqilya road nr. Havat Gilad settlement. The UN reports that in the previous wk., 2 Palestinian militants were killed mishandling explosives, and 1 Palestinian was killed and 1 injured in a smuggling tunnel collapse on the Rafah border. (Jewish Telegraphic Agency 11/23; OCHA, PCHR 11/25) 24 NOVEMBER In the West Bank, the IDF conducts late-night arrest raids, house searches in Salfit and nr. Bethlehem, Hebron, Jenin. (OCHA, PCHR 11/25; PCHR 12/3) 25 NOVEMBER In the West Bank, the IDF conducts late-night arrest raids, house searches in Qalqilya and nr. Nablus, Salfit. (PCHR 12/3; OCHA 12/9) Netanyahu declares a 10-mo. halt to all new residential housing approvals and construction in West Bank settlements, though building in East Jerusalem and work on 2,900 West Bank housing units currently under construction and any “public buildings essential for normal life” (e.g., schools, synagogues) in West Bank settlements would proceed. The U.S. welcomes this move as “significant.” PA PM Salam Fayyad says that the offer is not enough, the PA insists on a total settlement freeze. (IFM 11/25; NYT, WP, WT 11/26)
Bibliography of Periodical Literature : Spring 2010
Norbert Scholz
This section lists articles and reviews of books relevant to Palestine and the Arab-Israeli conflict. Entries are classified under the following headings: Reference and General; History (through 1948) and Geography; Palestinian Politics and Society; Jerusalem; Israeli Politics, Society, and Zionism; Arab and Middle Eastern Politics; International Relations; Law; Military; Economy, Society, and Education; Literature, Arts, and Culture; Book Reviews; and Reports Received. Reference and General `Abd al-Hay, Hana S. “Parliamentary Quotas for Women: Between International Support and Contradictory Arab Positions” [in Arabic]. MAUS, no. 23 (Sum. 09): 47–70. Abraham, Ibrahim, and Roland Boer. “‘God Doesn’t Care’: The Contradictions of Christian Zionism.” Religion and Theology 16, nos. 1–2 (09): 90–110. Davis, Nancy J., and Robert V. Robinson. “Overcoming Movement Obstacles by the Religious Orthodoxy: The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Shas in Israel, Comunione e Liberazione in Italy and the Salvation Army in the United States.” American Journal of Sociology 114, no. 5 (Mar. 09): 1302–49. Hassan, Riaz. “Interrupting a History of Tolerance: Anti-Semitism and the Arabs.” Asian Journal of Social Science 37, no. 3 (09): 453–62. Ouardani, Mohamed. “La religion peut-elle tout expliquer? L’islam comme modèle explicatif des sociétés musulmanes.” CM, no. 70 (Sum. 09): 147–64. Salem, Salah. “The Renovation of Arab Socialist Thought” [in Arabic]. ShA, no. 140 (Win. 09): 118–32. Al-Sayyadi, Mokhles. “Contemporary Islamic Movements” [in Arabic]. MA 32, no. 369 (Nov. 09): 7–27. History (through 1948) and Geography Abisaab, Malek. “Shiite Peasants and a New Nation in Colonial Lebanon: The Intifada of Bint Jubayl, 1936.” CSSAME 29, no. 3 (09): 483–501. Avci, Yasemin. “The Application of Tanzimat in the Desert: The Bedouins and the Creation of a New Town in Southern Palestine (1860–1914).” MES 45, no. 6 (Nov. 09): 969–83. Chazan, Meir. “Mapai and the Arab-Jewish Conflict, 1936–1939.” ISF 24, no. 2 (Win. 09): 28–51. Hirsch, Dafna. “‘We are Here to Bring the West, Not Only to Ourselves’: Zionist Occidentalism and The Discourse of Hygiene in Mandate Palestine.” IJMES 41, no. 4 (Nov. 09): 577–94. Holmila, Antero. “The Holocaust and the Birth of Israel in British, Swedish and Finnish Press Discourse, 1947–1948.” European Review of History 16, no. 2 (Apr. 09): 183–200. Hughes, Matthew. “From Law and Order to Pacification: Britain’s Suppression of the Arab Revolt in Palestine, 1936–39.” JPS 39, no. 2 (Win. 2010): 6–22. Kabalo, Paula. “Challenging Disempowerment in 1948: The Role of the Jewish Third Sector during the Israeli War of Independence.” ISF 24, no. 2 (Win. 09): 3–27. ———. “The Historical Dimension: Jewish Associations in Palestine and Israel 1880s–1950s.” Journal of Civil Society 5, no. 1 (Jun. 09): 1–19. Kushner, David. “Mussaver Çöl: An Ottoman Magazine in Beersheba toward the End of World War I” [in Hebrew]. Cathedra, no. 132 (Jun. 09): 131–48. Nashif, Taysir. “Educational Background and Elite Composition: Jewish Political Leadership during the British Mandate.” ISF 24, no. 2 (Win. 09): 67–81. Sheffy, Yigal. “Chemical Warfare and the Palestine Campaign, 1916–1918.” Journal of Military History 73, no. 3 (Jul. 09): 803–44. ———. “The Jaffa–Jerusalem Railway Line, the Sejed Station, and British Military Intelligence” [in Hebrew]. Cathedra, no. 131 (Mar. 09): 163–69. Sinanoglu, Penny. “British Plans for the Partition of Palestine, 1929–1938.” Historical Journal 52, no. 1 (Mar. 09): 131–52. Palestinian Politics and Society Abdallah, Hmaidi. “The Prospect of the Intra-Palestinian Dialogue in Egypt” [in Arabic]. Dirasat Bahith 7, no. 27 (Sum. 09): 113–26. Abdallah, Taisir. “Prevalence and Predictors of Burnout among Palestinian Social Workers.” International Social Work 52, no. 2 (Mar. 09): 223–33. Abu Fakhr, Sakr, ed. “Fatah and the Palestine Liberation Organization” [in Arabic]. MDF, no. 79 (Sum. 09): 100–7. Aruri, Naseer, and Hani Fares, eds. “The Boston Declaration on the One State” [in Arabic]. MDF, no. 79 (Sum. 09): 124–26. Boulby, Marion. “On Shifting Boundaries: Islamist Women in Palestinian Politics.” BCBRL 4, no. 1 (Nov. 09): 31–32. Braverman, Irus. “Uprooting Identities: The Regulation of Olive Trees in the Occupied West Bank.” Political and Legal Anthropology Review 32, no. 2 (Nov. 09): 237–54. Brom, Shlomo, Giora Eiland, and Oded Eran. “Partial Agreements with the Palestinians.” Strategic Assessment 12, no. 3 (Nov. 09): 67–86. Clarno, Andy. “Or Does It Explode? Collecting Shells in Gaza.” Social Psychology 72, no. 2 (Jun. 09): 95–98. Dana, Seif. “Islamic Resistance in Palestine: Hamas, the Gaza War and the Future of Political Islam.” HLS 8, no. 2 (Nov. 09): 211–28. Fayyad, Salam (interview). “Salam Fayyad Presents his Project of State-Building” [in Arabic]. MDF, no. 79 (Sum. 09): 5–20. Harker, Christopher. “Spacing Palestine through the Home.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 34, no. 3 (Jul. 09): 320–32. Hawatmeh, Nayef (interview). “Nayef Hawatmeh: A Comprehensive Interview” [in Arabic]. Dirasat Bahith 7, no. 27 (Sum. 09): 9–32. Ishtiya, Imad, Husni Awad, and Fakhri Dwaykat. “The Reasons behind Fatah’s Decline: A Field Study” [in Arabic]. MDF, no. 79 (Sum. 09): 27–38. Jokman, Georges. “The Future of Fatah and the Two-State Solution: Power or Resistance” [in Arabic]. MDF, no. 79 (Sum. 09): 21–26. Kayyali, Majed. “The Impasse of Efforts for an Internal Palestinian Reconciliation” [in Arabic]. ShA, no. 39 (Fall 09): 14–24. Klein, Menachem. “Against the Consensus: Oppositionist Voices in Hamas.” MES 45, no. 6 (Nov. 09): 881–92. Kuruvilla, Samuel. “The Invention of History: A Century of Interplay between Theology and Politics in Palestine, Report on the International Centre of Bethlehem Conference, 23–29 August 2009.” HLS 8, no. 2 (Nov. 09): 235–38. Kurz, Anat. “The Sixth Fatah Convention: Formal Changes Only.” Strategic Assessment 12, no. 3 (Nov. 09): 51–65. Legrain, Jean-François. “Hamas et Fatah dans leur rivalité médiatique.” CM, no. 69 (Spr. 09): 75–86. Merari, Ariel, Jonathan Fighel, Boaz Ganor, et al. “Making Palestinian ‘Martyrdom Operations’/‘Suicide Attacks’: Interviews with Would-Be Perpetrators and Organizers.” TPV 22, no. 1 (Jan. 10): 102–19. Al-Rimmawi, Hussein. “Spatial Changes in Palestine: From Colonial Project to an Apartheid System.” African and Asian Studies 8, no. 4 (09): 375–412. Salman, Talal. “In Memory of Shafiq al-Hout” [in Arabic]. MDF, no. 79 (Sum. 09): 96–99. Shikaki, Khalid. “Fatah Resurrected.” The National Interest, 104 (Nov./Dec. 09), http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=22326. Taha, al-Moutawakkel. “Gaza: The War and the Culture” [in Arabic]. Dirasat Bahith 7, no. 27 (Sum. 09): 67–70. Tawil-Souri, Helga. “New Palestinian Centers: An Ethnography of the ‘Checkpoint Economy’.” International Journal of Cultural Studies 12, no. 3 (May 09): 217–35. JERUSALEM Al-`Azaar, Muhammad K. “Jerusalem: 2009 Capital of Arab Culture” [in Arabic]. ShA, no. 140 (Win. 09): 104–16. Dumper, Michael. “‘Two State Plus’: Jerusalem and the Binationalism Debate.” JQ, no. 39 (Fall 09): 6–15. Dumper, Michael, and Craig Larkin. “UNESCO and Jerusalem: Constraints, Challenges and Opportunities.” JQ, no. 39 (Fall 09): 16–28. Frenkel, Yehoshua. “Praises of Jerusalem and Damascus” [in Hebrew]. Cathedra, no. 131 (Mar. 09): 142–46. Houk, Marian. “A New Convergence? European and American Positions on Jerusalem.” JQ, no. 38 (Fall 09): 88–96. Ju`ba, Nazmi. “Jerusalem: Between Land Settlements and Excavations” [in Arabic]. MDF, no. 79 (Sum. 09): 39–54. Khamaisi, Rassem. “Israel’s Policy in Old Jerusalem: The Creeping Domination and Urbanization” [in Arabic]. Idafat, no. 8 (Fall 09): 121–44. Makhoul, Amir. “The Status of Jerusalem in the Palestinian Cause” [in Arabic]. ShA, no. 140 (Win. 09): 92–103. Pullan, Wendy. “The Space of Contested Jerusalem.” JQ, no. 39 (Fall 09): 39–50.